1 / 50

E- WASte

Nick Ling & Danica Hill. E- WASte. I <3 gadgets. When was the last time you bought a new computer, or a new cell phone? What happens to the old one?. http://www.slipperybrick.com/2008/01/star-trek-gadgets/.

media
Download Presentation

E- WASte

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Nick Ling &Danica Hill E-WASte

  2. I <3 gadgets • When was the last time you bought a new computer, or a new cell phone? • What happens to the old one? http://www.slipperybrick.com/2008/01/star-trek-gadgets/ http://www.unplggd.com/unplggd/green-ideas/recycle-your-cell-phone-and-donate-to-charity-041574

  3. So, what’s e-waste? • E-waste is a term used for the recycling of electronic products such as • computers, • cellphones, • televisions, • VCRs , • stereos, • copiers, • fax machines, • and other electronic  products that are no longer in use. http://deleket.deviantart.com/art/iPod-Generations-Icons-47813530?moodonly=1

  4. Where does it go? • Developed countries don’t have the capacity to deal with the e-waste • So what do we do? • Send it to a third world country. http://www.greenpeace.org/international/campaigns/toxics/electronics/where-does-e-waste-end-up

  5. Why send it away? • Expensive and difficult to process • Laws in the US and worker safety • Carcinogenicity of the materials • Problems? • Rapid technology change • Planned obsolescence • Think apple computers. Good for 3-4 years, then kaput! • Third world countries • Lack of environmental laws • Valuable metals in the electronics

  6. Typical E-Waste Breakdown How much is discarded? • Disposed of in US (2007) • 205 million computer products • 27 million televisions • 140 million cell phones http://www.rubbermonkey.org/rothmobot/recycling.htm

  7. What is the current problem? • This is the threat http://artsyspot.com/e-waste-in-guiyu/

  8. Who’s playing the game? Stakeholders • Consumers (gadget buyers) • Countries exporting to developing countries • Workers • Producers/ manufacturers • Countries with properly established recycling facilities • People living next to the facilities

  9. …1 Hazard Identification http://blog.archenemy.org/2006/10/15/proceed-with-caution-cognitive-hazard-ahead/

  10. What’s the threat? • Aluminum, plastics, PCBs, zinc, flame retardants in plastics. • Toxic metals such as lead, mercury, cadmium • These materials can leak out into soil, water, and the atmosphere • Soil, water are needed for crops • People need air. (fresh) • Materials can lead to cancer, neurological and respiratory disorders , and potentially, birth defects. • Dust is generated in the mechanical and manual dismantling process • Inhaled into the system Hazard identification

  11. Unsafe practices • Landfills • Incineration • Open Burning • Reuse • Recycling

  12. Landfills • One of the most popular ways of waste disposal • This is problematic due to the materials reaching ground and water sources and contaminating them. Also a problem for developing nations who live in close proximity to landfills • Releases hazardous emissions such as Mercury, lead and cadmium. Also hazardous PCBs are released. • Landfills are prone to vaporization of toxix chemicals as well as uncontrolled that may spark.

  13. Incineration • Very hazard due to the toxic fumes that are release and then inhales causing respiratory problems as well as skin problems • Copper which is used in circuit boards and cables acts as a catalyst for dioxin formation when flame retardants are incinerated • PVC also found in e-waste can be corrosive when burnt and lead to the formation of dioxins as well. • Leads to loss of useable elements that could have been sorted and recover properly

  14. Open Burning • Releases more pulluntants that in a controlled incineration • When pollutants are inhaled it can cause asthma attacks, respiratory infections. Other smaller problems such as coughing, wheezing, chest pain and eye irritation • Open fires lack oxygen that then forms CO2 and when inhaled poisons the blood. • Inhalation of ash poses a problem as well.

  15. Reuse, Recycling • Reuse • This is common for developing countries because they are inexpensive, however 25-75% of electronics are obsolete • Recycling • Mostly done in developing countries due to low recycling costs • Obtaining the raw materials from electronics can be profitable, however due to the hands on recycling, a worker’s health is at risk.

  16. Who is at risk? • 3rdworlders • the workers • All ages. That includes children. • unborn babies • Toxins travel across the placenta • Aka. Mothers pass it on to the children. Hazard identification http://artsyspot.com/e-waste-in-guiyu/

  17. Case Study: Guiyu, China One man’s trash is another man’s problem http://greenlightforbusiness.files.wordpress.com/2009/11/c99a16ed-eda3-47ef-8863-59670dd45d1f7.jpg

  18. Guiyu • The largest E-waste recycling site in the world since the 1990s • This is where computers go to die • Population 150,000 and estimates ~ 80% of families engaged in the e-waste recycling program. • More problems? • Unsafe techniques – manual electronic component removal • Open burning to reduce mass, extract precious metals • Open acid digestion to recover precious metals

  19. Contamination • Aquatic Systems – direct dumping of acid waste into streams • Soils – PDBE saturated soil • Genetic damage to plant and animal life. • Lead, cadmium in rice over 4 times in excess the maximum allowable concentrations. • Air • Dioxins – air particle concentrations: • 65-2765 pg / cubic meter* • remember, 65 pg/m^3.

  20. Brush that dirt off your shoulder, now. http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_iVw4McXZboQ/Sxg1rsbHKCI/AAAAAAAAABM/5kZGn4XQzw4/s1600-h/guiyu.jpg

  21. Precautionary Assessment Precautionary Assessment Precautionary Assessment

  22. Precautionary assessment – Community/Social issues

  23. P.Ass - Exposure Issues

  24. P.Ass – Hazard/Toxicity

  25. Precautionary Assessment summary • Community / Social Issues - 15/15 • Exposure Issues – 18/20 • Hazard / Toxicity – 28/30 • *precautionary assessment applies to the Guiyu, China case study.

  26. Which one to narrow down to? • There sure are a lot of different chemicals. • We will focus on the burning of plastics, which releases toxic emissions such as: DIOXINS

  27. What are dioxins • A class of hundreds of chemical contaminants • Most toxic is 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD) • Formed during combustion processes such as waste incineration, forest fires. • The most potent synthetic carcinogen ever tested in laboratory animals

  28. Dioxin, effects http://benblogged.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/10/zombie.jpg • Short term exposure • Chloracne- skin lesions • Hepatic toxicity- altered liver function • Long term exposure • Endocrine system • Reproductive functions • Animal studies • Cancer • Regarded as a probable human carcinogen, but conclusion is based off of animal studies and human epidemiological studies. Still debatable.

  29. …2 Exposure assessment http://www.cynical-c.com/archives/bloggraphics/0421834.jpg

  30. Daily Tolerable intake Dioxins. • WHO • 2 pg/kg bw/day • FDA • 0.03 pg/kg bw/day • EPA • 0.006 pg/kg bw/day • Canada • 10 pg/kg bw/day • Bw – body weight • Pg – Picogram = 10^-12 grams. A nanogram is 10^-9

  31. Routes of exposure Dioxins • Inhalation • Air borne concentrations are high • 65-2765 pg / cubic meter • Dermal • Dust settling • Ingestion • Meat and dairy products • Beef, fish, eggs all bioaccumulate up the food chain • Levels are 100,000x of the surrounding environment • Breast milk

  32. Choosing a human study • Hard to choose • Available human data not rigorous enough for establishment of a tolerable daily intake • Dioxins never travel alone in these studies. • confounding factors in exposure assessments.

  33. We turn to animal studies • Most sensitive endpoint – developing reproductive systems of male rat fetuses while exposed in utero. • Measure effects on: • sperm production • Sperm morphology • Derive a Tolerable Daily Intake from this. • How? The sperm reserve in men is much less than a rat’s.

  34. Study findings • Faqi et al (1998) • Lethality in animals: 1-5000 µg/kg • Reproductive – decreased fertility, decreased sperm count, teratogenic (birth defects) • Carcinogen – thyroid and liver tumors. Skin and liver cancer promotors

  35. …3 Dose-Response Assessment

  36. How to calculate risk? • Dioxins are usually found in mixtures containing several types of dioxins. • To express overall toxicity, use “international toxicity equivalents” (TEQ) • Individual dioxins are attributed their own Toxic Equivalence Factor (TEF)

  37. 1 0.1 0.0001 0.1 0.0001 0.1 0.01 Sample Toxic Equivalent Factors (TEFs) • 2,3,7,8-TCDD • 1,2,37,8-PeCDD • OCDD • 2,3,7,8-TCDF • PCB 77 (3,4,3’,4’) • PCB 126 (3,4,5,3’,5’) • PCB 169 (3,4,5,3’,4’,5’) Sum of these allows estimation of TEQs These are all types of dioxins, or dioxin-like compounds.

  38. Considerations • Each chemical vary considerably • In tissue distribution and absorption • Metabolism • Elimination • Half-lives • In mice/rats may be only weeks • In humans may be 7+ years • TCDD – 7.5 years • OCDD – 120 years • In terms of risk assessment, need to take into account all of these factors.

  39. Uncertainty factors Thus a 9.6 = uncertainty factor

  40. calculations • Daily intake (pg/kg/day) = = body burden(pg/kg bw) x ln2 bioavailability x ½ life in days = 3400 pg/kg bw x 0.693 0.5 x 2740 days (7.5years) = 1.7 pg/kg/day • Uncertainty factor = 9.6 • LOAEL = 33* ng/kg/bw • Half-life in humans = 7.5 years • *LOAEL determined from Faqi et al (1998)

  41. Many uncertainties • Dose-added is fundamental to the TEF model, sounds reasonable • But not certain that this is still applicable in complex mixtures related to human exposures and dose responses. • Most TEFs are derived from animal data • are they appropriate for humans? e.g. carcinogenicity

  42. NOAEL, LOAEL • ATSDR: LOAEL: 120 pg/kg/day intake based on animal study. • Safety factor: 90. Yields tolerable intake of 1.3 pg/kg/day. • MRL set at 1 pg/kg/day. Serum lipid level associated with intake of 1 pg/kg/day is about 10 ppt, assuming 7.5 year half-life of elimination and 60 percent absorption. • WHO JECFA: Tolerable body burden: NOAEL/safety factor. • NOAEL: 16 ng/kg; Identified safety factor: 3.2 • Tolerable body burden: 16/3.2 = 5 ng/kg. • Corresponding serum lipid level: Assume 25% body fat: 5/0.25 =20 ppt • ECSCF: (European Commission Scientific Committee on Food) NOAEL body burden of 20 ng/kg; 3.2-fold safety factor. • Tolerable body burden: 20/3.2 = 6.25 ng/kg • Corresponding serum lipid level: Assume 25% body fat: 6.25/0.25=25 ppt tolerable serum lipid level • WHO (1998) level: Range of maternal body burdens associated with LOAELs in animal studies: 28-73 ng/kg. Identified safety factor: 10. • Tolerable body burden range: 28/10 to 73/10 = 2.8 to 7.3 ng/kg • Corresponding serum lipid level: Assume 25%body fat: 11-29 ppt range of tolerable serum levels http://www.dioxinfacts.org/dioxin_health/dioxin_food/dioxinTEQgraphic.pdf

  43. Legislative mandates • No Federal mandate to recycle e-waste. • Many states have set up mandatory electronics recovery programs. • Disposal – Treated as hazardous waste

  44. conclusion • Most people will not deal with dioxins from burning plastics. It is in food. • Don’t burn trash • LOAEL – 1.3 pg/kg daily • That’s 10 parts per trillion.

  45. …4 Risk management and communication

  46. What can we do. Prevention, solutions? • Basel Convention Multilateral environmental agreement • signed in 1992 by 169 countries to regulate trade of international trade of hazardous waste. • Basel Ban Amendment • adopted in 1995 outlawing the transfer of hazardous waste from developed countries to developing counties. • However it has not yet entered into full force other than some nations such as the European Union and China

  47. solutions: E-stewards • A group of North American qualified and certified recyclers pursuing the highest standard of environmental and social responsibility when it comes to recycling electronic products • Ensure that e-waste products will no be dumped in landfills or incinerators, exported to developing countries or sent to prison labor operations • They will be accountable for all recycling processes for all of the toxic materials

  48. Manufacturer responsibility • Have manufactures be responsible for the recycling of their specific products, this will lead them to make longer lasting and safe products

  49. Proper Recycling • Detoxification • The removal of key components from e-waste materiasl that help to avoid dilution of contamination of toxic substances. • Examples: • Lead glass from CRT screens • CFC gases from Refrigerators, light bulbs and gases • Shredding • Obtaining recyclable materials as well as further separating out the hazardous materials • Also the gas emissions are filtered in this process to lower the environmental impact • Refining • The materials need to be refined and conditioned in order to be sold as secondary materials as well as being able to be properly disposed of in their final destination.

  50. Thanks.

More Related