That's kind of typical of official reactions when one hysterical account (BAN.org) that "80% of E-Waste exported 80% of the time, and 80% of that is dumped and lost to the circular economy" is questioned sharply by someone (yours truly) who had a certain degree of credibility at the time. Regulators try to find someone at a median between Robin and The Ayatollah of EWaste, and fund them to get at the truth.
Ruediger's been at the receiving end of research funding for over a decade. And he's filled the role of compromise chef, admirably. A compromise between talented tech sector importers, and the bigots who labelled them "primitive recyclers"...
I haven't finished starting the 2020 "Global E-Waste Statistics Partnership" report, "Global EWaste Monitor 2020" yet. But in the introduction, this paragraph stood out.
"Only 17.4% of this was officially documented as properly collected and recycled."
I see what you did there. It's a very precise statistic, down to the decimal, about what data you have. But it also continues a backhanded European narrative about the so-called "informal" sector (which I call either the Tech Sector or Scrap Sector according to what is happening).
This is #whitesplaining why the Africans I filmed (below) are not to be trusted. If they were trusted, the charitable industrial complex funding might grind to a halt.
The film above was shot last year in a North African factory that buys "damaged" desktop LCD computer monitors, and remanufactures them into affordable "good enough" hotel TVs. Let's be clear, this is what "informal, undocumented" electronics trade typically looks like. The film depicts an "underground" or "informal" process, as UNU defines it. They are officially licensed, and pay national tariffs and taxes, etc. I was present during a 2019 audit by their North African port authorities (they passed).
 |
| Anti Alarmists Jeopardizing EU Environmental Funding |
But they occupy a niche not recognized in OECD documented recycling chains. They specifically avoid paying more for "tested working" devices (as PACE would prescribe they buy) because they are going to gut those devices and replace the existing circuit boards with more sophisticated board (tuner boards that work internationally, receiving airwave broadcasts in any country). They also avoid buying smashed up, mishandled monitors. Their "sweet spot" are the monitors that can be purchased for a dollar apiece (more than the scrap, but less than a fully functional device).
Basel Action Network describes these people as "criminals". Or as "victims". Because BAN does not know what it is talking about and makes it all up as they go along. Everyone knows that now. The Emporer of Ewaste has no clothes.
But Ruediger's bunch has played a role in "balancing" BAN's disinformation in a way that continues to suck the guilty white conscience sector of millions of dollars, promising to "solve the ewaste problem" (StEP.org is another fruit of Dr. Kuehr's and Pacal LeRoy's influence).
So as they become more educated that the "primitives" in emerging markets are usually more sophisticated than they are, how do they acknowledge the systemic racist depictions of the reuse / Secondhand Sector, without sacrificing their own funding?
You identify your lack of information as "uncertainty", and declare yourself the savior of statistics.
 |
| My only meeting / interview with Joe "Hurricane" Benson, at a cafe at Heathrow Airport |
It only counts if White Man in Europe was able to count it?
White Man in Europe has trouble counting it when Joseph "Hurricane" Benson buys 300 hotel televisions, replaced with flat screens in 2008, and ships them for reuse to Accra and Lagos. White Man in Europe was able to count it when processed by Kuusakoski's SWEEEP program in the UK. White Man in Europe labels #FreeJoeBenson practices "informal", and Kuusakoski (the largest share of USA's biggest CRT dump in Columbus Ohio) as formally documented.
Now, I can also see that Dr. Ruediger Kuehr has learned a lot over the decade, and has refined his claims, read accurate reports by researchers like Reed Miller at Yale (cited in the report, gladly), and hopefully Dr. Josh Lepawsky, Dr Grace Akese, and Dr. Josh Goldstein (not cited). I can see that the UNU is relying ever less on hysterical made up percentages printed by and disclaimed by Basel Action Network. He may well have read Secondhand, by Adam Minter.
But just once, I'd like to read an opening document that had some white privilege acknowledgement of past "statistics", which were used as a basis to fund a half dozen "Slumumentary" films in places like Agbogbloshie. Here are the quotes I'll be searching for in the 2020 Global EWaste Statistics report, from my Imaginary UNU Friends.
 |
| Do as Europe Says, Not as Europe Did |
"We acknowledge that documentation of recycling is not necessarily an indicator of proper recycling"
"We acknowledge that our reports, in the past, made assumptions about the fate of materials - most likely destined for reuse - based upon the racial and national origins of non-white businesspeople"
"We acknowledge that terms such as 'informal' have been used harshly and critically to impugn the practices of African, Asian, and Latin American (Global South) technicians and businesses, and have had the effect of shortening the life of used electronics."
"In hindsight, we see that import/export companies like BJ Electronics (#freejoebenson) created what World Bank consultants termed 'a critical mass of users' in emerging markets. Without affordable used cell phones, investment in cell phone towers would not have been possible. Same for internet cable, satellite broadcast, TV stations, etc which were scaled by Africa's Tech Sector."
"Looking back on it, we have erred both in the quality of statistics we provided the Western Press, and the leading assumptions we made about the environmental impact of the processes. In retrospect, a 2008 hotel TV exported to Lagos by Joe Benson was most probably better managed that the same TV sent to the UK's official - and documented - SWEEEP program."
"We take this moment to acknowledge that the privilege our European liberal education, and our best intentions, did not protect the Tech Sector in emerging markets from collateral damage."
"We apologize."
"Our ability to collect data does not conflict with your ability to preserve function and value added to the materials in electronics, your ability to provide better income and living standards than would have occurred if you had purchased brand new EU manufactured devices, etc."
"We should have started out by stating the obvious - the importer is far more astute and knowledgeable about the devices we assumed were 'waste' because we had replaced them."
"Looking back, the absence of quotes or interviews, or acknowledgement of billion-dollar per year high scale remanufacturing factories (such as Proviews) was an error of magnitude."
"We honestly believed we were making progress towards a Circular Economy. Today, we recognize the wisdom of Copernicus and Galileo - that the circle does not revolve around us."
"Going forward, let's work together to acknowledge the devastating environmental effects of original mining and extraction of the materials in E-Waste, very often originating in mining communities in the Global South. Let's spend more time at Zambia's leaded ore mine (Kabwe), which produces the same leaded silicate as abandoned CRT screens."
"Africans and Asians mined the minerals and elements we consumed in electronics, and have every right to a stake in their future use and disposition."
"Again, we are sorry. Let's move forward".
Thanks, Imaginary UNU Friends.
Let's focus our combined attention on lead mining in Kabwe, copper mining at OK Tedi, gold mining in the Amazon, and tin mining from Indonesia's coral islands. You've been staring at Agbogbloshie for too long.
No comments:
Post a Comment