Transforming from ‘dumping ground’ to an Urban Mining Success Story

STEP and the UN have ‘warned’ that most e-waste from US may be exported to (or shall we say dumped in) India.

How strange! More than half of the valuable content of WEEE processed in India is exported! So effectively, the WEEE will be dumped in India at dirt cheap rates. All the dirty work of sorting, dismantling, isolation of valuable components will be done in India, the negative value items will be simply discarded in primitive ways due to lack of technologies or affordability of the same. And the cream goes abroad again. The same metals recovered somewhere are again imported in India at a high price!

I look at this UN ‘warning’ as a great opportunity for our formal sector. In fact under current situations, one may see it as a great opportunity for the likes of Umicore and Dowa! Considering that the e-waste dumped in India will undergo dismantling at the basic level and the valuable contents will be exported to them, they may have already stepped up their Christmas celebrations!

India generates about a million tons of e-waste already. The total installed capacity of the formal e-waste recycling sector is just about 10% of that. The remaining 90% has no trace, simply vanishing in the informal sector and powering a large grey economy. Even at that 10% capacity, the formal sector is struggling to get e-waste. This is where the opportunity comes in.

Now lets look at this a bit more positively. E-Waste is a great resource. The problem with this resource is that it is highly polluting if handled carelessly. Umpteen studies have shown that when clean recycling methods are applied to WEEE, the metals recovered actually have a much greener footprint. For example the amount of Copper recoverable from 1 ton of WEEE of an average quality can be easily about 100 Kg. Considering the fact that the global yield of copper mines is falling and has already reached below 3%, it means that we are replacing at least about 3 tons of Copper ore. And if we consider the environmental cost of extraction and refining of pure copper from copper ore, it is at least 6-8 times that in case of WEEE recycling. So if we have to consider the actual total cost (including social cost) of copper recovered from WEEE versus that from a mine, we can safely say that the former has a 20 times better value than the latter. And to add some more math, with 1 ton of WEEE recycling, we are replacing 3 tons of mining. So with say 25 million tons, we can replace 75 million tons of mining. Is that close to the weight of a small mountain? Probably yes. And we are still talking only about copper! WEEE contains almost about 40 metals! (See www.resposeindia.com for more details). How many hills and forests and natural carbon sinks can we save!

The key lies in how green can we keep this activity. If we can implement clean technologies at affordable costs and make our processes compliant to globally acceptable standards, we have a winning story. We at ResposeIndia are bullish about the entire e-waste sector.

What can be done is, all our existing formal sector and those willing to upgrade from the informal sector can be aligned to global standards and made compliant to ISO 14001, OHSAS 18001 and R2. Thereby we can legally import WEEE. We can equip the e-waste recycling facilities with affordable technology solutions for environment friendly recycling and transform the millions of tons of WEEE to billions of dollars. We at ResposeIndia provide such services at extremely affordable costs. That holds the key. Making recycling technology mainstream will provide answers to many questions. We need not oppose US ‘dumping’ e-Waste into India or even be worried about it. Let us evaluate how we can transform all this waste to wealth.

Why are most authorized e-waste businesses struggling?

I got this question posed to me in a social media interaction. In larger interests of the e-waste sector as a whole, I thought it would be a good idea to post a blog.

There are multiple reasons responsible for the woes of authorized e-waste recycling business. First and foremost in the list is the regulatory framework. The current e-waste regulations are grossly incomplete. These regulations have been made with the sole objective of controlling pollution by the informal sector. While this part of the objective is good in itself, the other side must be to encourage the formal sector. This part is grossly missing. As I have always been saying, every person needs an incentive to do anything. Currently the incentives offered to the formal sector are so ridiculous that the entire system actually encourages the informal sector. (see : https://respose.wordpress.com/2012/08/17/recycling-versus-resposal-the-e-waste-case/)

Secondly, the informal sector has its own unique style of working. They have by far perfected the technique of reverse logistics. Under operations management, reverse logistics is supposedly one of the most difficult tasks. Akin to the ‘dabbawalas’ of Mumbai who have won a place in Harvard case studies, this informal recycling sector collection chain is a masterpiece in itself. The amount of money, effort and time required to establish a parallel equally successful system is simply unimaginable. Many companies have tried to copy the ‘dabbawala’ model in the food industry but most have failed drastically. One needs to understand that there is always a great value in simplicity. Complex board room solutions often fail at grass roots. This reverse logistics expertise is grossly lacking in the formal authorized sector.

Thirdly, the country does not have a great metallurgical infrastructure. Most of our metallurgical giants are focused on a single metal. There is a gross lack of multi metal smelting and refining units. Therefore the part of the e-waste value chain that is generates the maximum wealth is not within reach of Indian recyclers. We at ResposeIndia are trying to devise clean technologies suited to the Indian market conditions in terms of individual collection sizes and budgets. As of now we have succeeded only to a certain level (restricted to metal and non metal separation). (See http://www.resposeindia.com/products)

Fourthly, the demographics of India are so diverse that one single solution to any problem does not exist. It will always need to be a framework with suitable modifications over every 200 km radius. This is extremely difficult and expensive for Indian corporate houses to achieve, given the fragmented e-waste scenario today.

Fifth, the awareness levels about e-waste, what is means, what are the hazards, what are their responsibilities, etc are extremely low even among the effluent higher middle class, let alone the rest of the population. There are many more issues related to econometrics, logistic infrastructure, half baked legal frameworks, polarized thinking on part of some of the NGOs and environmental activists, etc. Each of these issues deserves a long article in itself.

To conclude for the time being, the reasons are many. What has a potential of being an endless source of wealth is being grossly neglected as a low level, blue collared, polluting business. However the fact is that if done in an organized fashion with a little bit of lateral thinking, resposal is a fantastic method of transforming waste to wealth. For more details, see (www.resposeindia.com/infobank)

Symbiosis of informal sector and formal e-waste resposal agents

I have been reading most blogs on e-waste and I see that most of them are dedicated to pointing flaws in policies and laws and implementation models. I think it is most inappropriate that governments throughout the world need to be involved in making policies for effective collection of e-waste. I may sound ridiculous to many. But here goes my logic –

e-Waste management is basically dependent on efficient collection. Rest of the things are easy. For efficient collection, policy researchers and environmentalists are crying hoarse over making collection effective. The question commonly being asked is who will bear the cost of collection. All suggestions for policies, laws, models revolve around how the cost of collection can be transferred to be generator of e-waste. So far so good.

The critical question is who is the generator of e-waste? Manufacturer? Distributor? Retailer? User? Reuser? Depending on the convenience of the policy maker (suggestor!) one can decide that. However I have a slightly different line of thought. Who bears the cost of distribution of electronic goods? If one understands the economic incentive attached in distribution of electronic goods, I guess it is easy to see an answer for the reverse logistics cost transfer problem.

If we look at the India example, less than 95% e-waste comes to authorized recyclers. (As of 2012). The question is where is the remaining? Obviously it is collected through the informal sector. If the informal sector can collect 95% of a million tons of e-waste a year, I guess they must be at least as efficient in the processes, cost management and network as any damn corporate chain, if not more. Does it therefore make any sense in breaking that highly efficient collection chain?

The problem is not the existence of the informal sector. The problem is in ensuring that they get rid of the collection in a right manner. This is where the question of incentives comes in force. I personally thing that no one spoils environment by choice. It is either unawareness or lack of incentives to keep things clean. One may as well put it the other way round. There are clearly visible instant economic incentives for the polluters to pollute. (see : https://respose.wordpress.com/2012/08/17/recycling-versus-resposal-the-e-waste-case/)

In one of my earlier blogs I urged readers to sell their e-waste only to authorized recyclers. However a few grey hair later, I feel that it may not be the panacea to the problem. Yes, it could contribute in some small way in making the recycling activity cleaner, but only in a small way. I guess mainstreaming the informal sector collectors is the most logical answer to the problem of e-waste. (In fact all other wastes as well !)

If we can simply build a mechanism to clearly separate the scope of activities of a collection agent and a resposal agent (recycler) and provide each of them individual economic incentives, I guess it could be a great model. If both can coexist and a market place can be created where free trade of e-waste is made possible between collection agents and resposal agents, it could build a very nice ecosystem. And to build such an ecosystem, governments need not play a major role all they can do is provide a conducive framework for creating such a market and the invisible hand of the market will play its role in achieving the larger social good. Just some food for thought !!!!

* For Resposal : pls see : https://respose.wordpress.com/2012/03/21/respose/

For more information on e-waste resposal pls see http://www.resposeindia.com

 

What’s the big deal about e-waste?

India produced 8 million tons of electronic waste in 2009. In 2012, the number may cross 12 million tons. No big deal. With a population of  1.3 billion, it  means a mere 10 Kgs per capita !

The big deal is here. e-waste is the fastest growing pile of waste worldwide, and in India and China it is growing faster than the world. Great ! It simply means that India and China are absorbing new technology and discarding old technology at a rate faster than the world. So good for them.

No.

The reality is that a large part of this heap is contributed by the west. Despite anti-dumping laws, there are huge consignments of e-waste being brought in India and China in the name of ‘second hand products for reuse and/or resale’. In reality  these containers go straight to the unorganized recycling sector. Ok. So what? If the unorganized sector is getting a livelihood, isnt it good enough?

The issue is that they do get a livelihood in return of their lives !

Let us look at the entire mechanics of how this whole stuff works. e-Waste is collected through multiple sources including the ragpickers, large ITES companies, manufacturers, governments and of course the banned import route. (Sometimes I think, imposing a ban on anything is equivalent to signalling that now you can make money out of this!) The collection chain is an extremely “well organized” network with a clear hub and spoke arrangement. The ragpickers sell their foraging to the slightly bigger scrap retailer. Such scrap retailers then sell it to a scrap dealer. Many such dealers then sell it to a regional scrap agent. These agents collect the scrap on behalf of the scrap tycoon.

This tycoon directs the scrap to recycling agents who then download it to local recyclers. These local recyclers dump it on their labour, often bonded labour. Such labourers actually recycle the scrap with three simple tools : A sledge hammer, a match stick and acid. The collected scrap is simply broken into pieces. The wires are burnt in heaps. The PCBs (printed circuit boards) are dipped in acid and the metals are dissolved in the acids. The output obtained is metal pieces and plastic from the external casings, a highly contaminated lump of copper from the wires and various metals in form of sulphates and chlorides and nitrides and other salts. And of course the largest output is the by products – poisonous gases, tar, leachants, wasted acids and chemicals.

There is absolutely no problem in dealing with these pollutants. There is a simple mechanism. The poisonous gases are inhaled by the workers. So human lungs take care of treating the gases. Left over gases become a part of the city atmosphere. So we have a few million lungs cleaning the gases. The leachants and tar and other stuff that runs into the ground is absorbed by the soil. The earth being earth, it simply allows the poison to seep in. Occasionally it may seep in directly in an aquifer. Else it may simply be absorbed by trees (if there are any!). And as far as wasted acid and other dissolved chemicals are concerned, it is very easy to let it flow to the nearest drainage that finally terminates either water bodies either above the earth’s surface or below. If it is above the earth’s surface, the treatment is simple. Aquatic life takes care of it. So may kidneys, gills, intestines are available to clean the water. So the final residue on the planet is only a few dead bodies. That’s fine. Someone needs to sacrifice for the benefit of the environment !

It is a scary situation. We, at Respose, conducted a small dipstick survey. (Of course it was a under cover operation. And we could only venture as far as our common sense and a sixth sense of danger would allow.  Recyclers dont like too much inquisitiveness. So one needs to know when to back out. ) The survey was based on the economic and health aspects of the waste workers.

Table 1 : Average Sick Days observation in waste labourers

People interviewed	37	Average Years in this activity	Average monthly earning	Avg No of sick days in a month	Avg weight (kg)
Male Adults (above 14)	15	5	4500	3	48
Female Adults (above 14)	4	5	3000	4	42
Male Children (under 14)	10	4	1400	6	29
Female Children (under 14)	8	3	1200	6	27

Table 2 : Average Daily Earning of ragpickers

	No. of. Respondents	Material collected	Average daily income (Rs)
Male Adults	10	Plastic, Metals, Paper, household electronic equipment	76
Female Adults	30	Plastic, cloth, metals	53
Male Children (under 14)	43	Plastic, cloth	32
Female Children (under 14)	37	Plastic, cloth	27

This is the big deal.

While the ‘mafias of waste’ are making huge money, the actual workers are languishing.

Respose aims to change this. We therefore appeal –  DO NOT throw away your electronic waste and please DO NOT sell it to your local scrap retailer.