Good Point: Ethical Electronics, Recycling "e-Waste" Blog: Kenya

Showing posts with label Kenya. Show all posts

Monkey Zoo Math: Reprint of Basel Action Network Fingerprints

In July of 2010, I wrote the post with the most reads to date. Some have suggested that it was too long and buried the lead, but the people I met after writing it encouraged me to write more, and not to be afraid to write longer.

Below (more:) is the bottom third of the blog "Monkeys Running the Environmental Zoo". The math has now been corroborated by USITC, by MIT, by World Bank, by the ASU Williams/Kahhat study, the Nigeria and Ghana E-Waste Assessment (studies of 279 actual containers, seized at ports in Lagos, based on reporter Cahal Milmo's and Greenpeace's "investigation" of naughty, naughty African television repairmen).

I will re-link all of those studies this week. But as a reminder, Basel Action Network knew this in 2006, when they provided guidance to Kenyan researchers Kiaka and Kamande.

PRELIMINARY STUDY ON THE IMPORTED SECOND HAND COMPUTERS IN KENYA - THE CASE OF NAIROBI by Richard Kiaka and Rachel Kamande (2007) "with guidance from Puckett James, Basel Action Network"

The 2010 math has been completely borne out. All you had to do was listen to the African, Latin American, and Taiwanese refurbishers, and take a pen and the back of an envelope. It has always been obvious. Toxics are a problem, pollution is serious business... but Racial profiling doesn't look good dressed in green. There are real victims of Environmental Malpractice, and the time has come to clean our "stewardship" programs of the vestiges of accidental racism and poverty porn.

Whose fingerprints are on the "e-waste" monitors at Agbogbloshie? African cities. The "80% export" figure was not just a mistake... it was mathematically impossible, and disproven by BAN's own 2007 study.

From 2010 Blog:

Q: How do bad monitors get overseas?

WR3A - Live From Nairobi, Kenya!

The Great E-Waste Hoax of Africa is Falling!

Live from the ground in Nairobi, where WR3A has 4 people watching the proceedings.
These are each links to the individual presentations.

I'll try to give titles and presenters names later, in the meantime, hunt and fish and flag.

Concluding Remarks, final presentation

"Avoid the import of e-waste and near-end-of-life equipment without
hampering the meaningful and socio - economically valuable trade
of used EEE of good quality.

Refurbishing of EEE and the sales of used EEE is an important
economic sector in some countries of West Africa (e.g. Ghana and
Nigeria).

It is a well-organized and a dynamic sector that holds the potential for
further industrial development.

Indirectly, the sector has another important economic role, as it supplies
low and middle income households with affordable ICT equipment and
other EEE.

"In the view of the sector’s positive socio-economic performance, all policy measures aiming to improve e-waste management in WestAfrica should refrain from undifferentiated banning of second-handimports and refurbishing activities and strive for a co-operativeapproach by including the market and sector associations."

BAN BAN Reports on Jakarta, not on Kenya

BAN should get credit when they get it right. And BAN should take credit when they got something right back in 2006... when it turns out they assisted the first study of Africa used computer imports - and found that 80% are reused. A link to the study follows.

primitive environmentalism

As for this week's headline, BAN appears to have gotten a bad guy for a change. According to E-Scrap News, the loads of "ewaste" seized at the port of Jakarta, originating in Europe, are dirty loads... they sound like the office material we got from the Waterbury Office Irene Floods. The broker, WR Fibers, is not anyone I know or anyone that any of my former buyers in Indonesia have anything to do with.

Now, the free trade argument can still be made... note that sales of raw ore and blister copper - dirt from the ground with high metal content - is still legal to export. Digging it out of a mountain or rain forest doesn't seem to me to be safer than taking a percentage of metal from dirt second-hand. And I still wait to hear from the person who bought it, whether they are upset, or were paid to dump it, or see value (like ore value) that we don't recognize. But I'm relieved it's not another refurbisher being accused.