The Drama, Failures, and Pitfalls of E-Recycling in Ontario
July 12th, 2011
There is a lot to be said for electronics recycling in Ontario. There are those of us who started before OES, and the lion’s share that came into action after the fact. Regardless, everyone who is actively involved has seen several dozen changes, revisions, and unfortunate failures of our provincial program. For those of us that dislike the OES operations this is a boon, but for most of us the failure or cancellation of the OES program means that there will be blood in the water.
I read an excerpt ( http://www.ottawacitizen.com/mobile/story.html?id=5055748 ) the other day that heavily criticized the OES recycling initiatives. There are several Ottawa region politicians criticizing a program they obviously know nothing about. They refer to the provincial program as a “sneaky tax grab”, a definition that outlines their ignorance.
For all the heavily taxed Ontarians that have a sincere issue with the current program please read on; the current program contains Stewards, who are resellers of technology. These Stewards are required to tag an eco-fee on all new items sold. This value may be anywhere from $5 and up per item. These fees go into a proverbial pool that funds the provincial recycling program.
A comment was made by a Mr. Denley (click the link above) stating: “…there are a number of organizations that recycle used computers and televisions and there is no need for a government bureaucracy to do similar work.” Unfortunately Mr. Denley we need ‘incentives’, which could also be referred to as recycling subsidies. In approximately 90% of consumer electronics the intrinsic recoverable commodity value does not cover the recycling process. Meaning simply that the recovery rates on consumer electronics are simply not worth recycling without an incentive (or subsidy). This does not mean that our industry is a lame duck, as the alternatives speak for themselves.
But, that doesn’t derail the issue: the general failure of the OES program. There are many ways to go with this, but in general it is my opinion that a certain amount of grace is required. The OES is responsible for implementing a province wide program for a new waste stream. This includes literally hundreds of collection sites, thousands of clients, and the integration of an entire industry that is hungry to get involved. In my opinion the only real downfall of the OES was their failure to hire anyone from the industry they serve. I know personally of several applicants to the program that would have been of immense value. Time and time again the OES show they have great administrative strengths, but no internal knowledge. The car is clean, but the engine is running like a 1970’s russian import.
Let’s go back to our options, and the government intent:
Option 1: Cancel the program, use the $20 Million in excess funds to clean up all existing program materials, and then move onto nothing.
Result: Electronic waste goes back into the landfills, exporting starts en masse, and the old school scrap industry kicks back into action doing what they do best: making money at any cost.
Sounds good? Consider that on the low side Canadians contribute 6 Lbs. of e-waste per person annually. Let’s say on an extremely unrealistically conservative basis that only 50% will be land filled. That’s still 93 MILLION pounds of heavy metals and inorganic laden e-waste hitting our landfills annually. I kid you not, our children’s children will invent time travel if only to come back here and kick our asses.
Option 2: Municipalities deal with e-waste locally.
Result: For those of you pissed off about eco-fees, you should worry more about this option. Instead of taxing the individuals who purchase new items, Municipalities will tax everyone. This means that the technologically conservative individuals who are fine with their wood panelled CRT televisions will be paying for the recycling of the new fangled thing-a-ma-bobbers being toted by all those young punks.
Also, this will mean that e-waste incentive programs will fluctuate from township to township. So if one offers more than another there will be an imbalance, and due to a potential lack of geography separating these townships the one offering the most will get the most, draining the local funds dedicated to said programs.
Option 3: OES Revamp. Review the foundation of the existing program and push for a new approach, while involving industry leaders and individuals with actual electronic recycling experience. Maintain the existing plans until new ones are formed, using the excess funds to bolster the revised approach. Administrators and bureaucrats should be in support of this program, not leading it into the dark, unless of course you like the idea of the ships accountant navigating unknown seas.
_____________________________________________________
We need to keep the provincial stance on our programs, and we need to continue to work with the existing infrastructure. The OES is broken, but it exists, which is better than nothing. Keep in mind that hundreds are now employed as a result of this program and the taxation is going in the right direction, namely on the people who choose to purchase new materials. I agree there has to be revisions, but to throw this program out would be complete lunacy. Use the infrastructure, but change the mode.
I honestly think that the OES has done a good job, all things considered. But now that we’re on the other side of the first couple years it’s time to learn from our mistakes and take a new approach, before some politician uses the OES as a political spring board “Freeing the people from the tyranny of electronics recycling!” Yes they will cheer when they find out that they’ll save $20 on their new flat screen, and yes our time travelling great-grandchildren will wreak bloody vengeance on us for polluting their water tables beyond repair.
