A province-wide electronics waste collection and recycling program beginning Aug. 1 will mark a crucial step in ensuring that highly toxic tech-junk is dealt with responsibly. However, so far the public and local recyclers are being left in the dark on perhaps the most important question: where’s it all going to go?


The industry-led Electronics Stewardship Association of B.C. (ESBC), in partnership with Encorp Pacific (which runs the Return-It bottle depots), have developed a pilot recycling system for “end-of-life” electronics, or e-waste, such as computers, TVs, printers and fax machines.


Sarah Westervelt, an e-waste toxics research analyst for the Basel Action Network (BAN), affirms there has been no official announcement about which three B.C. recyclers will be taking on the waste that is collected at the Return-It Depots.


“Now, of course all this starts on Aug. 1, so you can imagine that the decisions have been made. Whoever is taking the equipment has to be ramped up to handle that,” Westervelt says, whose company works globally to prevent toxic trade and dumping.


The purpose of the program is to divert end-of-life electronics away from landfills, which are cluttered with over 140,000 tonnes of e-waste annually across Canada. The average computer contains 33 toxic elements and compounds, including mercury, cadmium and lead, which cause numerous health and environmental hazards in landfills.


How and where the e-waste will be processed is raising concern for BAN and local electronics reuse/recycling organizations. Some speculate that the e-waste will be smelted to recover precious metals, though this has yet to be confirmed by either ESBC, Encorp or the provincial government. Westervelt says that if this is the case, the complex materials in each unit need to be disassembled first so that only the necessary parts are smelted and the rest, such as the toxic fire-retardant plastic casings, are appropriately recycled.


“One of our challenges is that we want to use recyclers that are as local and as sustainable as possible,” says Ifny Lachance, director of the non-profit recycling organization, Free Geek Vancouver, which refurbishes and redistributes computers.


She says that regardless of which end-of-line recyclers ESBC choses, Free Geek hopes to be able to uphold higher standards than the minimum requirements of the program and still be able to participate.


“For us to be locked into dealing with the materials handlers that the Recycling Council of British Columbia decides are good is not really okay with us. We know that we’re doing things that nobody else is doing,” says Lachance.


Free Geek’s 14-unit computer lab is one example of their novel approach to waste. By running “obsolete” Pentium II computers on a Linux Terminal Server Project, the lab is not only fast enough to be used for most office environments but also runs on less energy.


One aspect of the ESA program that both BAN and Lachance strongly support is the stricter mechanisms it is expected create for preventing the illegal shipment of toxic e-waste. Canada has ratified the Basel Convention’s international treaty banning hazardous waste shipment to developing countries, where poor recycling practices endanger people’s lives and the environment. Despite this, e-waste dumping continues to be a rampant problem.


Westervelt says the challenge in trying to curtail shady operations is that it can limit good projects. While consumers will still be free to give used electronics directly to reuse organizations, BAN’s main concern is that the ESBC may not grant access to the equipment dropped at Return-It Depots to reuse organizations like Free Geek, resulting in many functional electronics being unnecessarily disposed of.


“We really believe that the best outcome for human health and the environment would be to try to extend the life of these products,” Westervelt says. She is concerned that the environmental handling fee paid by the consumer on new electronics (ranging from $5 to $45) fails to get to the root of the problem because it lets manufacturers off the hook.


“Requiring the manufacturer to take their products back at the end of their life cycles is really the best way to drive redesign and phase out toxins, especially if the manufacturer has to pay these end-of-life costs and incorporate them into the price of a new product.”


“The market is always trying to drive retail prices down, which really provides incentive for [companies] to lower the toxins, make the products last longer and make them more recyclable,” says Westervelt, explaining that legislation in Europe for mandatory extended producer responsibility (EPR) has actually been welcomed by manufacturers as a level-playing field.


Until Canada’s EPR legislation catches up with those of other countries, such as Europe and Japan, the B.C. program seems to be an important step for responsible e-waste disposal in the province. However, it remains to be seen whether it will be the best available option, or simply a short-term answer to a longer-term problem.


Free Geek presents a talk by Sarah Westervelt, and the BAN films “The Digital Dump” and “Exporting Harm” on Aug. 2, 7 p.m. at SFU Harbour Centre. For more info visit freegeekvancouver.org or call 604-879-4335