Precious metals feared to be depleted in the future are lying in unexpected places. They are found in mountains of waste electrical and electronic equipment (E-waste or WEEE: Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment, hereafter “e-waste”). E-waste has been increasing year by year; in 2019 it is estimated that 53.6 million tons were generated worldwide. The recyclable metal resources contained in this waste are said to be worth as much as 57 billion US dollars, underscoring how problematic our current use of resources is. Moreover, improperly handled e-waste releases hazardous substances, causing harm to the environment and people. This article explores what is happening in a world buried in e-waste.

Discarded circuit boards (Photo: Rwanda Green Fund / Flickr [CC BY-ND 2.0])

What are electronic devices and e-waste?

First, let’s look in detail at what e-waste is. The electronic devices that give rise to e-waste cover many items, and the United Nations University classifies them into six categories: ① temperature exchange equipment (refrigerators, air conditioners, etc.), ② screen equipment (televisions, desktop computers, etc.), ③ lighting equipment (LED bulbs, fluorescent lamps, etc.), ④ large equipment (washing machines, electric heaters, etc.), ⑤ small equipment (vacuum cleaners, microwave ovens, etc.), and ⑥ small IT and telecommunication equipment (smartphones, routers, etc.).

The volume of discarded devices has been increasing rapidly, and this trend can be thought of in two broad stages. The first stage driving the increase in e-waste is greater use of electronic devices. In recent years, global consumption of electronic devices is estimated to be increasing by an average of about 2.5 million tons per year. One reason is population growth. In addition, three factors—rising incomes, industrialization, and urbanization—are influencing this trend.

Let’s look more closely at the background driving increased device consumption. First, the global middle-class population (Note 1) has been on an upward trend. Data show that the world’s middle class numbered about 1.5 billion people in 2000, but had doubled to about 3.0 billion by 2015. As more people have become economically well-off, their opportunities to buy devices have increased, driving up worldwide consumption. Next, industrialization has boosted productivity and made it possible to mass-produce products at lower cost. As a result, consumers can obtain devices more cheaply. Finally, the rapid urbanization of the world is not unrelated to the growth in device consumption. Compared with rural areas, urban areas have better infrastructure and access to electricity, so people in cities tend to use electronic devices more than those in rural areas do. It is said that the number of people living in urban areas worldwide increased from 7億5,100万人 to 42億人 between 1950 and 2008. Globally rising incomes, industrialization, and urbanization have expanded the segment of people with access to electronic devices.

Discarded mobile phones exported to Ghana (Photo: Fairphone / Flickr [CC BY-NC 2.0])

The second stage in the increase of e-waste is the shortening span from use to disposal. For example, according to data from the United States, in 1997 the average service life of a desktop computer tower was 4~6 years and that of its monitor was 6~7 years, but by 2005 both products were used on average for only about 2 years. The shortening of service life involves intentions of actors in various positions, including manufacturers, retailers, and consumers. Focusing on consumers, the reasons for buying new products can be classified into three types: economic, technical, and psychological. Economically, it is not uncommon to buy new instead of repairing because repair costs are nearly the same as, or even higher than, the price of a new item. Technical reasons include functional inconveniences after long-term use—for instance, software updates end product support, or component manufacturing ceases so repairs become impossible—making it difficult to keep using older products. Finally, there is a psychological motive, related to the second point, namely purchasing out of a simple desire for “something better.”

These may seem like consumers’ own choices to purchase new devices, but their choices may be influenced by other actors. One is planned obsolescence (planned obsolescence or built-in obsolescence ) by manufacturers. Planned obsolescence refers to creating a situation in which consumers are compelled to upgrade frequently by intentionally making repairs expensive or by designing shorter product lifespans to encourage the purchase of new models. Against this backdrop, the service life of individual devices has gradually shortened, and with it the total volume of devices purchased and discarded has increased.

The situation worldwide

We’ve looked at the causes of the rise in e-waste; how much are people actually using and discarding devices, and how much of what’s discarded is collected and recycled?

First, let’s look at global consumption of electronic devices. Excluding solar panels, worldwide consumption is calculated to be increasing by about 2.5 million tons per year on average. Use varies greatly between high-income and low-income countries. Comparing ownership of several devices, in high-income countries there are refrigerators 0.7 units/person and smartphones 1.4 units/person, while in low-income countries there are refrigerators 0.02 units/person and smartphones 0.6 units/person.

Students each with one computer (Photo: Brett jordan / Flickr [CC BY 2.0])

As consumption increases, so does disposal. According to the United Nations University, global e-waste generation rose from 33.8 million tons in 2010 to 55.5 million tons in 2020. This figure is projected to reach 74.7 million tons by 2030 (Note 2). In other words, under this projection, emissions will more than double over the 20 years from 2010 to 2030.

How is such a massive volume of devices disposed of? There are four main disposal routes. They are: ① formally collected and recycled in accordance with laws set by the state; ② discarded as municipal solid waste without special treatment; ③ collected and recycled in ways not authorized by law; and ④ disposed of by the informal sector (Note 3) in countries without relevant legislation. Of these, only route ① is appropriate; however, this route does not exist in countries lacking legal frameworks. Even in countries with such systems, it may be avoided to save time and money, leading to the use of routes ②–④.

As of 2019, only 17.4%(9.3 million tons) of the world’s e-waste followed the formal route ①. The remaining 82.6% (44.3 million tons) is unaccounted for and is thought to have been managed via the inappropriate routes ②–④. Looking at a chart of the top 10 countries by generation, India, Brazil, Russia, and Indonesia have overwhelmingly low shares of properly collected e-waste. Although India does have regulations on e-waste management, they are not functioning adequately. Brazil, Russia, and Indonesia do not have domestic laws or regulations governing e-waste management. As a result, the lack of formal collection channels in these countries leads to extremely low recycling rates.

As noted above, most e-waste is disposed of via routes ②–④, either domestically or by export. When exported, e-waste often moves from high-income countries with legal frameworks to low-income countries lacking them. However, exporting discarded devices violates the Basel Convention, which bans the export of hazardous waste. Because the convention prohibits the export of e-waste that is not usable secondhand, unless the importing country consents, mass exports should not occur. In reality, though, waste is disguised and exported in large quantities as secondhand goods or “scrap.” It is reported that about 80% of e-waste collected in high-income countries is exported to low-income countries. Because this trade includes illegal shipments, it is impossible to obtain precise data on exported e-waste. To understand export patterns, the Basel Action Network (BAN: Basel Action Network) has undertaken a project that attaches GPS trackers to devices before disposal to follow their path; such investigations have been conducted in the United States, Australia, and Canada. They confirmed that discarded devices were in fact exported abroad.

Problems caused by e-waste

As we have seen, proper disposal is rare, and the failure to treat massive amounts of e-waste appropriately creates serious global problems. We examine three of them.

The first is the issue of metal resources. As noted at the outset, e-waste contains many metals and, despite being technically recyclable, they are not being recovered in practice. Because so much resource is embedded, piles of e-waste are also called “urban mines.” For some metals, the amount already mined is said to exceed what remains unmined. Several metals are already facing supply concerns, and many are projected to be depleted in the future. For example, mining of copper (Cu), lead (Pb), zinc (Zn), gold (Au), silver (Ag), and tin (Sn) is expected to exceed the currently technically and economically recoverable quantities by around 2050 (Note 4). In other words, even if we explore and mine with current technology, the costs would not be recouped by revenues.

People burning waste in Agbogbloshie, Ghana (Photo: Fairphone / Flickr [CC BY-NC 2.0])

The second problem with mass disposal is the impact on the environment. As noted, much e-waste is exported to low-income countries, where it is burned, landfilled, or stripped of metals by local people using inappropriate methods. Mishandling e-waste can contaminate air, water, and soil over wide areas. Properly recovering metals requires dedicated facilities and tools. However, many of those engaged in e-waste handling in low-income countries lack such equipment and tools, and they burn device components, including plastics, to recover recyclable metals. Incinerating plastics releases hazardous substances such as dioxins and particulate matter into the air, leading to widespread air pollution. Landfilling allows mercury, lead, and other substances to leach into soils, causing long-term soil contamination. Furthermore, pollutants that seep into soil contaminate plants, reach groundwater, and eventually flow into rivers, causing water pollution as well. Plants and animals living in such environments are exposed to contamination over long periods, putting the very maintenance of ecosystems at risk.

The third problem is harm to human health. This is inseparable from environmental issues and includes not only respiratory diseases caused by inhaling polluted air. Through the food chain, people end up ingesting contaminants daily. This not only increases the risk of cancer and infectious diseases but also raises the risk of stillbirth and preterm birth during pregnancy, and even when babies are born safely, the likelihood of congenital defects in the nervous system and DNA is also higher.

Cases in Asia and Africa

In some regions, such harms have become serious social issues. Here we introduce countries and areas where the situation is particularly severe.

Large volumes of e-waste imported into Thailand (Photo: baselactionnetwork / Flickr [CC BY-ND 2.0])

Among African countries that are major destinations for e-waste exports, Ghana and Nigeria are operating at large scale, and the area near Ghana’s capital (commonly known as Agbogbloshie) is said to be the world’s largest e-waste processing site. With a steady supply of e-waste in this area, recovering and reselling metals has become a source of income for local people. However, the recovery work is not carried out with proper facilities or tools, and people routinely work under dangerous conditions. Seeking to harness the economic effects of processing e-waste, the Ghanaian government is looking to collect 100 million US dollars in annual taxes from e-waste importers.

It is estimated that Nigeria receives about 500 containers loaded with approximately 500,000 units of e-waste every month. As in Ghana, hazardous work to recover and resell metals from e-waste is rampant, and it has become so entrenched that it creates employment for about 100,000 people.

In such informal processing sites, not only burns and injuries from work but also skin diseases, respiratory illnesses, and chronic headaches have been reported. Yet because this is the informal sector, there is no compensation system for workers’ injuries or illnesses. There are data indicating drug use to dull symptoms and pain. Long-term handlers of e-waste have also been reported to show elevated levels of heavy metals in their blood, with incalculable health impacts.

Indian worker dismantling e-waste with a grinding machine (Photo: Greenpeace India / Flickr [CC BY-ND 2.0])

Although the scale varies, such informal e-waste processing sites exist worldwide, and the problem is particularly serious in India and Southeast Asian countries. In India, the Seelampur district of the capital, New Delhi, hosts the country’s largest e-waste processing site. As in African countries, processing has become industrialized there, employing about 50,000 people. Unlike in African countries, however, India not only receives e-waste from abroad but also generates large amounts domestically. Over 800,000 tons of e-waste are generated annually within India, and although generation is increasing by 30% each year, only 1.5% is recycled due to inadequate laws and regulations.

In Southeast Asian countries, imports of e-waste have surged in recent years. The background is the tightening of China’s laws on waste imports. China once hosted large-scale processing that illegally imported about 70% of the world’s e-waste. However, after a process spanning more than 20 years, a law restricting waste imports took effect in 2018. As a result, e-waste that lost access to China began to be exported to Southeast Asian countries with looser regulations. For example, in Thailand in 2018 alone, 25 tons of e-waste were imported from Australia, about 500 times the volume in 2017. Moreover, because there are only domestic regulations for hazardous industrial waste, imported e-waste is landfilled. In response to this situation,  Thailand moved in 2020 to ban imports of e-waste. However, even if recipient countries introduce controls, the situation will not be fundamentally resolved unless the countries that generate and export e-waste implement regulations. As e-waste keeps increasing, it will seek new destinations and be exported to countries with even weaker regulations.

Countermeasures

We have discussed the environmental and social problems caused by e-waste; what is being done to improve the situation? Here are brief examples from institutional and technical perspectives.

Recycling facility in Rwanda (Photo: Rwanda Green Fund / Flickr [CC BY-ND 2.0])

Although problems persist, many countries are working to establish systems for e-waste management. In the European Union (EU), the WEEE Directive, which assigns producers responsibility up to end-of-life, entered into force in 2003. Furthermore, in 2019, laws based on the concept of the “Right to Repair” took effect requiring manufacturers to guarantee repairability periods (Note 5) of up to 10 years for household appliances such as refrigerators and washing machines, and there are now moves to expand the range of repairable products. In Africa, where many countries lack e-waste regulations, some—including Rwanda, Nigeria, and Ghana—have in recent years introduced guidelines and established facilities for recycling and repair. However, while Rwanda has passed a law on e-waste management, in Nigeria and Ghana disposal is still mostly carried out by the informal sector. In India, a law on e-waste was enacted in 2011, and licensed recyclers have built capacity to process 80,000 tons per year; however, as in Nigeria and Ghana, most e-waste is still handled by the informal sector, and the facilities cannot be said to be fully utilized.

Introducing regulations and improving proper treatment capacity in countries that handle the world’s e-waste will improve the situation, but it is not a fundamental solution. For a fundamental solution, high-income countries—the source of the e-waste circulating around the world—must address the issue. Yet progress remains slow in exporting and generating countries, exemplified by the United States, which ranks among the top 10 e-waste generators but has not ratified the Basel Convention.

There are also efforts to solve e-waste issues technologically. For example, research is advancing on “bioleaching,” a technique that uses microorganisms to extract metals from e-waste. In this method, microbes dissolve and separate metals so that only desired substances can be recovered; it is known as a method with a relatively low environmental burden. Manufacturers are also working to extend product lifespans by making devices easier to repair. One example is a smartphone (Fairphone: Fairphone) designed so that users can easily replace broken parts themselves without specialized skills.

Disassembled Fairphone (Photo: Fairphone / Flickr [CC BY-SA 2.0])

Summary

Problems related to electronic devices are not limited to disposal. From the mining of raw mineral resources to the production process, various issues exist, and GNV has covered them previously. Regarding the disposal of electronic devices introduced here, some countries have begun taking measures, but their scale and speed are not sufficient compared with the severity of the problem. Moreover, the countries that use and discard the most devices are not tackling the issue seriously, delaying fundamental solutions. We must not forget that e-waste is directly connected not only to environmental problems and resource depletion but also to the lives and livelihoods of vulnerable people around the world. As everyday users of electronic devices, we must consider how we will confront this issue—our responsibility is being tested.

Note 1: Here, “middle class” refers to people earning 10–100 US dollars per person per day.

Note 2: The figures for 2020 and 2030 are projections as of 2019. As of May 2021, the 2020 data have not been released.

Note 3: Informal sector: An economics term referring to activities not officially recorded in the formal economy.

Note 4: This situation is also described as exceeding the reserve base, meaning that further mining is considered unrealistic.

Note 5: Intended to ensure that repairs do not become fundamentally impossible due to manufacturers ceasing production of parts, etc.

Writer: Minami Ono

Graphics: Minami Ono

Follow @GNV_tweets