How to choose a recycling vendor - Revision history

Ali: categorized

2010-07-06T23:25:00Z

categorized

Iamturnip at 04:15, 11 September 2008

2008-09-11T04:15:24Z

Iamturnip: /* The Tough Questions */

2008-09-10T21:46:47Z

The Tough Questions

Iamturnip: /* Whats the BIG DEAL?? */

2008-09-10T20:17:08Z

Whats the BIG DEAL??

Iamturnip: /* Whats the BIG DEAL?? */

2008-09-10T20:14:06Z

Whats the BIG DEAL??

Ali: /* Ten signs you are dealing with an un-ethical recycler */ who says so? where's it written?

2008-09-09T20:50:12Z

Ten signs you are dealing with an un-ethical recycler: who says so? where's it written?

Ali: /* Whats the BIG DEAL?? */ define what is harmful

2008-09-09T20:48:24Z

Whats the BIG DEAL??: define what is harmful

Rfs: wikifying

2008-09-09T20:18:55Z

wikifying

Rfs: /* Overview */

2008-09-09T20:17:51Z

Overview

Rfs: /* Ten signs you are dealing with an un-ethical recycler */

2008-09-09T20:06:20Z

Ten signs you are dealing with an un-ethical recycler

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:25, 6 July 2010
Line 76:		Line 76:

	[[Category:Ewaste]]		[[Category:Ewaste]]
		+	[[Category: Recycling]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:15, 11 September 2008
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	~~This is page is still being worked on. Content will be complete in 2 days. Check back regularly.~~
−
	===Overview===		===Overview===

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:46, 10 September 2008
Line 44:		Line 44:

	[[Questions for end of life recyclers]]		[[Questions for end of life recyclers]]
		+
		+	[[Questions about downstream vendors]]

	====Extended questions for vendors with reuse/resale operations====		====Extended questions for vendors with reuse/resale operations====

@@ Line 30: / Line 30: @@
 The United States and Canada have fought very hard against the Basel Convention.  In fact the USA is not even signatory to the Convention.  To make matters worse the USA uses terms like "Materials of Concern" to mislead the public to the dangers of these materials.  Most other countries refer to this material as "Hazardous Waste"; sounds a bit more serious doesn't it?
-There is a common assumption made that recycling eliminates risk and harm. This of course is false, particularly when the recycling takes place off shore. Electronic waste contains many [[toxins in computers| toxins]] Recycling toxins always carries risks and produces toxic residues.
+There is a common assumption made that recycling eliminates risk and harm. This of course is false, particularly when the recycling takes place off shore. Electronic waste contains many [[Toxins in Computers| toxins]] that are not made known to the general public. Recycling always carries risks and produces toxic residues.
-Harm is never confined to a recycling facility. In developing countries cost externalization and harm occurs due to lack of enforcement, “safety nets” and downstream residual management as well.  An excellent example of how we can be harmed by lack of awareness is the study on the [http://www.agreenspan.org/mainsite/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=8&Itemid=40 lead found in children's jewelery.]
+Harm is never confined to a recycling facility. In developing countries cost externalization and harm occurs due to lack of enforcement, “safety nets” and downstream residual management as well.  An excellent example of how we can be harmed by lack of awareness and/or export of ewaste is the study on the [http://www.agreenspan.org/mainsite/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=8&Itemid=40 lead found in children's jewelery.]
   What are the risks?  What is harmful?  A good definition here can be useful for addressing a variety of folks/concerns.

@@ Line 30: / Line 30: @@
 The United States and Canada have fought very hard against the Basel Convention.  In fact the USA is not even signatory to the Convention.  To make matters worse the USA uses terms like "Materials of Concern" to mislead the public to the dangers of these materials.  Most other countries refer to this material as "Hazardous Waste"; sounds a bit more serious doesn't it?
-There is a common assumption made that recycling eliminates risk and harm. This of course is false, particularly when the recycling takes place off shore.  Recycling toxins always carries risks and produces toxic residues.
+There is a common assumption made that recycling eliminates risk and harm. This of course is false, particularly when the recycling takes place off shore. Electronic waste contains many [[toxins in computers| toxins]] Recycling toxins always carries risks and produces toxic residues.
-Harm is never confined to a recycling facility. In developing countries cost externalization and harm occurs due to lack of enforcement, “safety nets” and downstream residual management as well.
+Harm is never confined to a recycling facility. In developing countries cost externalization and harm occurs due to lack of enforcement, “safety nets” and downstream residual management as well.  An excellent example of how we can be harmed by lack of awareness is the study on the [http://www.agreenspan.org/mainsite/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=8&Itemid=40 lead found in children's jewelery.]
   What are the risks?  What is harmful?  A good definition here can be useful for addressing a variety of folks/concerns.

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:50, 9 September 2008
Line 63:		Line 63:

	Of course there are some exceptions to this, but generally these should raise red flags and cause a much more thorough investigation on your part.		Of course there are some exceptions to this, but generally these should raise red flags and cause a much more thorough investigation on your part.
		+
		+	Who made up this list? Can it be backed up with reliable sources & facts? Where are the explanations for this list?

	===Trading sites/Auctions===		===Trading sites/Auctions===

@@ Line 28: / Line 28: @@
 The Basel Convention on Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal was adopted in Basel, Switzerland on 22 March 1989. The Convention was initiated in response to numerous international scandals regarding hazardous waste trafficking that began to occur in the late 1980s. Yup, this has been happening for some time and [http://www.canada.com/reginaleaderpost/news/story.html?id=746589f9-8bdf-437e-82a5-1b0a9394dc26 still happens] to this day despite laws and wide public knowledge of the issue.
-The United States and Canada have fought very hard agasint the Basel Convention.  In fact the USA is not even signatory to the Convention.  To make matters worse the USA uses terms like "Materials of Concern" to mislead the public to the dangers of these materials.  Most other countries refer to this material as "Hazardous Waste", sounds a bit more serious doesn't it?
+The United States and Canada have fought very hard against the Basel Convention.  In fact the USA is not even signatory to the Convention.  To make matters worse the USA uses terms like "Materials of Concern" to mislead the public to the dangers of these materials.  Most other countries refer to this material as "Hazardous Waste"; sounds a bit more serious doesn't it?
 There is a common assumption made that recycling eliminates risk and harm. This of course is false, particularly when the recycling takes place off shore.  Recycling toxins always carries risks and produces toxic residues.
 Harm is never confined to a recycling facility. In developing countries cost externalization and harm occurs due to lack of enforcement, “safety nets” and downstream residual management as well.
-It is important to remember that not all materials are covered under the Basel Convetion or the Basel Ban.  The Convention covers specific chemical compounds that are considered hazardous waste.  To simplify things you can say that items like CRT glass, circuit board, LCD screens(mercury) and batteries are covered under the Basel Convention and the Basel Ban.  Items like steel, copper and plastic are not.  So things like toner cartridges are not covered although arguments could be made as to why they should.  This does not mean that the items not covered under the Basel Convention and Basel Ban are not hazardous or shouldn't be treated differently from the usual suspects.
+ What are the risks?  What is harmful?  A good definition here can be useful for addressing a variety of folks/concerns.
 ===The Tough Questions===

@@ Line 13: / Line 13: @@
 ===Attitude===
-A lot of people think they need to humble themselves before a recycler, or feel lucky that someone would actually take all this old broken stuff.  Often someone representing Free Geek will be calling up a large corporate type company and it can be intimidating.  One must remember that you are a customer, and one that could potential bring that vendor a lot of product and ultimately more money.  You are in the drivers seat, make sure the vendor knows that from call one.  Also remember that in time if a good working relationship grows, any for-profit vendor will want to use their work with a Free Geek to make themselves look better.  Again, you are in the drivers seat.  Be confident, know your facts, know the issues, don't back down or give up from a rough first call.<br>
+A lot of people think they need to humble themselves before a recycler, or feel lucky that someone would actually take all this old broken stuff.  Often someone representing Free Geek will be calling up a large corporate type company and it can be intimidating.  One must remember that you are a customer, and one that could potential bring that vendor a lot of product and ultimately more money.  You are in the drivers seat, make sure the vendor knows that from call one.  Also remember that in time if a good working relationship grows, any for-profit vendor will want to use their work with a Free Geek to make themselves look better.  Again, you are in the drivers seat.  Be confident, know your facts, know the issues, don't back down or give up from a rough first call.
 Attitude is important when it comes to asking the tough questions.  Some recyclers will take offense and say things like "if you don't trust us go somewhere else", or "that information is a trade secret" or "why would I tell you that information, you'll just go to the people I sell to".  Do not let these comments throw you off track, and they are tell tale signs of something fishy.
@@ Line 24: / Line 24: @@
 ===Whats the BIG DEAL??===
-Ok so maybe you are thinking - "whoa this seems a bit heavy, it's recycling after all, it can't be that bad" Lets look at some issues here.<br>
+Ok so maybe you are thinking - "whoa this seems a bit heavy, it's recycling after all, it can't be that bad" Lets look at some issues here.
-The Basel Convention on Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal was adopted in Basel, Switzerland on 22 March 1989. The Convention was initiated in response to numerous international scandals regarding hazardous waste trafficking that began to occur in the late 1980s. Yup, this has been happening for some time and [http://www.canada.com/reginaleaderpost/news/story.html?id=746589f9-8bdf-437e-82a5-1b0a9394dc26 still happens] to this day despite laws and wide public knowledge of the issue.<br>
+The Basel Convention on Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal was adopted in Basel, Switzerland on 22 March 1989. The Convention was initiated in response to numerous international scandals regarding hazardous waste trafficking that began to occur in the late 1980s. Yup, this has been happening for some time and [http://www.canada.com/reginaleaderpost/news/story.html?id=746589f9-8bdf-437e-82a5-1b0a9394dc26 still happens] to this day despite laws and wide public knowledge of the issue.
-The United States and Canada have fought very hard agasint the Basel Convention.  In fact the USA is not even signatory to the Convention.  To make matters worse the USA uses terms like "Materials of Concern" to mislead the public to the dangers of these materials.  Most other countries refer to this material as "Hazardous Waste", sounds a bit more serious doesn't it?<br>
+The United States and Canada have fought very hard agasint the Basel Convention.  In fact the USA is not even signatory to the Convention.  To make matters worse the USA uses terms like "Materials of Concern" to mislead the public to the dangers of these materials.  Most other countries refer to this material as "Hazardous Waste", sounds a bit more serious doesn't it?
 There is a common assumption made that recycling eliminates risk and harm. This of course is false, particularly when the recycling takes place off shore.  Recycling toxins always carries risks and produces toxic residues.
-Harm is never confined to a recycling facility. In developing countries cost externalization and harm occurs due to lack of enforcement, “safety nets” and downstream residual management as well.<br>
+Harm is never confined to a recycling facility. In developing countries cost externalization and harm occurs due to lack of enforcement, “safety nets” and downstream residual management as well.
 It is important to remember that not all materials are covered under the Basel Convetion or the Basel Ban.  The Convention covers specific chemical compounds that are considered hazardous waste.  To simplify things you can say that items like CRT glass, circuit board, LCD screens(mercury) and batteries are covered under the Basel Convention and the Basel Ban.  Items like steel, copper and plastic are not.  So things like toner cartridges are not covered although arguments could be made as to why they should.  This does not mean that the items not covered under the Basel Convention and Basel Ban are not hazardous or shouldn't be treated differently from the usual suspects.
@@ Line 37: / Line 37: @@
 ===The Tough Questions===
-Ok, so you have the phone book open to electronic recycling and you are ready to call.  Lets go over some basic questions you should ask:<br>
+Ok, so you have the phone book open to electronic recycling and you are ready to call.  Lets go over some basic questions you should ask:
 ====End of Life Recyclers====

@@ Line 3: / Line 3: @@
 ===Overview===
-Choosing a recycling vendor to work with is a very important task.  New Free Geeks(or anyone wanting to recycle electronics) must take great caution as the electronics recycling industry is plagued with unethical businesses.  Keep this thought in the back of your head at all times:<br>
+Choosing a recycling vendor to work with is a very important task. New Free Geeks (or anyone wanting to recycle electronics) must take great caution as the electronics recycling industry is plagued with unethical businesses. Keep this thought in the back of your head at all times:
-'''"Do not trust recyclers"'''<br>
+'''"Do not trust recyclers"'''
 Historically we can see that all recycling industries have proven to be quick money grabs, often unchecked by government bodies until things are too out of hand. Also it is important to understand that most recyclers are just brokers of waste - they do not actually do any recycling - they ride on power of the word "recycler".

@@ Line 49: / Line 49: @@
 ===Ten signs you are dealing with an un-ethical recycler===
-# They ship overseas<br>
+# They ship overseas
-# They cannot tell you who their downstream is<br>
+# They cannot tell you who their downstream is
-# They cannot provide documentation of final disposal<br>
+# They cannot provide documentation of final disposal
-# The will not let you in their facility<Br>
+# The will not let you in their facility
-# They pay for CRT monitors<Br>
+# They pay for CRT monitors
-# They have your ewaste picked up by 53' sea containers<br>
+# They have your ewaste picked up by 53' sea containers
-# They tell you they refurbish CRT monitors<Br>
+# They tell you they refurbish CRT monitors
-# The facility has no sign of processing material on site<br>
+# The facility has no sign of processing material on site
 # The company has changed names more than once
-# They take offense to regular questions and requests for documents<Br>
+# They take offense to regular questions and requests for documents
 Of course there are some exceptions to this, but generally these should raise red flags and cause a much more thorough investigation on your part.