Vermont: Our exports in 2010 and 2009 were 22% (both years). Last year was 15%... the second half of the year saw reuse rates fall through the floor... as predicted in our testimony for S.77 to Vermont's legislature two years ago.
Part of the cause is the apparent declining demand (price) of reuse product, which I've described recently. It's actually a steady demand, but a supply imbalance from rapidly emerging markets who are now switching from CRTs to LCDs themselves (seeing used Chinese CRT TVs in South America, omg)...
As the price of reuse commodities fall, resources to defend or maintain our markets are limited. Competition from Steward-Shredders in the USA, and competition from Chinese used supply, makes this seem like a losing battle.
Vermont's legislature defined "local reuse" to be restricted (to keep OEMs from having to pay for the same TV, over and over again). But then ANR defined "local" as "USA" (Honolulu is local to Middlebury, by Vermont statute). Ok, we then removed any reuse from the program to make sure it wasn't charged and was outside the program. As of now, ANR has said even that is NOT ok, and material that we didn't charge to the program is sitting in a legal limbo, collecting in boxes in the plant... or more often we just recycle it and tear it down. We buy product for the reuse markets out of state - the 16% includes material brokered from other states into export-for-reuse markets.
Economically, it's rather short-witted for Americans to take a billion dollars of assets and ban them from reuse. It makes recycling more expensive, makes for a criminal's "sellers market" for the remaining reuse, forces export markets to buy loads which are of lesser quality, or to source their loads from Shanghai, Seoul, and Kuala Lumpur.
Part of the cause is the apparent declining demand (price) of reuse product, which I've described recently. It's actually a steady demand, but a supply imbalance from rapidly emerging markets who are now switching from CRTs to LCDs themselves (seeing used Chinese CRT TVs in South America, omg)...
As the price of reuse commodities fall, resources to defend or maintain our markets are limited. Competition from Steward-Shredders in the USA, and competition from Chinese used supply, makes this seem like a losing battle.
Vermont's legislature defined "local reuse" to be restricted (to keep OEMs from having to pay for the same TV, over and over again). But then ANR defined "local" as "USA" (Honolulu is local to Middlebury, by Vermont statute). Ok, we then removed any reuse from the program to make sure it wasn't charged and was outside the program. As of now, ANR has said even that is NOT ok, and material that we didn't charge to the program is sitting in a legal limbo, collecting in boxes in the plant... or more often we just recycle it and tear it down. We buy product for the reuse markets out of state - the 16% includes material brokered from other states into export-for-reuse markets.
Economically, it's rather short-witted for Americans to take a billion dollars of assets and ban them from reuse. It makes recycling more expensive, makes for a criminal's "sellers market" for the remaining reuse, forces export markets to buy loads which are of lesser quality, or to source their loads from Shanghai, Seoul, and Kuala Lumpur.
