Response to The Lancet: Electronic waste—time to take stock

Electronic waste—time to take stock

A member of WR3A based on Sao Paulo, Brazil, emailed me a copy of an article in the respected journal "The Lancet" yesterday.   It reminded me of the Charlie Schmidt article in Environmental Health Perspectives in 2006, when I was interviewed, and unfortunately, kept a hand tied behind my back.   Charlie erred on the side of "white guilt" and wrote an article that supported J. Puckett's of BAN.org now completely discredited allegation that African importers were "mostly" importing TVs to be burned for copper.   Puckett only recently admitted (in the comment section of an article by Bloomberg) that he had done no research while in Africa and made the "80%" statistic up.  He simply made it up.

Profiling kids at dumps

I now realize that once an allegation is printed in a respected journal, like EHSP or The Lancet, especially when accompanied by "poverty photos" of kids at dumps, that the "presumption of guilt" shifts, rather violently, against reuse FIXers techs geeks of color.  The white guilt ricochets around, and in the end, it's the African, like Hamdy of Egypt or Benson of Nigeria, who is accused, arrested, loses his business.

For that reason, my new policy is to never let a "reporter", like Dr. Jack Caravanos, off the hook as easily as Charles Schmidt.  I haven't met him yet, am certain he's a good guy, just like Therese Shyrane and David Higgins of Interpol, and UK enforcement leaders lik Graeme Vickery  (a supporter of Joe Benson's arrest).  All good people, armed with the statistics Basel Action Network hallucinated, who think that most African importers are guilty of #wastecrime.


OPEN LETTER TO THE LANCET AND JACK CARAVANOS

Dear Mr. Caravanos,

Are you the author of the piece in the Lancet?  http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(13)61465-8/fulltext  First, I want to congratulate you on entering the discussion, and second, to introduce you to three professors who are working on a grant together to explore reform, rather than ban, of the trade.  Dr Lepawsky is from Memorial University, Dr. Goldstein from USC, and Dr. Kahhat teaches engineering at PCU Peru.

"Much e-waste (estimated to total 45·6 million tons in 2012) originates in developed countries. Treaties such as the 1989 Basel Conventionprohibit the export of defunct electronic equipment for disposal in developing countries. However, a loophole that allows the export of electronic equipment for re-use results in most of this retired equipment ending up in developing countries—a problem exacerbated by a lack of resources to test equipment for functionality. E-waste output from developing countries is also rising rapidly, and will soon overtake the developed world as the dominant source."

While there is definitely an element of truth here, and while the aspects of bored children burning things in landfills is completely unacceptable, I'd like to invite you to revisit the article from another point of view.   According to several studies, the import of used electronics cannot really be explained, economically, by any economics of "externalization".  Externalization of recycling costs definitely exists, but would not explain the sorting of loads sold.   From what I've personally observed, cities like Accra and Lagos have had television and electronics for several decades, and the way their own eventual discards are treated bears reform in the same way ours did two decades ago.

Nigeria, in 2007, had 6,900,000 households with television (World Bank).  And according to a 2012 storty, the UNEP, which intercepted and tested 279 sea containers imported by Nigerian techs, found 91% reuse in those containers - actually higher reuse rate than brand new product sold in Africa.  I'll share two quotes from the UNEP studied (funded in part by a grant from the Basel Secretariat).

"The majority of refurbished products stem from imports via the ports of Lagos. The interim results from project component 2, the Nigerian e-Waste Country Assessment, show that 70% of all the imported used equipment is functional and is sold to consumers after testing. 70% of the non-functional share can be repaired within the major markets and is also sold to consumers. 9% of the total imports of used equipment is non-repairable and is directly passed on to collectors and recyclers."

- Final report of the UNEP SBC, E-waste Africa Project,  Lagos & Freiburg, June 2011 

Here's another quote from the Nigeria E-Waste Assessment Study:

"Refurbishing of EEE and the sales of used EEE is an important economic sector (e.g. Alaba market in Lagos). 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 Nigeria should refrain from undifferentiated banning of  second-hand imports and refurbishing activities and strive for a co-operative approach by including the market and sector associations."

If you simply mean that most of the used goods imported to Africa work or are repaired, but will eventually be discarded in a decade or two, I'd agree with that, since 70% of the sales documented (product in use) are used product.  I don't think that mining more lead, tin, copper etc. to make brand new product, however, would either eliminate the eventual dumping problem.  It would certainly elevate the exposure of Africans to lead and other pollution - hard rock metal mining is the primary source of toxics in both the USA and Africa.

The photo above, taken from a film by Greenpeace, shows a typical load of imports.  Frequently these are used CRTs taken out of hotels, upgraded for flat screens.  The Africans who purchase them are very picky, and you will not see a lot of variety of age or type of e-waste in these loads.

I'd invite you to visit my plant in Vermont, or to come down and meet with you at CUNY.  Our organization, Fair Trade Recycling (fairtraderecycling.org) is dedicated to improving quality of loads sold to repair and refurbishing markets.. The moral of your article seems to be that the "reuse" is some kind of a "loophole", and that people should be somehow ashamed if some of the goods sold or repaired in Accra or Lagos originated in New York.   I'm afraid that "boycott" attitude has not been very effective, driving entrepreneurs into back alleys to find the computers and televisison Africans need but cannot afford to buy new.

Robin Ingenthron

So that's my "open letter" to Jack Caravanos.  I hope I didn't burn any bridges.  I still correspond with Charles Schmidt, who unfortunately cannot get an editor interested in exhuming the bodies for DNA tests.

more->

Banning the Exportation of Ladders

We would be heartless to ignore the images.   Poor child workers, huddled over fires, stoked with the coals of yesterday's technology.   As westerners spend more and more lavishly on shiny smart phones, flat screens, and tablets, with the world's wiki-media at our fingertips, it seems apt to pause and think about the impact of the wealthy's consumption on the planet's resources, and of the worlds poor, left seemingly farther and farther below us, inside a muddy pit of toxic fumes.

Photographers like Pieter Hugo capture the wet irritation in the eyes of the black teenager.  Filmmakers like David Fedele slowly let the reel turn and record the images of kids trying to make a living off of the scraps of electronics once imported into their cities.

Cairo, Lagos, and Accra, the megalopoleis of urban growth, stream with cell towers and internet today.  But the poor just outside those cities, at their unlined, unregulated, unspoken dumps, seem to stretch their arms out of a moat.  Their slow effort to climb out of poverty, through urban mining, makes Europeans and Americans feel guilty, ashamed of our wealth.  Reminded of these "poster child" recycling workers, seemingly without even boots to lift as they climb, we want to check a box.  We want to say we are certified.  We want to pass a law, a ban, to address the unfamiliar black faces hauling too familiar CRT televisions, VCRs, and refrigerators.  To say we have done our part for Africa and change the topic.  Turn the page, please, make the images go away.

There are indeed many important topics in the so-called "third world".

• Endangered species poaching.
• Sex trade.
• Toxic alleuvial gold mining.
• Blood minerals.
• Crime.
• Despotism.
• Child soldiers.

How much of our time should we devote to "e-waste"?  Where does it belong on this list?

Defining E-Waste "Racism": Part I "Negativity"

- Overt Racism:  Purposeful, intended, blatant selection based primarily or partly on race.   

- Covert Racism:  Subtle or disguised racism, purposefully hidden or unacknowledged.

- Accidental Racism:  Someone who isn't racist at all finds out, despite fair-mindedness, they've accidentally (or subconsciously?) said/written/assumed something which someone else suspects as racist.   Normally they clarify or apologize. 

"Excuse me, sir.  You've accidentally spilt champagne on my sneakers"

"How dare you, sir, accuse me of purposefully pouring my drink on your shoes!" 

Part 1 of 2: To prove it's not an ad hominem attack on opponents, I'm including examples when I've been suspected of racialism.   In part II, I focus on  people actually arrested for environmental crimes based on racial (or national) profiling, by well intentioned people, and the people who make their living making the same overseas flight, who profile themselves as environmental heroes.

First things first.   I coined the phrase "accidental racist" in 2004, but I did not invent the reaction, from the southern hemisphere, to the images of children posed on smoking piles of garbage.  I'm the messenger.  If a bunch of someone elses call you a racist, and I'm defending your intentions, "accidental" is middle ground.

In the news this week, Greece expelled one of their Olympic athletes for a "racist tweet".  AP opens the story as follows:   "Triple jumper Voula Papachristou was expelled from Greece's Olympic team Wednesday for her comments on Twitter mocking African immigrants and expressing support for a far-right party."  The tweet that went viral and caused the stir was a joke about "West Nile Virus" which was reported in Athens.  With so many African immigrants in Greece, Papachristou tweeted, the mosquitos and virus would enjoy some "home cooking" (soul food?). 

The joke's not that bad, in my opinion.   But the "body of work" in other Papachristou tweets made this the last straw.  The Greek government felt this was either racist or covertly racist, and not something you want anywhere near the Olympics.  Ultimately, the ugly is in the eye of the "minority" beholder.

The repercussions of an accusation of "racism" are kind of unique to caucasian nations.  I assume it's because of the USA's history with slavery and the process of ending segregation.  Europe inherited James Baldwin from us, and has quickly come to speed. "Racist" is an ultimate sin against society, a label of ignorance, callousness, and meanness.  It exists in Africa and Asia, and it's a huge issue in South America.. but the concept of "minority" as underdog is very different.   When passed from one white person to another, a Greek on Greek or American on UK insult that ruffles white feathers.  The story on the Greek expulsion was selected for The Drudge Report for a reason.

In 2002, in China (with Lynn Rubinstein of NERC), I was on a tour with one of our translators from China's Guangzhou Electric Appliance Research Institute, Ms. Huang.  She had tip-toed up to the subject of the Basel Action Network, asking me what I thought of the BAN film, "Exporting Harm".  She seemed to be on guard, and kept asking me what I think.  I thought that it was a problem of "losing face", that it was a humiliating depiction of China, and that the bans on imports/exports were largely a result of that.  She seemed encouraged, and then said in her own, deferential way, that in her humble opinion, the film was a bit racist.   She furtively looked over her shoulder, almost instinctively, having said it... as if she'd used a bad word, and said that was only her, personal, view of it, and that she was not speaking on behalf of the Chinese government, etc, etc.

That sentiment about the BAN films was repeated by Souley of Senegal, by Fred of Burkina Faso, and by others from Africa and the middle east.

Me, too.   I was called a "racist" three times.   The first was by an  African buyer living in my house. It started out that I wanted $1 each for new laptop bags, he said he wanted them to help protect/cushion the computers.  In frustration he said all I care about is money not people.  I said "f*k you", and he got furious - and called me a racist.  He stomped out of my house and moved in for the night with my Cameroonian friend Yadji, who told me the buyer tried to convince him I was exploiting him.  We made up the next day. The African buyer said that when he told Yadji I was a racist, that Yadji told him point blank that there were two people in the world he trusted.   Yadji told him that one was Robin, and the other (pointing) was his cat.

Another time I was complaining about a certain habit among certain buyers in certain Mediteranean countries to haggle for reimbursement rather than discount, i.e.  to haggle after a load of computers was received, to revisit prices after the sale.  It was a new mideast/African buyer I was engaged with, and the load had not yet shipped.  I remembered the episode with the laptop bag pricing and I was trying to be careful.  My wife is French Catalan,(also Mediterranean).... so I thought I was on safe ground alluding to Mediteranean negotiations and discounts after shipment.   The buyer said that when I speak of Mediteranean, knowing he's mid-Eastern, that I sounded a bit "racist".

Last month, I wrote an extremely long and emotional piece about the drowning of my "African brother" from Cameroon, Yadji Moussa...   Someone I didn't know wrote a comment that my post was "covertly racist".  It was a shock, and came at a very bad time.

Rereading my Yadji Moussa epitaph blog (because one tends to get friends epitaphs right), I could see how someone who studied racism in school could find a lot of things I'd written about my friend which were "racist".    He had come to the USA as a hero of mine, 15 years ago. I'd described him as an "African Gandhi" to many people (including his future wife).  When exposed to alcohol, he had left his family and had recently been kicked out of the homeless shelter, and we all knew this and I didn't want to sugarcoat it.  I had partnered, fired, hired, fired and rehired him, a fourth time, and he was making real strides.  This post was making it about "me", my feelings, at Yadji's expense and he was not here to defend himself.   It was an emotional post, and I took the post down for a couple of weeks, and worked on this film, still pics without commentary, which we played at Yadji's memorial service.

Anyway, when the "covert racism" accusation slapped me, I had to park the blog and edit it.  Do I personally think of all Africans as loved ones with this deeply personal relationship?  Was it necessary to mention my bittersweet guilt, that he'd forgiven my call to the police (resulting in a year's imprisonment for drunk driving?).  In trying to cover up the anger, hope, disappointment, tragedy, and sadness, I'd captured my friend's decline from a disease in a way which someone actually could detect as a "white man's burden" essay.  I even had a clip of Shirley Temple dancing with Bojangles Robinson, and a link to an essay on Yir Yorant (which my dad had given me, and which I rejected, but it's mere presence in the article was a match for the accusation of racism).  What was I thinking?

No one likes to be called a racist, or to be accused of "accidental racism".  And white liberal people who mean well hate it especially when it comes from another white liberal.  With that said, the post is better without many of the items I deleted from it.

In Part 2, we will see actual people making a living by flying overseas to inspect used electronics.   One is identified in the press as an environmental hero, the other is profiled as an environmental criminal.

We have to discuss it because of the actual, realprofiling of brown businesspeople as "waste tourists".  I compare two e-waste professionals, ones who "fly and buy" and those who "fly  and lie".   I have included actual articles in news magazines showing real brown people who were arrested, imprisoned, and falsely accused of exporting waste, and ask why the environmental press broadcast allegations as a form of public lynching of people who were proven - yes, proven by Basel Secretariat and UNEP investigation - to be innocent.   Not one of the the western media which reported on the "waste tourists" and "waste criminals" has reported any retraction or even reported on the finding of innocence of the people they sold papers by defining as a criminal.

To me, this"e-waste export" policy must include this discussion of racial profiling.   

A final note on Yadji, and his views on racism.  In our last conversation, about AA and about his future plans, how we would put together a plan for him to return to his family in Michigan, etc., he told me that his mantra had become to eliminate 'negativity'.  He said his contribution, at AA and to his own life, was that he'd discovered there was "too much negativity", that we are all surrounded by it, and it owns us and gives us excuses.  He said his problems stemmed from negativity.  He said that it's best to just accept the election of Obama as evidence of the end of racism, because whether it was or not, that the negativity about the racism was doing more harm than the racism.

There is a negativity about African "waste tourists" which I write about in Part II.   And I'm forced to confront my own negativity, because there's nothing more negative to Americans and Europeans than an accusation of "racism".

Ultimately this is about "environmental justice" and "unintended consequences".  It's in the history of how recycled red metals, grey iron ore, and other raw materials are regulated based on who touched them last.