Survey shows electronic firms fail on toxic responsibility duty
By RONNIE E. CALUMPITA, The Manila Times Reporter
The environmental group Greenpeace on Wednesday disclosed that major electronic firms are not keen on taking back their electronic waste and are contributing to the deterioration of environmental health.
Beau Baconguis, a Green-peace toxics campaigner, said the results of their survey conducted from July to October were "dismal" since only two of the 14 companies surveyed have carried out product-recovery solutions though they fall short of extended producer responsibility (EPR).
EPR is a product-oriented policy conceptualized in Europe to deal with electronic waste.
The survey shows that computer manufacturers Hewlett-Packard and Dell are the only companies that take back their electronic waste for recycling abroad but only business and public customers are covered by this policy.
The two manufacturers also do not accept old electronic goods of private/individual customers.
"Companies should be responsible for their electronic waste, since they were the ones that manufactured or assembled them," Baconguis told reporters at a briefing.
"So if their products reach their end of life, companies should take them back for treatment and proper disposal."
The firms that failed to reply to the survey on product take-back policy were Nokia, Samsung, Sony Ericsson, LG, Panasonic, IBM and Fujitso/Siemens.
Motorola and Siemens mobile-phone companies said that they did not have manufacturing facilities in the country.
Baconguis said electronic companies should take back their obsolete and discarded products because these contain toxic elements and substances such as lead, cadmium, chromium, polyvinyl chloride and other chemicals that affect human health and environment.
She said that electronic firms should also eliminate toxic elements in their products. Among the 14 electronic firms surveyed, only Nokia, Motorola, Sony
Ericsson and LG have committed to phase out specified hazardous substances in their products as required by a global policy on toxic chemicals carried by numerous products.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home