e Waste Management

E-waste Management - A Study in Perspective of PilaniVeera V.S.S.R. Pavan P." and Dasgupta ^*

AbstractE-waste management is an emerging issue, driven by the rapidly increasing quantities of complexend-of-life electronic equipments, E-waste contains large amount of both toxic and valuablesubstances. The international regulations, mainly under Basel convention, enforce a global ban ontrans-border movements of E-waste but implementation of the same has its own difficulty due to lackof convergence in definition of E-waste followed by different governments, agencies and stakeholders- Most E-waste in India ends up with slum based scrap dealers, who, in dangerous andhazardous working conditions take away resalable parts from this waste. The rest goes into landfillswithout proper treatment, posing serious ecological threat. Previous studies have shown region wisevariation in E-waste handling pattern in India. Under this study, a comprehensive sun-ey is carriedout with scrap dealers in and around Pilani town of Jhunjlmnu district of Rajasthan to gatherinformation about the state of art. In the backdrop, comparison with the best practices in world ismade to understand what is lacking in Pilani vis--vis India.

Key words: Waste Management, E-waste, Convergence, hazardous, resalable

liitroduetionE-waste is an informal or trendy name of whatis otherwise known as Waste from Electronicand Electrical Equipment (WEEE), Accordingto first MAIT-GTZ study (2008), Indiaproduced about 3.3 lakh tons of WEEE in2007. Out of which, by far the majorcontribution by weight is due to discardedtelevision sets. Computers contributed about17% and mobile phones 0.5% by weight oftotal WEEE generated. Apart from the largeamount of WEEE generated out of use withinIndia, it is estimated that 50 thousand tones ofE-waste is illegally imported to India fromvarious developed countries although the sameis banned by International Base! Convention.According to a study by Toxic link (2005).Delhi based scrap yards handled 20 thousandtones of WEEE in 2005 and a significantportion of the same was traced to illegalimports from foreign countries. In north India,other large E-waste scrap yards exists in Menitand Frozabad. It was also pointed out in theMAIT-GTZ study that while the E-waste

handling in South and West India is organized,north India lacks formal recycler.

The prevailing regulation regarding hazardouswaste management and handling in India arenot adequate to handle E-waste and this posesproblem for dispute mitigation. The legalframeworks around management, handlitig andmonitoring are critically analyzed by renownedSupreme Court advocate Dalai P. (2006). Inabsence of a strict regulation, theorganizational awareness is also appallinglylow. 94% of the IT industries polled in theMAIT-GTZ survey were found to be lackingany disposal policy for E-waste. As perexisting norm, if electronic wastes are managedas commercial product for the purpose ofrebuilding, reuse or remanufacture then theyare not considered waste. Thus a regulatedmaterial, although not in active use. is notconsidered waste until decision is taken bysome one that it will not be reused or repairedand whoever makes that decision is consideredto be generator of the waste and is responsiblefor proper disposition of the same. Many a

'" Fourth year. M. Sc. (Hons) Economics with B.E. Mechanical Engineering, BITS Pilani, India"Associate Professor, Mechanical Engineering Group, BITS Pilani, 333031 India, Email: [email protected]* Author for correspondence

, 2009,1'oC. 2, Syp. 4 11 'BITS.

-waste Management - A Study in Perspective of Pilani

times these are dumped to avoid responsibility.However the municipal solid waste handlingsystem is grossly inadequate to handle WEEE.Country is awaiting amendments in wastemanagement regulation, as announced by thegovernment spokesperson in the recent FICCIenvirormient conclave (2008).Identifying E-wasteE-waste refers to discarded end-of-lifeelectrical and electronic equipments. Mowever,considerable variation in opinion exists abouthow to detect 'end-of-life". what means'discarded" and what 'equipment' refers to?These confusions give rise to clandestine oreven open cross border trade (dumping) of oldelectronic gadgets to third world countries fromdeveloped nations. Intra border, similar patternis observed in donation of out of use computersto schools and NGO's in the name of charity.

Studying the six major definitions of E-wasteviz. references 4, 5, 10, 17 & 22 it is certainthat whatever definition of E-waste is followed,it can be stated with certainty that E-wastecontain toxic substances and has immensepotential to cause harm to human health andenvironment, if not disposed properly. Thispoints to the need for early formulation oflegislation for a holistic E-waste management,which will eventually lead to an enablingpolicy. It is also important that such a policymust appropriately reilect tbe concerns of thevarious stake holders, both organized and un-organized sectors, besides seeking views ofpractitioners in the field. Under the aegis ofASSOCHAM Expert Committee onEnvironment (2006), a high level seminar on"E-waste policy for India" was held at NewDelhi. The seminar addressed the prevailinguncertainties regarding 'when, where and how'to dispose hazardous and harmful E-waste.Need for an ' India unique solution' whichcould strive to strike a balance betweenpercepts and praxis for sustainablemanagement of E-waste was stressed. The

committee came out with 14 point guidelines.Prominent among them are

(i) Create public-private participatory forumfor problem resolution in E-wastemanagement.

(ii) Review trade policy and eximclassification codes to plug the loopholesthat are often misused for cross borderdumping of E-waste into India.

(iii) Foster partnership with manufacturers andretailers for recycling services by creatingan enabling environment so as to disposeE-waste scientifically and at economiccost.

(iv) Create a database on best global practicesand failure analysis for development anddeployment of efficient E-wastemanagement and disposal practices withinthe country.

Toxic substances in E-wasteAs analyzed in Earth Tones report (2006). mostelectronic devices have toxic substances, somuch so that about 70% of heavy metals in USlandfills come from E-waste. The toxicsubstances are lead, copper, antimony,mercury, cadmium, hexa valent chromium,beryllium, phosphor, arsenic plastics,brominated flame retardants (BFR), chlorinatedand phosphorous-based flame retardants, longchain esters, polybrominated biphenyl (PbB),polychlorinatcd biphcnyls (PcB) etc. Specificexamples are glass cathode ray tubes of TV andcomputers, which contain, on an average. 1.8kg of lead as observed by Schmidt (2002).Besides lead. CRT screens are also prominentsource for cadmium and rare earth elements.Circuit boards contain considerable quantitiesof lead-tin soldering material. Mobile phonescontain only about 0.3 gm oi' lead butmultiplied by the 315 million total subscriberbases in India as of September 2008 reportedby Broadband India (2008), it is a fiituie sourceof 94500 kg of potential lead contamination ifnot treated properly while disposed.Fluorescent lamps, LCD's and alkaline

'L. 2009. 'I'oC Z, r\it. 4 12 Bl'TS. Vilanv

E-waste Management - A Study in Perspective of Pilani

batteries contain mercury. Data tapes andfloppy disks contain hexavalent chromium.LEDs contain Arsenic. Rectifiers in SMPSboxes contain beryllium. Main sources ofcadmium are Ni-Cd rechargeable batteries,printer ink and printer drums. Cable insulationscontain PVC and fire retardants. Insulatingfoams contain CFC. Condensers andtransformers contain PcB,

The physiological and health impacts of thesetoxic substances are many. Depending on levelof exposure, they can let to disruption offunction of various internal organs and glandsand may even lead to altered sexualdevelopment in some organisms.

Precious metals in E-wastePrinted circuit boards are one of the mainsources of precious metals in E-waste. Theycontain more than 10 times the concentration ofprecious metals available naturally in content-rich minerals as per study carried out byShanghai Jiao Tong University's school ofEnvironmental Science as reported by Betts(2008). An average of mid 1990s computercontains 0.25 gm to I gm of gold as well asplatinum and silver as reported by Broughton(1996). However due to change in technology,a computer of 2000 contains 90% fewerprecious metals than that existed in a 1996brand computers. On the other hand the use ofthe plastic content and BFRs has increasedwhich is inseparable from plastic componentsduring re-cycling, posing greater environmentalchallenge. Other re-saleable metals typicallysalvaged from E-waste, are copper, aluminum,zinc, lead and ferrous material.

Recycling scenario in IndiaIn indu.strial areas of India, E-waste recyclingis a "clandestine operation", as observed inToxic link (2004). North Indian dump yards aremanned mostly by migrant workers frompoorer stales, carrying out work for 12 to 14hours a day handling E-waste with bare hands,without access to mask or other protective

gears. The recovery techniques used are alsounscientific. Firstly there is no test for reuse.Components are mostly crushed and ferrousmetals and plastics are separated to be sold todealers. Precious metals are recovered in a verydangerous and hazardous manner. Copper andaluminum cables are burnt to recover Ihe metalthereby releasing large amount of plastic andrubber fumes to environment. The printedcircuit boards are dipped in open acid bath andthen scrapped to recover copper, gold andsilver. The dead acid containing lead and othertoxic substances is then dumped to normalsewage system, which is ultimately released toa marsh or river untreated. The left outunusable components are either burnt or goesto a land fill.

The practice followed by the unorganized E-waste handlers is not only dangerous but arehighly inefficient in recovery of material.Karnataka state pollution control board hasgiven authorization to two commercialenterprises to scientifically handle E-waste inBangalore; these are E-Parisaraa Pvt. Ltd.initiated by a city based HT educatedentrepreneur Mr. Parthasarathy P. and AshRecyclers operating under Masha Allah trust.Both these agencies make use of certifiedtechnology and prevalent safety norms andhave safe manual and automated handlingfacilities. The recovery of precious metal isalso reported to be higher. E-Parisaraa (2005).However the existing facility is grosslyinadequate for a city like Bangalore which isestimated to generate more than 11.000 tonesof E-waste a year while tlie combined peakhandling capacity of these two organized E-waste handlers is less than 2000 tones per year.

E-waste generation vs. processingA survey by O Gol et al. (2000) cauied out inSouth Australian household indicate tiiat 46%of people are yet to replace ihcir first computer.Out of those that had replaced their firstcomputer, approximately 40% had done sowithin the first five years after their original

, 2009,1'o(. 2. % . 4 13 'Bl'IS,


purchase, and the majority of replacedhousehold computers identified in the studywas either placed into storage (34%) or hadbeen passed on for reuse (26%) within thefamily. A consistent figure emerges from thestudy carried out in Florida by Price (1999),which indicated that, out of the total obsoletecomputers in the state, over 71% are in storageawaiting disposal. In a more recent study byWorldWatch Institute (2005) it is estimated thatthree quarters of all computers ever sold in U.Sare lying in basements and office closetsawaiting disposal.

Figures are not expected to be different forIndia, however a comprehensive study is yet tobe reported. The GTZ-MAIT study has pointedout that, in India, out of the total estimated E-waste generated; only about 5% is processed inthe country at present.

Survey resultsThe survey was canied out in a region in andaround Pilani. The motivation behind selectionthis place and adjoining areas for the survey isthat Pilani is a major educational hub withBITS Pilani and many schools and colleges anda CSIR laboratory and couple of BPOinitiatives in the locality and also its proximityto metropolitan cities like Delhi and Jaipur.Substantial activities in the E-waste handlingare presumed to be happening in this region.

A sample survey was initially carried out withjust 3 vendors from Chirawa (a small businesstownship near Pilani) to understand thequantitative aspects of E-waste business and tohelp formulate the relevant questions in theparlance of the vendors. A detailed survey waslater canied out during September-November2008 time period covering vendors in andaround Pilani town of Jhunjhunu district ofRajasthan, extending up to Jaipur in south and,covering Bhiwani, and Rohtak towards north.City wise contact addresses of vendors areobtained from . Total 250vendors were contacted by letters, e-mail, andover telephone, out of that, 30 fully agreed to

the terms and conditions of the survey and hadresponded.

15 questions were asked to the vendors andtheir responses are discussed and analyzed. Thequestions are broadly classified into threecategories, questions to gather informationabout vendor profile, questions related to workprofile and questions related to environmentalprofile.

Vendor profile: Out of the 30 vendors, 11(37%) are found to do business of buyingsecond hand items and then sell them as it is,we call them resale group. 8 vendors (27%) dobusiness by upgrading / refurbishing the olditems, we call them reuse group, 4 vendors(13%) glean usable components from old itemsto reassemble, we call it re-cycle group and therest 7 (23%) are involved in the end-of-lifebusiness of reclaiming material after junkingthe items, we call them reclaim group(Figure la). We also observe a cascadingpattern in the business focus of the vendors,one group of business feeding the other. Thisgoes well with the MAIT-GTZ survey whichconcluded that in India "A significant portionof the waste that finds its way into therecycling stream especially television andmobile hand sets, is refurbished and resold insecondary market."

Reuse, 8,27%Figure la Vendor Profile

-B, 2009, 'Uoi 1,3V). 4 14 BHS, 'Hani


On a question "on what basis do you purchasesecond hand items" there is a clear cutpolarization observed among the vendors. Thevendors who resell and reuse are found to giveimportance to factors like usage period andquality of the item. While the vendors whoreclaim and recycle give importance to thedealer from whom they purchase item in bulk.

Responding to the question "Are you abovepoverty line?" all but one response receivedwas positive.

In response to questions on background of thevendors il is found that only 7 (23%) out of 30inherited the business from their family and tlierest are new entrants in the field. Among thenew entrants, as many as 20 (67% of total) findthe profession interesting or rewarding in thepresent market (Figure Ib).

FinancialConstraints, 3,

10%

Inherited, 7,23%

interest 11,37%

RewardingMarket, 9,30%

Figure Ib Reason for adoptitig thisbusiness

We also wanted to find out how long thesevendors had been engaged in this profession, inorder to assess the stability of this profession inthis region. We Und that it is quite stable andgrowing as more than 60% of the vendors whoare polled are found to be engaged in this

profession for the past i-10 years and 13%more tban 10 years (Figure lc). Some vendorsinherited the profession as mentioned earlier.The results of the survey thus clearly indicatethat WEEE handling activities., in alllikelihood, will increase in the vicinity ofPilani. This observation can even begeneralized for other regions of India.

>10YeafS,4,5-10 Years, 19,

0-5 Years, 7,

Figure lc How long in this businessWork profile: The second set of questions wasdesigned to understand the nature and extent ofthe work. It is found that, for majority of thevendors, it is a full time profession and 70% ofthe vendors responding said they put 6 to 7days of the week in this job (Figure 2a) and 50% of them put 10 to 15 hours or more daily inthis work (Figure 2b). The working hours ofthe laborers in the profession, as can beguessed from the above response, puts aprominent question mark regarding the laborlaws adhered by vast majority of the vendors.However in response to a direct question on"Are the labor laws strictly implemented?"majority of vendors (73%) answered yes. butwhat is intriguing is that 27% actuallyresponded with a 'no' to this query.

CU'/^I-E, 2009. VoC 2, ^ o. 4 15 SITS,


5 Days, 4,

7 Days, 12.40%

< 5 Days, 5,17%

6 Days, 9,30%Figure 2a Number of days per week engaged

5-10 Hrs,.27%

>15Hrs.,4,13%


Rs.50-100k, 1.3%

>Rs. 100k. 1,3%

Rs. 10-25k, 21,71%

Figure 2d Business volumeEnvironmental Profile: l o assess the overallenvironmental effect due to trade in H-waste inthe vicinity we had asked the vendors severalquestions. On a direct question on whether theyare aware of pollution due to electronic waste,80% of vendors replied in affirmative.However when we tried to verify the claimthrough indirect questions regarding how theydispose off the electronic waste, the overallawareness was found to be appallingly low. 8vendors (27%) even declined to disclose theirdisposal policy. 15 vendors (50%) told theyburied unsaleable items in the soil, 3 vendors(10%) dumped in the municipal waste boxes,and 4 vendors ( 13%) burnt it (Figure 3).

Dump. 3. 10%

Refusei!, i.27%

Buiy. 15.50%

Figure 3 Method of e-waste disposal

Benchmark W handling practicesNorthern European countries like Switzerlandand Norway have impeachable overallenvironmental track record and are consistentlyon the top of global EnvironmentalSustainabiiity Index, ESI (2005), sinceinception of the same list. It is thereforeimperative that study of WEEE handlingsystem in these two countries will give usunderstanding of the best practices in theworld.

Switzerland and Norway have slightly differentmodel of WEEE handling and these arecontrasted and compared and a discussion isinitiated on implementation ability in India.Although there are difTercnces in execution, thetwo benchmark models are built for costefficiency and recovery of material and energy(incineration of residue material) whilecomplying with strict environmental staiidard.s.

The Swiss Association of Information,Communications and Organization TechnologySWICO was established in 1991 on voluntarybasis. A bold decision taken at that time was tointroduce an Advanced Recycling Fee (ARF)on sales of each electronic item. Themanufacturers and importers of EEE pays ARFto SWICO based on their import or salesstatistics and category of EEE they deal with,essentially covering the necessary recyclingexpenditure. The fees are passed on to the endconsumer. Consumers, at the end of life cycle,can bring back obsolete WEEE and deposit toany retail store or special SWICO collectingpoint free of charge. SWICO then invitestenders at different geographic regions fromrecycler and subsequently estimate its cost ofrecycling and transport and fixesreimbursement for each kg of recyclingmaterial. The system also guarantees adherenceto environmental norms by recyclers. It is tonote here that the recyclers and transporters areall commercial vendors and makes money outof the process and is a fully sustainablebusiness model. The operational statistics of

. 2009,1'oC. 2,9^. 4 17 'BITS, 'Pitani


SWICO show that smce 1994 SWICO hassteadily lowered its ARF charges whileincreasing its activity to cover all gamut ofWEEE as reported in SWICO RecyclingGuarantee (2006).One of the main criticisms to the SWICOsystem is that there is no clear cut guideline asto how the cost of recycling of itemsmanufactured before 1991 will be taken care bythe system as there is no ARF collected forthose itetns. A similar situation can occur dueto change of regulation denning WEEE. Steadytechnological advancements in the recyclingdomain have come handy to the system. ARFwere collected on EEE items based onrecycling cost in prevailing technology statusindexed to future. However technologyadvancements have steadily reduced the actualcost at the time of recycling and this has madepossible accommodating items on which noARF was claimed into the stream withoutexternal government input in Switzerland.

In Norway, at the core of the design of thefinancial engine for WEE handling is a detailedstudy done in 1996 covering definition,category and life span assessment of variousEEE products. The legal frame work is basedon 1998 Norwegian regulation on WEEE,which holds producers and importer in Norwayresponsible for environmentally safe scrappingof WEEE. An independent nonprofitorganization Elretur is founded by Norwegianindustries and trade organizations in July 1999.Since majority of WEEH products are found tohave lower life cycles in a mature market likeNorway, Elretur has set a target of collectionand treatment of 80% of estimated volume ofwaste per year within a 5 year period after itsproduction date. Elretur charges ARF on allnew products as well as a percentage forhistorical waste on which no levy was raised.As in case of Swiss system, the charges arepassed on to the consumer and the consumer inturn have the liberty of depositing their end oflife EEE at any collection point all over thecountry free of charge.

Elretur also follows a variable compensationscheme for the recyclers, linking it with profitfrom material recovery; the benefits are alsoshared with consumers by adjusting the ARF.The scheme is a fully sustainable businessmodel with built in incentives for recyclers togo for technology upgrade for higher metalrecovery and cost optimization in recyclingsystem. Although the ARF in Norway was highin initial years in order to accommodatehistorical cost, the stretigth of the systemhelped it to overcome the same quickly and asof 2006, Norway had the lowest ARF inEurope as reported by Martin (2006).

Also note that both the SWICO and Elretursystem encourage manufacturers of EEE toadopt green tecluiology as they attract lowerARF as well as liability.

Discussion and conclusion

Studying the best practices, the first andunequivocal conclusion that can be made isthat, a lot of pragmatic decision making isrequired in Indian perspective to set up andimplement a sustainable WEEE handlingsystem. A delay in implementation is simplygoing to raise the ARF to account for historicalWEEE. Another important observation is that,the responsibility of safe disposal of WEEE isshifted away from the end user. It isunexpected ofa user to have access to requiredresources for safe disposal of WEEE andtherefore the corresponding changes in legalframework is necessary in India, distinguishingWEEE from municipal waste handling. Alsoobserve that, both the system models discussedare top down models although they areparticipative in nature in terms ofimplementation. Success of such a modelhinges on cooperation of all stake holders andis dependent on socio-economic structure. Inorder to see success of such a scheme in Indiancontext, massive PR exercise may need to beundertaken to sensitize all stake holders aboutenvironmental issues, Further, we have to keepin mind that when we observe EEE consumer

, 2009, Voi 2. 9iiK 4 18 SITS,


behavior in European countries, we find amature and some what saturated market, whilein India, it is a developing market. Therefore inIndia, a piece of mobile phone or a PC,however dilapidated, can still fetch a buyer insecondary market and the consumer is notmature enough to deposit the same forenvironmentally safe disposal, unless a suitablemonetary incentive is there to do so, Theincentive, on the other hand, has to be collectedup-front from the consumer as a part of ARF inorder for the financial model to be self-sustaining. An encouraging point to note is thatdue to technological advancements, increase inGDP and decreasing tax regime in EEE, themodern gadgets have become affordable tolarger section of society in India. Therefore, alevel of maturity is expected in the consumerbehavior. An increase in price of EEE in termsof added ARF or taxes may not be detrimentalto the growth of business at this point. Further,the average life of an EHE product in Indiancontext may have to be fixed at a level muchabove 5 years; however detailed study in thisregard is necessary before any concltision canbe drawn. Organizational users of EEE in Indiaalso face another problem related to auditregulations, which are sometimes restrictive inteiTns of recognizing 'out of useful life" for thecostly HEE items that face rapid obsolesce dueto technology upgrade. Globally, for thedesigner of EEE items, the need of the time isto think in terms of future poof and/or modularand upgradeable products.

From our study in the vicinity of Pilani andfrom literatiue survey, the need of an organizedand scientific e-waste handling plan in theregion is well established; further study isrequired to assess feasibility.

Acknowledgement

The authors would like to express theirgratitude to all those who participated in thesurvey. Sincere thanks are due to Prof, B VUabu, who provided some vendor contacts.Or B K Rout and Dr. Monica Sharma, who

were consulted for statistical matter andquestionnaire design respectively, all at BITSPilani.

References1. ASSOCHAM Expert Committee on

Environment (2006). E-Waste Policy forIndia. Available at :http://www.assocham.org/events/recent/event_64/E_Wste Recommendations.doc. Accessed on10/04/2008.

2. Betts, Kellyn (2008), New technologiesbeing developed in China and EasternEurope may create usable materials frome-waste. Available at: http://www.env-eng.cn/post/37.html. Accessed on23/12/2008.

3. Broadband India (2008), Telecomsubscribers [Mobile + LandLine + WLL]in India, Available athttp://telecom.broadbandindia.eom/2008/l0/latest-niobile-landline-subscriber-base.html. Accessed on 01/01/2008.

4. Broughton, (1996). End of Life Computer& Electronics Recovery: Policy Optionsfor tlie Mid-Atlantic States, 2nd edn,MACREDO. p. 22. Available at:http://mac redo.org/public at ions/e_reco very.pdf Accessed on 01/01 /2008

5. California Integrated Waste ManagementBoard (2005), What is E-waste. Availableat: http://www.ciwmb,ca,gov/ Electronics/WhatisEwaste. Accessed on 01/01/2008.

6. County of San Bemardino(2007).Glossary of terms. Available at:http ://www, CO. san-bemardino.ca.us/wsd/Glossary.htm.Accessed on Ot/OI/2008.

7. Dalai P. (2006). H-Waste in India,Available at: http://unpanl.un.org/intiadoc/groups/public/documents/APClTY/UNPAN029841.pdf Accessed on01/01/2008.

CifJifE, 20, 1/oC. 2, 9^. 4 19 BITS, 'PUani


8. E-Parisaraa Pvt. Ltd (2005). ElectronicWaste Recycling, Available at:httj)://www.ewasteindia.in/pro file.asp,Accessed on 23/12/2008.

9. Environmental Sustainability Index(2005), Available at:http://www.yale.edu/esi/ Accessed on23/12/2008.

10. European Union Laws (2003). WasteElectrical and Electronic Equipment(WEEE). Available at:bttp://www.europa.eu.int/eur-lex/pri/en/oj/dat/2003/L037/l 03720030213en00240038.pdf Accessed on 01/01/2008.

11. FICCI environment conclave (2008).Facilitating an Integrated Approach forSustainable Waste Management. Availableat: http://ww^.ficci.com/fecO8/index.htm.Accessed on 01/01/2008.

12. MAIT-GTZ Smdy (2008) Press release,Available at:http://www.mait.coni/admin/press images/press77-try.htm. Accessed on 23/12/2008.

13. Martin S. P., (2006), SWICO/S.EN.S. TheSwiss WEEE recycling systems and bestpractices from other European systems.Proceedings of the 2006 IEEEInternational Symposium on Electronicsand the Environment. Available at:http://ewasteguide.info/system/files/Streicher_2006 IEEE.pdf Accessed on01/01/2008

14. Gol. Heidenrich, C and Nafalski,A(2000) Waste from Electrical &Electronic Equipment: A South AustialianPerspective, prepared for EPA. Dept forEnvironment & Heritage, Adelaide.Available at:http://www.environment.gov.aii/settlements/publi cat ions/waste/elec trica ls/computer-report/pubs/computer-report.pdf. Accessedon 23/12/08.

15. Price. JL (1999). Reclaiming End-of-LifeCathode Ray Tubes & Electronics: A

Florida Update. Florida Dept ofEnvironmental Protection, lallahassee.Available at: http://www.environment.gov.au/settlements/publications/waste/electricals/con^uter-report/pubs/computer-report.pdf Accessed on 23/12/08.

16. Puckett J. et. al. (2002). Exporting Harm -The High-Tech Trashing of Asia,Available at: http://www.ban.org/E-waste/technotrashfinalcomp.pdf Accessedon 01/01/2008.

17. Schmidt, C.W (2002). e-Junk Explosion,J. of Environmental Health PerspectivesVolume 110, Number 4, Available at:http://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/members/2002/110-4/focus.html. Accessed on23/12/2008.

18. SWICO Recycling Guarantee (2006).Activity Report 2005. Available at:http://www.swico.ch/en/recycling publikationen.asp. Accessed on 01/01/2008

19. . Tones, Earth (2006). Environmentalinternet and Phone Company weighs in one-waste. Available at:http://www.enn.coni'prcss.htnil?id=272.Accessed on 27/04/2008.

20. Toxic Link (2004). E-waste in India,Available at: http://www.noharm.org/details.cfm?type^document&id= 1175,Accessed on 23/12/2008.

21. Toxic Link (2005). Britain's EnvironmentAgency confirms huge e-waste outllow toIndia. Available at: http://www.toxicslink.org/art-view.php?id^75,Accessed on 23/12/2008.

22- Wikipedia. Electronic Waste. Availableat: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-waste,Accessed on 01/01/2008

23. WorldWatch Institute (2005). Cood stuff-computers. Available at:http://ww\\. worldwatch.org/pubs/goodstuff/computers. Accessed on 23/12/2008.

'L, 2009, Voi. 2, 'Hg. 4 20 BITS.

Copyright of CURIE Journal is the property of BITS (Birla Institute of Technology & Science) and its contentmay not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's expresswritten permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.

Documents

e Waste Management