(CN) — A new report from the United Nations revealed that global production of electronic waste has outpaced the growth in global e-waste recycling by five times, raising severe environmental and economic concerns.
While the world produced over 68 million tons of e-waste in 2022, it only recycled only 15.4 million tons, according to a Wednesday report by the UN’s Global E-waste Monitor.
The monitor also found that e-waste production has grown by about 2.5 million tons per year since 2010, while e-waste recycling grew by only 0.55 million tons per year in the same timeframe.
Researchers attributed the divide to a list of factors: technological progress, higher consumption, limited repair options, shorter product life cycles, design flaws and inadequate e-waste management infrastructure.
E-waste, defined as “any discarded product with a plug or battery,” covers a wide range of products.
“From discarded televisions to dumped telephones, an enormous amount of e-waste is generated around the world,” Cosmas Luckyson Zavazava, director of the Telecommunication Development Bureau for the UN’s International Telecommunication Union, said in a press release. “The latest research shows that the global challenge posed by e-waste is only going to grow. With less than half of the world implementing and enforcing approaches to manage the problem, this raises the alarm for sound regulations to increase collection and recycling.”
One-third of global e-waste comes from small devices — like toys, vacuum cleaners and cameras — just 12% of which get recycled properly. Small IT and telecommunications equipment — think cell phones and laptops — have a slightly higher rate of 22%. Screens, monitors and televisions saw a 25% recycling rate, and 27% of refrigerators and other temperature exchange equipment gets recycled.
The report highlighted e-waste from solar panels. Though that sector produces relatively little waste at 0.66 million tons per year, the researchers expect the figure to quadruple by 2030. In particular, solar panel waste will rise as small-scale solar devices with shorter lifespans become more popular, and as existing solar panels age into retirement.
Recycling rates varied significantly from region to region. Europe, the largest per-capita producer of e-waste, recycles 42.8% of its e-waste. In contrast, Asian countries, which produce half of all e-waste, recycle just 11.8%. African nations recycle just 1%, though they are the smallest producer region.
Much of that disparity stems from legislation. Eighty-one countries, of the 193 analyzed by the report, have some legislation regarding e-waste. But just 36 countries have formalized targets for e-waste recycling.
The UN report focuses on two reasons why nations need to increase their e-waste recycling capacity: environmental and economic.
On the economic side, harvesting useful metals (such as copper, gold, and iron) from existing e-waste poses a more sustainable alternative to traditional mining and is a largely untapped source of value.
Common metals like copper and iron already get recycled at high rates, around 60%, but precious metals like gold, and rare earth elements like cobalt, lithium and neodymium, have little to no rates of extraction from recycled e-waste.
The 34 million tons of metals left in e-waste in 2022 would be worth $91 billion if extracted and reused, according to ITU’s Vanessa Gray.
“We must seize the economic and environmental benefits of proper e-waste management," Gray said. "Otherwise, the digital ambitions of our future generations will face significant risks.”
Kees Baldé, the report’s lead author, emphasized that shortcoming.
“No more than 1% of demand for essential rare earth elements is met by e-waste recycling. Simply put: Business as usual can't continue," Baldé said.
"This new report represents an immediate call for greater investment in infrastructure development, more promotion of repair and reuse, capacity building, and measures to stop illegal e-waste shipments. And the investment would pay for itself in spades.”
On the environmental side, proper recycling could help mitigate the spread of dangerous pollutants. Harvesting metals from e-waste helped avoid 52 billion kilograms of CO2-equivalent emissions from ore excavation and proper recycling keeps substances like lead and mercury out of water supplies.
Moreover, proper recycling would lower the proliferation of refrigerants like chlorofluorocarbons and hydrochlorofluorocarbons. Scientists identified the chemicals as catastrophic ozone pollutants decades ago, resulting in the 1987 Montreal Protocol and large-scale reductions in their use. But e-waste remains a major source of the hazardous substances.
Finally, the environmental and economic impacts are often one and the same. Unsafe e-waste management costs $78 billion in externalized costs to human and environmental health, the researchers estimated — $36 billion in long-term socioeconomic changes and $22 billion in medical costs from pollutant-based illnesses.
Ruediger Kuehr, senior manager of the UN’s Sustainable Cycles program, called on people and nations to act.
“In the face of all this, concrete steps are urgently needed to address and reduce e-waste," Kuehr said. "Improved e-waste management could result in a global net positive of US $38 billion, representing a significant economic opportunity while addressing climate change and health impacts.”
The report presents four possible outcomes for 2030, depending on how aggressively the world pursues e-waste recycling, highlighting the net cost of each approach (including externalized costs to human and environmental health, the cost of waste management systems, the value of metals extracted from e-waste, and the value of avoided emissions).
If nothing changes, just 20% of e-waste produced in 2030 will be recycled and would cost a net $40 billion.
If nations just pursued voluntary collection and recycling schemes, which the report calls the “progressive” option, they could reach 38% recycling and cut net costs to just $4 billion.
If governments enacted legislation alongside voluntary schemes — the “ambitious” option — they could reach 44% recycling and receive a net benefit of $10 billion.
Finally, the “aspirational” option would require much more formalized collection and recycling of e-waste from governments themselves alongside voluntary programs. But they would reach 60% e-waste recycling and the net benefit of $38 billion Kuehr projected.
Subscribe to Closing Arguments
Sign up for new weekly newsletter Closing Arguments to get the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and hot cases and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world.
Additional Reads
-
-
Four wounded in Sydney church stabbing, 15-year-old arrested April 15, 2024
-
Sudan war marks one-year anniversary April 15, 2024 -
