Koninklijke Philips Electronics N.V. (Philips) is failing to take responsibility for the take-back of its used products. Inadequate recycling policies are leading to e-waste dumping in the developing world, harming human health and polluting the environment.

Three Greenpeace activists unfurled a banner demanding "Philips: Simply take-back & recycle" after scaling the Okura Hotel conference centre in Amsterdam today, where Philips is holding its annual general meeting.

Other electronics producers, like Sony, Toshiba, Dell and Lenovo do take responsibility for their own-branded obsolete products and are setting up voluntary take-back systems for their products, including TVs. Philips stands out by publicly stating that recycling is a shared financial responsibility for the customer, government and the producer. According to Philips consumers should pay for recycling by a visible fee.

The company's failure to take full responsibility for its e-waste resulted in its low ranking in Greenpeace 's 'Guide to Greener Electronics', scoring below the average of 5/10 points and ranking second from the bottom.

"Philips needs to take financial responsibility for its own end-of-life products and not put the burden on consumers, government or other producers," said Martin Hojsik, Greenpeace International toxics campaigner.

Greenpeace is calling on electronics companies to take financial responsibility for their own product waste. Making electronics producers pay for the recycling of their products creates a financial incentive for them to stop using toxic materials and make electronic goods more recyclable.

"It is outrageous that a leading Dutch company is failing to take full responsibility for its products globally when its Asian and American competitors already have," added Kim Schoppink, Greenpeace Netherlands toxics campaigner. "Philips needs to follow its own slogan and act with 'sense and simplicity' by taking responsibility for its own e-waste and provide take-back and recycling services wherever its products are sold."

In a recent study of the world's e-waste flows, Greenpeace International showed that most e-waste is unaccounted for; there is no tracking of its toxic trajectory or adequate control over how it is disposed of. This includes up to 75 per cent in the European Union and 80 per cent in the United States. This so-called 'hidden flow' fuels the exports of e-waste to China, India and other countries in the developing world, creating mountains of e-waste which is hazardous to human health and the environment.

Greenpeace

The fate of large quantities of electronic waste is unknown, according to a Greenpeace report Toxic Tech: Not in Our Backyard, published today. While some electronic waste may be accounted for by storage in attics or garages, much may be disposed of with mixed waste in landfills and incinerators or exported - often illegally - for dumping in Africa or for rudimentary recycling in Asia, where it has a high toll on health, safety and the environment.
Amsterdam, 21 February 2008 – The fate of large quantities of electronic waste is unknown, according to a Greenpeace report Toxic Tech: Not in Our Backyard, published today. While some electronic waste may be accounted for by storage in attics or garages, much may be disposed of with mixed waste in landfills and incinerators or exported - often illegally - for dumping in Africa or for rudimentary recycling in Asia, where it has a high toll on health, safety and the environment.

Even in regions such as the EU that are subject to tighter regulation, there is no precise information on what happens to as much as 75% of e-waste generated. In the US, this figure could be as high as 80% or more, since the amount of e-waste which is reported for recovery includes some of the e-waste that is exported to developing countries.

In newly industrialised countries it is almost impossible to estimate the amount of e-waste escaping any form of treatment or management, although in India, it is estimated that around 99% of domestic and imported e-waste, 143,000 tonnes per year, ends up in the informal recycling sector or is simply dumped.

“It is the scrap yard workers in Asia who are bearing the toxic burden of e-waste. They are exposed to a cocktail of toxic chemicals when the products are broken apart, polluting the water, air and soil of not only the scrap yards but the surrounding neighbourhood,” said Martin Hojsik, Greenpeace International toxics campaigner. “The mountain of obsolete electronic products is expanding at a huge rate as our consumption of electronic devices continues to grow rapidly1.”

Figures provided by four PC manufacturers who have already developed take-back and recycling activities suggest that only around 10% of own-branded end-of-life products were recycled. The figures for mobile phones were even lower, with only 2-3% being recycled. This means that, even for those companies reporting their own-brands, the hidden flow of e-waste branded products currently amounts to an average of 91% of past sales.

“The reality is that we cannot say with any certainty what happens to e-waste once it has escaped responsible recycling. This is why manufacturers of electronic goods need to increase their efforts to collect and responsibly treat e-waste, introduce voluntary take-back schemes and remove hazardous substances from their products so they can be more safely and easily recycled,” added Hojsik. “Only in this way can we ensure that the dangerous tide of toxic e-waste is stemmed, and that the hidden flow of e-waste doesn’t become a problem in anybody’s backyard.”

Greenpeace

Greenpeace wants PlayStation, Xbox and Wii gamers to lay down the law to Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo and convince the electronics giants to catch up with the trend sweeping through the electronics industry by eliminating hazardous chemicals from their game consoles.

The games consoles industry grew almost 15 per cent in 2006, shipped 62.7 million units and is a US$ 30 billion a year industry. Despite its products including components common to PCs, in which levels of hazardous chemicals are being reduced, game console manufacturers have so far failed to achieve any progress in reducing the toxic burden of their products.

"Game consoles manufacturers are lagging way behind the makers of mobile phones and PCs who have been reducing the toxic load of their products over the past year," said Zeina Al Hajj, Greenpeace International toxics campaigner. "Game consoles contain many of the same components as PCs so manufacturers can do a lot more," she continued.

In its first foray into the world of 'machinima', Greenpeace is today launching its 'Clash of the Consoles: Battle for the Future' video, aimed at gamers. A 90 second video has the iconic games console characters, Microsoft's 'Master Chief', Nintendo's 'Mario' and Sony's 'Kratos' compete for the prize of a 'greener' games console. It ends with the message, "Jump in… Tell your game console company Wii would like to live and play in a toxic free world" - combining slogans of the three manufacturers.

Gamers can compare how each console measures up on toxics, recycling and energy efficiency and show support for their favourite console to go green.

The initiative is part of Greenpeace's campaign to persuade the entire electronics sector to go beyond current legislation and eliminate hazardous chemicals across the board.

Heading Greenpeace's list are brominated fire retardants and PVC, the use of which can lead to hazardous chemicals building up in the environment and in human and animal tissue. Workers in production facilities as well as recyclers in scrap yards may be most at risk. This includes Chinese and Indian children involved in dismantling by hand discarded electronic goods from richer nations.

"Surely gamers don't want people their own age in other countries to suffer for their pleasure," said Al Hajj. "Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo are currently undermining their own reputations among consumers," she added.

Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft dominate the game consoles market with respective sales shares of 42, 40 and 18 per cent.

Greenpeace is confident that the manufacturers can cut down on use of hazardous chemicals without consumers feeling the pinch. Sony, for instance, boasts of having saved over Euro 400,000 by carefully managing and optimising its takeback programmes, according to a study in the Journal of Industrial Ecology.

Greenpeace

by CELESTE YATES

There is another style of car coming out in the alternative car market. It has been reported not only to be an electric car, but will only have three wheels. The car will tilt and slide around corners like a motorcycle. The company creating the design, Venture Vehicles, has said they aim to market the vehicle for 2009.

The steering of the car is the most important aspect, as the engineers had to combine the concept of a car with a motorbike. Carver, based in Holland, invented the design for the steering technology.

It has been reported that the steering will cost $20,000 for a hybrid version or $25,000 for a full electric version. The vehicle will hold two passengers and have an optional luggage container that straps onto the roof. The car will be able to turn into a convertible with the easy removal of the roof.

The three-wheeled car will be named Venture One. It will be ideal for high traffic areas and close knit cities where space is a problem. Venture one is only 40 inches wide, and is shorter than the average car, so parking problems will be a thing of the past. Two Venture Ones will be able to fit into one parking space. However passengers don’t sit next to one another, but more in a motorbike style of one behind the other.

For the hybrid, which takes petrol, the gas mileage is a low 120 miles per gallon. The electric version will go an easy 120 miles before needing a charge. Although it is created for urban living, the car is able to keep its pace on the freeway as well, going from zero to 60 in five seconds.

The company is trying to capitalise on the green car market and is working with battery maker A123 system on the design. They are also involved in loading a variety of safety features, to ensure the vehicle still has some of the safety and security that a car offers.

Although the car is able to tilt 25 degrees, it’s almost impossible to tip over, so there is no need for passengers to worry about falling, as one would do in a motorbike. The car looks like a tornado with its aerodynamic shape and sleek feel, however this might just be the next bold advancement in car evolution. The combination of motorbikes and cars into one compact machine has resulted into a possible green future prospect of car evolution.
Celeste writes for Emerging Technologies News a site dedicated to all new technical news.

Amazines.com