E-Waste: Environmental Impacts
The E-waste Threat
Health and Environmental Impact of E-waste
Particulars to Human Threat from Hazardous Metals from E-waste
Soil and water Contaminations from E-waste
The growth of electronic waste is expected to rise exponentially in the next few years. According to a report published in 'The Guardian' on December 2013, the volume of electronic waste is estimated to increase at a rate of 33% in the next few years (Hester & Harrison, 2009). The report, quoting UN's 'Step initiative', the combined weight of all the e-waste would be the same as eight of the great Egyptian pyramids put together (Vidal, 2013). The electronic wastes are made up of various materials like lead, mercury, cadmium, arsenic and flame retardants. All these chemicals are toxic in nature. For example, a cathode ray tube television set can have up to three kilograms of lead (McCann & Wittmann, 2015).
Such toxic wastes once, they get into landfills, can seep through the soil and enter the ground water or the land or air. These toxic elements can then also mix with farm produce, or can be directly consumed unknowingly by people and animals causing harm. Such toxic elements tend to contaminate water, air and land. In addition to this, the dismantling of e-waste is also often done in primitive ways with potential of causing direct harm to people (Hieronymi, Kahhat & Williams, 2013).
The Population reference Bureau says that according to the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) every year there are more than 40 million millions tons of electronic waste is produced across the globe. But just 13% of the e-waste is actually recycled and the rest is dumped. However UNEO also notes that these estimates are relatively low as accurate data on e-waste is not always readily available (Prb.org, 2015). The above facts clearly show that dumping of e-waste is potentially hazardous to the environment as well as to the people who use it or are engaged in its dismantling for re use. Hence it is argued that the export of E-waste should be stopped for reasons related to health and environment safety (McCann & Wittmann, 2015).
The E-waste Threat
In the last couple of decades, the importance that has been attached to the growing threat from e-waste to the environment and humans has increased rapidly. This is because of the rising concerns about the steady growth of e-waste that exhibits no signals of slowing down and yet posing environmental and human health hazards. According to estimates the annual growth in e-waste is more than 5% every year globally.
According to a report published in the Newsweek, more than 49 million metric tons of e-waste was generate din 2012. The e-waste comprised of electronic items like last generation cell phones, laptops, televisions and washing machines. The largest of the contributors to e-waste has been identified as the United States where the average e-waste created per person is 66 pounds and growing. This number is projected to reach 65.4 metric tons by 2017 according to a study of a partner organization of the United Nations. The report also clarifies that even as the amount of e-waste increases, the solutions to recycle and prevent environmental damage have not been developed to corresponding levels (Walker, 2014).
The concept and culture of "make, consume and dispose" is reiterated by the growth of e-waste. This is a predominant culture in the developed nations and is gradually spreading to other economies as well. According to Foote and Mazzolini, (2012) the characteristics of e-waste have elements that tend to threaten the environment and the human health through the improper discarding of the e-waste materials as well as the potential to provide alternative means of livelihood (Hieronymi, Kahhat & Williams, 2013).
According to Chris Caroll of the National Geography the definition of e-waste is the accumulation of the debris that are generated when a consumer or business electronic equipment that is near the end of its useful life cycle is no more useful to the user and the user would tend to buy a new device by dumping the old one (Carroll, 2015). While e-waste primarily is believed to be comprised of electronic equipment like computers, televisions, VCRs, stereos, copiers, mobile phones and fax machines, experts are divided over the inclusion of kitchen appliances...
Life Cycle or Carbon Footprint of Plastic Bags Plastic bags are regarded as one of the most common items in daily life in the modern society. These products continue to be common in everyday life despite emerging concerns across many cities worldwide concerning their probable environmental impact. These concerns have increased in the recent past because of the problem of global climate change. Actually, the concerns have been fueled by increased
The D. factor symbolizes the level of economic demand that the population has and it depends on the number of people that inhabit the earth. T stands for the technology used to exploit nature by the people in order to have everything necessary for surviving. The equation is partly correct, but, in fact, it depends mostly on the population, as people tend to influence the environment with their constant evolution.
Tourism in Thailand Economic, Social, Cultural and Environmental Impacts of Tourism in Thailand Urban and rural tourism in Thailand accounts for around 7% of the total GDP. There are various factors, social, economic, environmental and cultural factors which affect the tourism industry in Thailand. Also, the rural tourism in Thailand needs more work. This report has some strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats of Thailand's tourism industry. In the end, recommendations are given
For example, unequal protection may result from land-use decisions that determine the location of residential amenities and disamenities. Unincorporated, poor, and communities of color often suffer a "triple" vulnerability of noxious facility siting." (Bullard, 1998) Finally, 'Social Equity' is that which "assesses the role of sociological factors (race, ethnicity, class, culture, life styles, political power, etc.) on environmental decision making. Poor people and people of color often work in the
This equation is more equipped to take into account changes in costs and cash flows on an annual basis, and with energy prices likely to increase this will yield a better view of the situation. Assuming a 10% annual increase in the price per kWh yields the following costs of 15,000 kWh of purchased electricity: Year 0: $3,000 Year 1: $3,300 Year 2: $3,630 Year 3: $3,993 Year 4: $4,392 At a 75% savings, cash
" The prominence of this type of mining method is underlined by a study prepared for the Governor of West Virginia which states that, "Mountaintop removal methods are essential to maintain the state's present level of coal production. The lower production costs of MTR have contributed significantly to maintaining West Virginia as a competitive coal producer." 3. Environmental impact of coal mining in the Appalachians. 3.1. Underground mining The earliest coal mining in Appalachia consisted
Our semester plans gives you unlimited, unrestricted access to our entire library of resources —writing tools, guides, example essays, tutorials, class notes, and more.
Get Started Now