Can Someone Explain Basel To Me?

The only thing that the Basel Convention does is infringe trade in scrap (which was not "waste" when the Convention was first written but later became a concern as a "loophole") between the "rich" (OECD) and "poor" (not OECD) people. 

Bring back the Negro Leagues to Make Recycling Great Again???

Because it certainly allows every Malaysian or Indonesian plastic recycler to buy whatever they want from the 75% of the world that is "not OECD."  The pictures, however sad, do not show anything not explicitly allowed by Basel Convention.

The Convention just advocates that poor people can buy from other poor people, but they cannot buy from rich people. Rich People (OECD) can sell used stuff to other rich people, poor people can recycle stuff from other poor people.

NO ACTIVITY IS CHALLEGED. Only IDENTITIES (nationality) are profiled.

It is purely segregation sold as a moral quality.  And fortunately, the Fair Trade Recycling board member Emmanuel Nyaletey will be on the panel to ask these questions to the audience... next to Jim Puckett of Basel Action Network next Wednesday in Orlando.

Ghanaian tech sector buys used phone from India = legal

Ghanaian tech sector buys used phone from USA = not legal

HOW DOES THE GHANA TECH SECTOR GET "SAVED" BY THIS SEGREGATION?

I honestly don't understand.

Please explain how this saves the black negro African recycler? Because HE is the only one getting arrested for violating this nonsense.

#freejoebenson

ChatGPT 4

You're raising an important point about the potential motivations behind extending Basel Convention regulations to non-hazardous waste like clean aluminum scrap and PETE plastic. There is a valid concern that regulating these materials could be seen as a form of trade control that benefits certain industries or countries, particularly OECD countries, which might be in a better position to comply with stringent regulations, while disadvantaging others.

Key Considerations:

1. Clean Scrap vs. Hazardous Waste:

   • Clean aluminum and PETE plastic are not inherently hazardous materials. They are widely recognized as recyclable and can be processed safely if handled properly. The argument that they pose a strong environmental risk might lack the same justification as hazardous waste, especially if the materials are clean and ready for recycling.
   • Unlike hazardous waste (which can cause pollution if mismanaged), clean recyclables are typically less likely to harm the environment when traded globally. As long as they are processed in facilities that adhere to environmental standards, they don't require the same level of control.

2. Trade Competition and Economic Interests:

   • One could argue that regulating the movement of non-hazardous recyclable materials could limit competition in the global recycling market, particularly in developing countries or non-OECD nations where labor costs are lower and demand for recycled materials may be higher.
   • OECD countries (which include many developed nations) might benefit economically from restricting the flow of clean recyclables to non-OECD countries. By limiting access to these materials, they can maintain a competitive edge in industries that rely on recycled inputs, such as aluminum manufacturing or plastic processing.

3. Leveraging Environmental Concerns:

   • Environmental concerns could be used as a justification to implement trade restrictions that primarily serve economic interests. This would not be the first time that environmental regulations were used as a non-tariff barrier to trade. By labeling the movement of clean scrap materials as potentially harmful, countries may restrict exports or imports in a way that benefits domestic industries.
   • This could be seen as a way to control access to valuable recyclable materials under the guise of protecting the environment, while in reality, the materials themselves (like clean aluminum scrap and PETE plastic) pose minimal risk if handled properly.

4. The Basel Convention’s Intent:

   • The Basel Convention was designed to address the problem of hazardous waste being exported to countries with less stringent environmental and labor standards. Extending its scope to cover non-hazardous waste could be seen as overreach unless there is clear evidence that such materials pose a significant environmental risk.
   • Without clear evidence of harm from the trade of clean, non-hazardous materials, expanding the Basel Convention in this way could indeed be viewed as a way to control trade flows rather than address legitimate environmental threats.

Evidence vs. Policy:

If the push to regulate clean scrap materials under the Basel Convention is based on concerns over improper disposal or environmental harm, those advocating for such changes would need to present strong evidence that:

• Non-hazardous materials like clean aluminum or PETE plastic, when exported, are causing environmental damage or being mismanaged.
• Developing countries or non-OECD nations are unable or unwilling to process these materials safely and sustainably.

However, in the absence of such evidence, it could be argued that expanding regulation on non-hazardous materials is more about economic protectionism than environmental protection. This could potentially disadvantage countries that rely on affordable access to recyclables, particularly those outside the OECD.

Conclusion:

You are correct to question whether expanding Basel Convention controls to clean scrap materials could serve as a way to limit competition for recyclable materials under the guise of environmental protection. If there is no clear evidence of environmental harm from the trade of non-hazardous materials, regulating them under the Basel Convention could indeed be seen as a move to protect economic interests rather than the environment. In this context, the use of environmental concerns to justify trade restrictions may not hold up without concrete proof of risk, and it could disproportionately impact developing countries or non-OECD nations that rely on these materials for their recycling and manufacturing industries.