Electronic Waste Management Through Reverse Logistics

¶ … Reverse Logistics Operations

In the recent years, electronic waste (e-waste) has grown as a rapidly growing challenge affecting the environment. Most of the electronic components contain toxic substances that negatively affect the environment. The toxic substances pose detrimental health threats to the world population. In January 2009, the state of New Jersey signed into law e-waste legislation. The growing e-waste within the New Jersey communities contributed to close to 2% of the municipal solid stream waste. The fundamental aspect emanated from the groundwater contamination from toxic metal substances such as cadmium, mercury and lead (Lawson, u.d., p.2). Most of the manufacturers also shipped e-waste to less developed countries. E-waste is comprised of broken or obsolete electronic equipment. Shipping of the e-waste to these countries creates serious global health concerns.

It occurred as a more economical mode of e-waste disposal for these manufacturers in the less developed countries. The 'easier' mode of disposal enabled the manufacturers to dispose of the broken and obsolete electronics and managing revenues (Mario, Manfredi, & Salvatore, 2013). The implemented laws delve in requiring consumer electronic device manufacturers to register and pay an annual fee of $5,000. The laws further require the manufacturers to submit the environmental plan to the State Department of Environmental Protection. Later, the state department ensuring the collection, transportation, and recycling of the e-waste products based on their weight (Lawson, u.d., p 4). The laws further permit the sale of excess credits in case the manufacturers recycle an excess of their share of the weight.

The current recapture of precious metals emanated from e-waste reiterates the profits reaped from reverse logistics. The recapture shelves metals from those lost in overseas dumping (Mario, Manfredi, & Salvatore, (2013). Estimates indicate that electronic consumer electronics manufacturers utilize close to 7500 tons of silver and 320 tons of gold. The demands delve in the manufacture of Smartphones, Galaxy tabs, Ipads, PCs, and other electronic devices.

The approved plans from January 2011 delved in requiring consumers to handle e-waste separately. Some communities have delved in various environmental friendly programs such as requiring residents to transport e-waste products to recycling facilities. Other programs delve in the provision on annual e-waste week that focuses on e-waste collection, disposal, and recycling. In efforts of powering environmental compliance, the state has shunned from charging fees to consumers (Daugherty et al., 2005).

The immediate direct impact delves in the reduction of landfill waste on a local platform. Further, it shelves in the protection of the water table deterring entry of harmful substances. The lack of infrastructure to manage e-waste products safely in less developed countries poses significant health and environmental risks. The less developed countries may engage in unorthodox disposal methods through landfill and incineration of e-waste (Ravia, Shankar, & Tiwari, 2005). The results pose detrimental effects with the creation of persistent bio-cumulative toxins. The dangerous toxins linger within the environment thereby negatively influencing water, food supplies, and human health. As the dangerous toxins build up within the environment, they create detrimental impacts such as nerve damage, reproductive disorders, and an increase in cancer levels. Efforts engaged in curbing manufacturers from sending the e-waste to less developed countries directly reduces the health concerns and improving other environmental conditions (Skinner, Bryant, & Richey, 2008).