Electronic waste, or e-waste, refers to old or broken electronic devices that are no longer useful. It is also called waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE) or end-of-life electronics. E-waste is one of the fastest-growing types of waste worldwide because of fast changes in technology and more people buying electronic devices. In 2022, about 62 million tonnes of e-waste were created globally, and only 22.3% of it was properly collected and recycled. By 2030, global e-waste is expected to reach 82 million tonnes. Used electronics that are planned to be fixed, reused, sold, or recycled are also considered e-waste. In some developing countries, improper handling of e-waste can harm people’s health and pollute the environment. The rise in electronic product use, driven by the Digital Revolution and advances in science and technology, such as bitcoin, has worsened the global e-waste problem. The very fast increase in e-waste is caused by frequent new product releases, buying unnecessary devices, short product life cycles, and low recycling rates. Many electronic parts, like computer processors (CPUs), contain harmful materials such as lead, cadmium, beryllium, or brominated flame retardants. Recycling and disposing of e-waste can pose serious risks to workers and their communities.
Definition
When an electronic product is no longer useful and is thrown away, it becomes electronic trash, or e-waste. As new models of electronic products are created, older ones often become outdated and are discarded. E-waste is produced in large amounts because of society's high demand for new products and the fast pace of technological progress.
In the United States, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) divides e-waste into ten groups. These groups include used electronics that may be reused, sold, repaired, recycled, or thrown away. They also include electronics that can be used again and materials like copper, steel, and plastic that are recovered from recycling. The term "waste" refers to materials that are thrown away instead of being recycled, such as leftover parts from recycling or reuse. Some groups use the terms "e-waste" and "e-scrap" to describe all unused electronics. Cathode ray tubes (CRTs), which are parts of old computer monitors, are especially hard to recycle.
Another group, the Partnership on Measuring ICT for Development, divides e-waste into six categories. The types of electronics in each group differ in how long they last, their environmental impact, and how they are collected. About 70% of the toxic waste in landfills comes from electronic waste, even though e-waste makes up only 3% of all waste in landfills.
CRTs contain high amounts of lead and phosphors (not to be confused with phosphorus), which are needed for the screen to work. The EPA lists discarded CRT monitors as "hazardous household waste." However, CRTs that are set aside for testing may be considered valuable if they are recycled or sent to be recycled under certain conditions. CRTs are sometimes mistaken for DLP Rear Projection TVs, which have different recycling methods because of the materials they use.
In the European Union and its member countries, the European Waste Catalogue (EWC) is used to define hazardous electronic waste. This system is based on a European Council Directive and is adapted into laws by each member country. In the UK, this is called the List of Wastes Directive. The EWC provides a general definition of hazardous e-waste, and waste operators must follow the Hazardous Waste Regulations for more details. Materials in the waste are also assessed using specific rules to determine if they are hazardous.
Some countries are accused of mixing hard-to-recycle, outdated, or broken electronics with working equipment to save money on sorting and processing. Some groups may expand the definition of "waste" electronics to protect their own markets from used equipment made elsewhere.
Recycling working computers, such as laptops and desktops, can help cover the cost of transporting large amounts of broken electronics, which are worth less or nothing. A 2011 study in Ghana found that of 215,000 tons of electronics imported, 30% were new and 70% were used. Of the used electronics, 15% were not reused and were thrown away. This is different from some unverified claims that 80% of the imported electronics were burned in unsafe ways.
Bitcoin, a type of digital money, creates a lot of e-waste. By May 2021, Bitcoin had produced about 30.7 metric kilotons of e-waste, which is similar to the amount of waste from a small country like Denmark. This has raised concerns about whether Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies are environmentally sustainable.
Quantity
E-waste is the fastest-growing type of waste in the world. A 2024 study shows that about 62 million tons of e-waste are created globally each year. Only 22.3% of this waste is officially recorded as being collected and recycled. The rest is often handled informally in developing countries, which can harm people’s health and the environment. About $62 billion worth of valuable materials are lost each year because of poor recycling practices.
Fast changes in technology, new inventions, changes in media (like tapes, software, and MP3s), lower prices, and planned obsolescence (when products are made to stop working after a short time) have caused more e-waste worldwide. Circular solutions (systems that reuse materials) are limited. Before technical solutions can be used, legal rules, collection systems, and other services must be set up.
Display units (like CRT, LCD, and LED monitors), processors (such as CPUs, GPUs, or APUs), memory (like DRAM or SRAM), and audio parts have different lifespans. Processors often become outdated because software no longer works with them, making them e-waste. Display units are often replaced even if they still work, due to changing preferences in wealthy countries. This issue could be helped by modular smartphones (like the Phonebloks idea). These phones are more durable and allow users to replace broken parts, reducing e-waste. About 50 million tons of e-waste are made yearly. In the U.S., 30 million computers are thrown away each year, and 100 million phones are discarded in Europe yearly. Only 15–20% of e-waste is recycled, with the rest going to landfills or incinerators.
A UNEP report titled "Recycling – from e-waste to Resources" says that e-waste, including phones and computers, could increase by 500% in some countries, like India, over the next decade. The U.S. produces the most e-waste, about 3 million tons yearly. China produces about 10.1 million tons yearly (2020 estimate), second only to the U.S. Even though China banned e-waste imports, it still receives e-waste from developed countries.
A 2023 study found that improper disposal and recycling of e-waste contributes to greenhouse gas emissions, linking e-waste to environmental problems. E-waste contains harmful and valuable materials, such as heavy metals (like lead, cadmium, mercury, and nickel) and chemicals (like flame retardants and dioxins). These can harm the environment and human health if not handled properly. Up to 60 elements are found in electronics, and the metal concentration in e-waste is often higher than in regular ores (like copper, aluminum, iron, gold, silver, and palladium). As of 2013, Apple had sold over 796 million iDevices (iPod, iPhone, iPad). Many phone companies make phones that don’t last long to encourage customers to buy new models. In the U.S., about 70% of heavy metals in landfills come from old electronics.
There is agreement that more electronic devices are being thrown away, but there is disagreement about how dangerous this is compared to other waste, like car parts. Some say limiting the trade of used electronics might help, but others believe it could make the problem worse. A Motherboard article said that trying to stop used electronics trade has pushed honest companies out of the market, causing unexpected problems.
In 2016, Asia had the most e-waste (18.2 million tons), followed by Europe (12.3 million tons), the Americas (11.3 million tons), Africa (2.2 million tons), and Oceania (0.7 million tons). Oceania had the highest e-waste per person (17.3 kg), but only 6% was collected and recycled. Europe had the second-highest e-waste per person (16.6 kg) but the highest recycling rate (35%). The Americas generated 11.6 kg per person and recycled only 17% of e-waste. Asia had the lowest e-waste per person (4.2 kg). Africa generated 1.9 kg per person, but little is known about its recycling rates. Only 41 countries have official e-waste data. For 16 others, e-waste was estimated through research. The fate of 34.1 million tons of e-waste is unknown. In countries without e-waste laws, e-waste is treated like general waste and may be landfilled or recycled with other materials. This can lead to unsafe handling of toxins and poor worker protection.
Although e-waste is increasing, more countries are creating rules to manage it. As of now, 66% of the world’s population lives in countries with e-waste laws, up from 44% in 2014.
In 2019, 53.6 million tons of e-waste were made globally, with an average of 7.3 kg per person. This is expected to rise to 74 million tons by 2030. Asia still produces the most e-waste (24.9 million tons), followed by the Americas (13.1 million tons), Europe (12 million tons), and Africa and Oceania (2.9 million tons and 0.7 million tons, respectively). Europe had the highest e-waste per person (16.2 kg), followed by Oceania (16.1 kg) and the Americas. Africa had the lowest (2.5 kg). Recycling rates were highest in Europe (42.5%), followed by Asia (11.7%). The Americas and Oceania recycled 9.4% and 8.8%, while Africa recycled only 0.9%. Of the 53.6 million tons of e-waste, 9.3% was officially recycled, and the fate of 44.3% is unknown. The number of countries with e-waste laws has grown since 2014, from 61 to 78. Much of
Global trade issues
One idea is that stricter rules for handling electronic waste and worries about harm to the environment in poorer countries may make it less expensive for companies to avoid properly removing harmful materials before sending used electronics abroad. Some people who oppose the trade in used electronics say it is still too easy for people who claim to recycle to send unsorted electronic waste to developing countries like China, India, and parts of Africa. This avoids the cost of removing dangerous parts, such as broken cathode ray tubes, which are hard and expensive to process. These countries have become places where large amounts of electronic waste are dumped. Even though some countries try to repair and reuse old equipment, in 2003, about 90% of electronic waste ended up in landfills in developing countries. Supporters of international trade argue that successful fair trade programs in other industries have created jobs and brought affordable technology to countries where repair and reuse are more common.
People who support the trade in used electronics say that mining for metals in new materials has moved to developing countries. Recycling metals like copper, silver, and gold from old electronics is better for the environment than mining. They also say that repairing and reusing computers and televisions has become less common in wealthier nations, and that fixing old equipment has historically helped poorer countries develop.
South Korea, Taiwan, and southern China have found ways to reuse old products and have created large industries focused on repairing used items like ink cartridges, single-use cameras, and working cathode ray tubes. Repairing old items has sometimes caused problems for companies that make new products, and some criticism of the trade comes from efforts to protect local industries. Books like "The Waste Makers" by Vance Packard explain some of the criticism of sending working products abroad, such as bans on importing used laptops or exporting working electronics from Japan.
People who oppose sending used electronics to other countries say that lower environmental and labor standards, cheap labor, and the high value of materials recovered from electronic waste lead to pollution, such as smelting copper wire. Electronic waste is often sent to countries in Africa and Asia, like China, Malaysia, India, and Kenya, for processing, sometimes without permission. Many used laptops are sent to developing countries as places to dump electronic waste.
The Basel Convention, created in 1989, is a major international agreement that aims to control the movement of dangerous waste to protect countries that receive it. The United States has not joined the Basel Convention or its Ban Amendment, so it has few laws stopping the export of toxic waste. Groups like the Basel Action Network estimate that about 80% of electronic waste sent to recycling centers in the U.S. is not actually recycled there but instead shipped to countries like China. This number is disputed by the EPA, the Institute of Scrap Recycling Industries, and the World Reuse, Repair and Recycling Association.
A study by Arizona State University found that 87–88% of used computers imported were sold for more than the value of the materials they contained. This suggests that the trade in used computers is mainly about reuse, not recycling.
Basel Convention Obstacles
The Basel Convention and Ban Amendment face challenges in being followed by countries around the world. One problem is that some countries do not report information about waste because they have not signed onto the Basel Convention or use informal methods for recycling and collecting waste, such as low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). A 2024 report by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) from the sixteenth meeting of the Basel Convention showed that 27 countries did not submit reports between 2018 and 2022 about how they followed the rules of the Basel Convention. These countries included Belize, Cambodia, Chile, Djibouti, Dominica, Somalia, Tonga, Mauritius, Nepal, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Angola, Botswana, Comoros, Cameroon, Kazakhstan, Kiribati, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Liechtenstein, Sierra Leone, Senegal, Samoa, Republic of Korea, Uruguay, Saint Kitts and Nevis, and Zambia.
Another issue is unclear language in reports and laws. At the sixteenth meeting, 68 out of 126 countries did not clearly define what "illegal traffic" means. Electronic waste (e-waste) is sometimes sent abroad under names like "used materials" or "second-hand goods," which creates loopholes and weakens the effectiveness of the Basel Convention.
The Basel Convention also leaves it up to each country to monitor waste and enforce rules for breaking them. At the sixteenth meeting, 66 countries had rules to return hazardous waste, and 52 countries treated the illegal movement of hazardous waste between countries as a crime. These numbers include all types of hazardous waste, not just e-waste. However, these challenges allow LMICs to receive large amounts of e-waste through global trade, which harms the health of people living in those areas.
Some people support the trade of used electronics, arguing that access to the internet is more closely linked to trade than poverty. For example, Haiti is a poor country and is closer to New York than southeast Asia, but more e-waste is sent from New York to Asia than to Haiti. In developed countries, many people work in jobs like repairing or reusing electronics, but these jobs are declining. Denying developing countries access to used electronics could take away opportunities for jobs, affordable products, and internet access or force them to rely on less responsible suppliers. A reporter named Adam Minter wrote in The Atlantic that many activities in China, like repairing and sorting computer parts, are considered sustainable.
Others argue that developing countries often use harmful methods to process e-waste. One common method is burning equipment in open fires to melt plastics and remove metals. This releases dangerous chemicals like dioxins and furans into the air, creating smog. These harmful fumes can pollute water sources and harm health.
In 2008, Greenpeace stopped a container of e-waste in Hong Kong that was being sent from the U.S. to China. Reports about e-waste exports also appeared in India, Ghana, Côte d'Ivoire, and Nigeria.
A study by the Countering WEEE Illegal Trade (CWIT) project, funded by the European Commission, found that in 2012, only 35% (3.3 million tons) of e-waste in Europe was collected and recycled properly. The remaining 65% (6.15 million tons) was either:
– Exported (1.5 million tons),
– Recycled in ways that broke rules in Europe (3.15 million tons),
– Scavenged for valuable parts (750,000 tons), or
– Thrown in trash (750,000 tons).
Guiyu, a town in China’s Guangdong region, is a major center for processing e-waste and is called the "e-waste capital of the world." It used to be an agricultural area but became a recycling hub in the 1990s, involving over 75% of local families and 100,000 migrant workers. Workers in Guiyu cut wires, remove chips from circuit boards, grind plastic cases, and use acid to extract metals. Other workers strip wires to recover copper. These activities have caused environmental issues like polluted groundwater, air pollution, and health problems for people living and working there.
In Guiyu, six villages focus on disassembling circuit boards, seven on reprocessing plastics and metals, and two on separating wires and cables. Greenpeace tested soil, dust, river sediment, and groundwater in Guiyu and found high levels of toxic metals like lead, mercury, and cadmium. Similar e-waste processing sites exist in Nigeria, Ghana, and India.
Guiyu is one of the oldest and largest informal e-waste recycling sites globally, but others exist in countries like India (Delhi and Bangalore), Ghana (Agbogbloshie), Nigeria, and the Philippines. Studies show that workers and communities near these sites are exposed to harmful chemicals. For example, in Delhi, workers extract metals using unsafe methods, and in Bangalore, e-waste workers in slums have higher levels of toxic substances than workers in formal recycling facilities.
Bitcoin mining has also increased e-waste. According to a study, each Bitcoin transaction creates about 272 grams of electronic waste, and in 2020 alone, Bitcoin generated around 112.5 million grams of waste. Other estimates say Bitcoin produces as much e-waste as a country like the Netherlands does each year (30.7 metric kilotons). Bitcoin’s waste production is higher than that of major financial companies like VISA, which creates 40 grams of waste per 100,000 transactions.
A major reason for this waste is the fast pace of technological change in Bitcoin mining. Miners compete to solve complex problems to earn Bitcoin, which requires powerful computers. This competition drives miners to use the most advanced computer chips, leading to frequent upgrades and more e-waste.
According to Koomey’s Law, the efficiency of computer chips doubles every 1.5 years, which means newer chips use less energy and perform better. However, this rapid improvement also leads to older chips being discarded more quickly, contributing to e-waste.
Environmental impact
The process of breaking apart and throwing away old electronics in developing countries has caused harm to the environment. Harmful liquids and gases from this process enter water, groundwater, soil, and air. These pollutants then reach land and sea animals, both wild and domesticated, crops eaten by people and animals, and drinking water.
A study in Guiyu, China, found these issues:
– Air pollution included dioxins, which were 100 times higher than levels measured before.
– Cancer-causing substances in duck ponds and rice fields were above international limits. Levels of harmful metals like cadmium, copper, nickel, and lead in rice fields also exceeded international standards.
– Heavy metals in road dust were much higher than in a nearby control village, with lead levels over 300 times higher and copper levels over 100 times higher.
In Agbogbloshie, Ghana, where about 40,000 people live, e-waste contamination affects nearly everyone. This area, one of the largest informal e-waste dumping sites in Africa, receives about 215,000 tons of used electronics each year, mostly from Western Europe. Because industrial, commercial, and residential areas overlap here, Agbogbloshie is ranked as one of the world’s 10 most dangerous toxic places. Improper disposal of electronics releases harmful chemicals into soil, water, and air, spreading pollution through many pathways and increasing risks to both the environment and people.
A study in Agbogbloshie found soil lead levels as high as 18,125 parts per million (ppm). The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) sets limits of 400 ppm for play areas and 1200 ppm for non-play areas. Workers at the site often burn electronics to recover copper, releasing toxins like lead, dioxins, and furans into the environment.
Researchers like Brett Robinson, a professor at Lincoln University in New Zealand, warn that wind in Southeast China spreads toxic particles from open-air burning across the Pearl River Delta, home to 45 million people. These toxins enter the "soil-crop-food pathway," a major way people are exposed to heavy metals. These chemicals do not break down easily and stay in the environment for a long time, increasing exposure risks.
In Chachoengsao, a district near Bangkok, villagers lost their main water source due to e-waste dumping. In 2017, a nearby Chinese-run factory began processing e-waste, such as broken computers and cables, to recover valuable metals like copper, silver, and gold. However, these items also contain highly toxic metals like lead, cadmium, and mercury. A local resident reported feeling sick from bad smells during processing and said the factory polluted her water. Rainwater carried waste through her home and into the soil and water system. Tests by environmental groups and local officials found high levels of toxic metals like iron, manganese, lead, nickel, and sometimes arsenic and cadmium in the water. People who used water from shallow wells reported skin problems and bad smells. Penchom Saetang, founder of the environmental group Earth, said, “This proves that communities’ concerns about water pollution are true.”
The chemical makeup of e-waste depends on the age and type of the item. Most e-waste contains metals like copper, aluminum, and iron, which may be attached to, covered by, or mixed with plastics and ceramics. E-waste harms the environment, and it is important to dispose of it at recycling facilities certified by R2 standards.
Information security
Old computers and other data processing equipment that are thrown away may still have readable data. This data could be important to the people who used the device before. Even if you delete the data or reset the device to its original settings, the data might not be completely gone. This means that bad people could find the data again. This might lead to a leak of private information.
A proper recycling plan can help protect information. It makes sure that steps are taken to remove private data properly. This might include steps like reformatting the storage media. It could also involve covering the data with random information to make it impossible to read. In some cases, the storage media might be physically destroyed, like shredding, to ensure all data is gone.
For example, on many computers, deleting a file might not actually remove the data. The data could still be on the storage device and be found using regular methods.
Recycling
Recycling can help reduce harmful materials from entering the environment and help protect natural resources. However, local governments and communities must work together to encourage recycling. Less than 20% of electronic waste is officially recycled, while 80% is either thrown away in landfills or recycled in unsafe ways, often by hand in developing countries. This process exposes workers to dangerous substances like mercury, lead, and cadmium. Even though electronic waste contains valuable materials, very little of it is officially recycled, which leads to waste.
There are three main ways to extract valuable metals from electronic waste: hydrometallurgical, pyrometallurgical, and hydro-pyrometallurgical methods. Each method has its own benefits and drawbacks, and all can create harmful waste.
Recycling printed circuit boards from electronic waste is a major challenge. These boards contain valuable metals like gold, silver, and platinum, as well as common metals like copper, iron, and aluminum. One way to process e-waste is by melting circuit boards, burning cables to recover copper, and using acid to separate valuable metals. A common method is mechanical shredding, but it is not very efficient. Other methods, such as cryogenic decomposition, are being studied. In 2023, a new material called AF aerogel made with protein fibrils was developed to help extract gold from circuit boards.
Properly disposing of or reusing electronics can help avoid health problems, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and create jobs.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) encourages electronics recyclers to get certified by showing they meet safety and recycling standards through an independent audit. Two certifications are endorsed by the EPA: Responsible Recyclers Practices (R2) and E-Stewards. Certified recyclers follow strict rules to protect the environment and human health, ensure materials are managed safely, and destroy data on electronics. These companies are regularly checked to make sure they continue meeting high standards.
Some U.S. retailers allow customers to recycle old electronics. The Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) provides a list of recycling locations that meet strict standards. Research shows that 58% of consumers know where to recycle electronics, and the industry wants more people to be aware of this. Over 5,000 recycling locations are operated by manufacturers and retailers, and the industry aims to recycle 1 billion pounds of electronics annually by 2016, up from 300 million pounds in 2010.
The Sustainable Materials Management (SMM) Electronic Challenge, started by the EPA in 2012, helps electronics manufacturers and retailers collect used electronics and send them to certified recyclers. These companies can then report that they recycle all electronics responsibly. The Electronics TakeBack Coalition (ETBC) works to protect health and the environment by holding manufacturers accountable for recycling. It also provides guidance for safe recycling and lists recyclers that follow environmental rules. While recycling efforts have improved, challenges remain, such as ensuring recycling standards are followed and managing waste that has value. Many experts believe better accountability and competition can improve recycling systems.
The Certified Electronics Recycler program sets high standards for recycling companies to ensure quality, environmental safety, and health. The Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition focuses on health and environmental justice issues caused by toxic materials in technology. The World Reuse, Repair, and Recycling Association (wr3a.org) works to improve recycling practices in countries that import electronics. Take Back My TV (possibly discontinued) is a project that evaluates television manufacturers based on their recycling practices.
Efforts have been made to raise awareness about the dangers of e-waste recycling in American prisons. A report called "Toxic Sweatshops" found that inmates are sometimes forced to handle e-waste in unsafe conditions without proper safety measures.
In Argentina, a group called Argentina's Cyber Dumpster Divers collects e-waste and repurposes it into new items like cameras and video game consoles. This work became especially important during the pandemic.
In many developed countries, electronic waste is first broken down into parts for further processing.
Financial incentives for electronic waste recycling
Governments and organizations use financial incentives to help people collect, recycle, and properly dispose of electronic waste (e-waste). These tools aim to reduce informal recycling, increase the recovery of valuable materials like gold, silver, and copper, and promote safe waste management. Reports show that only 22.3% of global e-waste was collected and recycled in 2022, with much of it still uncollected.
Deposit–refund systems (DRS) require buyers to pay an extra fee when purchasing electronics, which is returned when the product is returned at the end of its life. Studies show these systems can increase return rates compared to no incentives. However, their success depends on the type of waste; for example, deposit systems for batteries have had limited success in improving collection rates.
Some governments give money to certified recyclers through subsidies, grants, or tax breaks to support formal e-waste recycling. Research in Taiwan shows that combining financial rewards with public education improves recycling results and reduces reliance on informal recycling. Studies also show subsidies can improve the efficiency of formal systems that handle e-waste.
Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) holds producers accountable for managing electronic waste at the end of a product’s life. International reviews show EPR shifts waste costs from governments to manufacturers, encouraging better product design and recycling systems. In the European Union, EPR is required by the Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) Directive, which mandates that producers fund the collection, treatment, and recycling of electronics.
Investing in e-waste treatment infrastructure, such as certified dismantling plants and collection systems, is linked to higher formal recycling rates. Areas with strong infrastructure rely less on informal recycling, reducing environmental and health risks from unregulated processing.
In the European Union, the WEEE Directive enforces EPR and sets rules for collecting, reusing, and recycling e-waste. However, progress varies among member states, and some struggle to meet recycling goals.
In the United States, e-waste policies are managed at the state level. Some states use producer-funded take-back systems, host collection events, or offer rebates and vouchers to encourage recycling.
Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan use EPR systems or deposit–refund programs to reduce informal recycling and improve material recovery. Studies show formal, regulated systems capture more e-waste than informal methods.
Financial incentives can increase participation in formal e-waste collection and reduce harm from informal recycling. However, challenges remain, including uneven enforcement, inadequate infrastructure, and unregulated e-waste flows that escape formal systems.
Proper e-waste recycling helps recover valuable materials like metals and rare earth elements, reduces the need to extract new resources, creates jobs, and supports circular economy goals. Recycling turns discarded electronics into useful resources, helping manage materials sustainably and reducing the environmental impact of electronics use.
Repair as waste reduction method
There are several ways to reduce the environmental problems caused by recycling electronic waste. One major issue that makes the e-waste problem worse is that many electrical and electronic items stop working after a short time. Two main reasons cause this trend. First, people often want low-cost products, which can lead to lower quality and shorter product lifetimes. Second, some companies encourage or even force customers to replace their devices regularly. This can happen by limiting access to spare parts, repair guides, software updates, or by designing products to break down quickly.
People are becoming more upset about these practices, which has led to a growing movement focused on repairing items. This movement often happens at a local level, such as through repair events or community-based programs like "restart parties" organized by the Restart Project.
The idea that people should be able to repair their own devices is led by farmers in the United States. These farmers are frustrated because they cannot find repair information, special tools, or replacement parts for their high-tech farming equipment. However, this movement also includes other areas, such as criticism of companies like Apple for limiting repair options. Companies often argue that allowing repairs without proper oversight could cause safety issues.
One simple way to reduce the amount of electronic waste is to sell or donate old electronics instead of throwing them away. Improper disposal of e-waste is becoming more dangerous, especially as the total amount of e-waste increases. Because of this, large companies like Apple and Samsung now offer customers ways to recycle old devices. Recycling helps reuse valuable parts inside electronics, which can save energy and reduce the need to mine new materials or create new parts. Many communities have electronic recycling programs that can be found by searching online, for example, by typing "recycle electronics" along with the name of a city or area.
Cloud services have been useful for storing data, which can be accessed from anywhere in the world without needing physical storage devices. Cloud storage also provides large amounts of space at low cost. This is convenient and helps reduce the need to make new storage devices, which in turn lowers the amount of e-waste created.
Electronic waste classification
The market offers many types of electrical products. To organize these items, it is important to group them into clear and useful categories. These categories can help decide the best way to dispose of the products. Creating these groups helps describe electronic waste. However, classifications do not always include details about products that are not harmful to the environment. Also, classifications should not be too general because different countries may interpret them differently. The UNU-KEYs system uses the same system as the Harmonized System (HS) codes. This is an international system that helps countries agree on how to classify items for customs purposes.
Electronic waste substances
Some computer parts can be used again when making new computers. Other parts are broken down into metals that can be used in different areas like building, kitchen tools, and jewelry. Materials found in large amounts include epoxy resins, fiberglass, PCBs, PVC (polyvinyl chlorides), thermosetting plastics, lead, tin, copper, silicon, beryllium, carbon, iron, and aluminum. Materials found in small amounts include cadmium, mercury, and thallium. Materials found in very small amounts include americium, antimony, arsenic, barium, bismuth, boron, cobalt, europium, gallium, germanium, gold, indium, lithium, manganese, nickel, niobium, palladium, platinum, rhodium, ruthenium, selenium, silver, tantalum, terbium, thorium, titanium, vanadium, and yttrium. The following are ordinary applications:
Human health and safety
People who live near e-waste recycling sites, even if they do not work in recycling, may be exposed to environmental dangers. This happens because e-waste can pollute the air, water, soil, dust, and food sources. People may come into contact with these pollutants through breathing, eating, or touching contaminated materials. There are three main ways this can happen: breathing in polluted air, eating contaminated food or water, and touching polluted surfaces.
Studies show that people near e-waste recycling sites often have higher levels of harmful heavy metals in their bodies. Children and pregnant women are especially at risk. Health problems linked to e-waste exposure include mental health issues, trouble thinking clearly, and physical health problems. Research also found that DNA damage is more common in people exposed to e-waste than in people who are not. This DNA damage can lead to mistakes in cell replication, which may cause mutations or cancer. Workers who directly handle e-waste, such as by burning or breaking apart electronics, are at the highest risk because they are exposed to dangerous chemicals directly.
Prenatal exposure to e-waste can harm the health of newborns. In Guiyu, a major e-waste recycling site in China, studies found that babies born to parents who worked in e-waste recycling had higher lead levels in their blood. This was linked to how long the mother lived in Guiyu or worked in e-waste facilities during pregnancy. Babies in Guiyu also had higher levels of a protein called metallothionein, which shows exposure to toxic metals like cadmium. High levels of another chemical, PFOA, in mothers were linked to slower growth in their babies and lower chances of healthy development.
Exposure to e-waste during pregnancy can also lead to problems like stillbirth, low birth weight, and lower Apgar scores. These issues can affect a child’s health and development later in life.
Children are more vulnerable to e-waste exposure because they are smaller, have faster body processes, and have more skin area compared to their weight. They also have more ways to be exposed, such as touching things and putting them in their mouths. Studies show children in e-waste areas have eight times the health risks of adult workers. For example, children in Guiyu had blood lead levels nearly 1.5 times higher than children in areas without e-waste. The U.S. sets a safe blood lead level at 5 μg/dL, but levels in Guiyu were much higher. Children whose parents worked with circuit boards had the highest lead levels, while those who recycled plastic had the lowest.
Exposure to e-waste can harm children’s health. Toxins like lead, mercury, and cadmium in e-waste can lower IQ, harm thinking skills, and increase cancer risks. Some studies found that children in e-waste areas had weaker lungs, trouble with blood clotting, hearing loss, and lower immunity from vaccines. For example, boys aged 8–9 in e-waste areas had lower lung function and higher levels of harmful chemicals in their bodies.
The Occupational Safety & Health Administration (OSHA) lists dangers for e-recycling workers, such as injuries from crushing, exposure to harmful energy, and contact with toxic metals. OSHA also identifies harmful chemicals in electronics, like lead, mercury, and asbestos, which have set safety limits for workers.
Informal e-recycling involves small workshops with little equipment or safety gear. Formal e-recycling uses machines and follows safety rules to reduce pollution. Workers in informal settings often face greater risks because they use unsafe methods like burning electronics to get metals. These practices are common in poor areas, and children may help with recycling, increasing their health risks. Workers in informal settings rarely use safety tools like masks or gloves.
A study in India found that workers in formal recycling facilities had higher levels of some metals in their hair than workers in informal slum areas. However, workers in slum areas had higher levels of other harmful metals.
Even in formal recycling, workers may be exposed to dangerous chemicals. Studies in France and Sweden found workers had higher levels of lead, mercury, and other harmful substances than safety guidelines allow. Workers in formal settings also had more exposure to chemicals used in electronics, like flame retardants.
Much of the informal e-recycling happens in low-income or developing countries. A 2025 report from Transparency International highlights this issue.
E-waste legislative frameworks
The European Union (EU) has taken steps to manage electronic waste by creating two important laws. The first law, called the Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment Directive (WEEE Directive), started in 2003. Its main goal was to help member countries recycle and reuse electronic waste. This law was updated in 2008 and fully used in 2014. The EU also created another law in 2003 to limit the use of dangerous materials in electronic devices. This law was revised again in 2012.
In Western Balkan countries, North Macedonia passed a law about batteries in 2010 and a law about managing electronic waste in 2012. Serbia included electronic waste management in its National Waste Management Strategy from 2010 to 2019. Montenegro created a law in 2010 to collect 4 kilograms of electronic waste per person each year until 2020. Albania has a draft law from 2011 that focuses on how electronic devices are designed. However, Bosnia and Herzegovina does not yet have a law to manage electronic waste.
In Asia, Thailand banned the import of electronic waste in 2020, and China did the same in 2018. These rules have had some success, but some people have found ways to avoid them.
As of 2024, 81 countries have created policies or laws to manage electronic waste. However, many of these policies are not legally required, especially in Asia and Africa. This makes it harder to manage electronic waste properly. For example, EU research shows that laws about electronic waste have led to more electronic waste being sent to other countries.
Solving the E-waste Problem is an organization part of the United Nations University. It works with companies, governments, and other groups to find solutions for managing electronic waste. It encourages teamwork among all people involved in handling electronic waste and uses scientific methods to address the issue.
The European Commission (EC) of the EU defines electronic waste as materials from devices like refrigerators, televisions, and mobile phones. In 2005, the EU estimated that 9 million tons of electronic waste were produced. By 2020, this number had grown to 12 million tons. If not handled properly, electronic waste can harm the environment and cause health problems. Managing this waste requires proper facilities and careful planning.
Making electronic devices also uses natural resources like aluminum, gold, and copper, which can harm the environment. To address this, the EU created two laws: the WEEE Directive and the RoHS Directive. The WEEE Directive, started in 2003, focuses on recycling electronic waste. It allows free collection of electronic waste for consumers.
The EC updated the WEEE Directive in 2008 because electronic waste is growing quickly. In 2012, the EU revised the directive again to better manage electronic waste, and the new rules were used in 2014. In 2017, the EC introduced a new rule requiring each EU country to track and report electronic waste data.
The RoHS Directive, created in 2003, limits the use of dangerous materials like lead and mercury in electronic devices. This law was revised in 2008 and again in 2013. In 2017, the EC updated the RoHS Directive to improve its effectiveness.
Each year, the EU deals with about 800,000 tons of automotive batteries, 190,000 tons of industrial batteries, and 160,000 tons of consumer batteries. These batteries are used in many everyday products. If not properly collected and recycled, they can release harmful materials into the environment. The EU has created the Batteries Directive to improve battery recycling and reduce environmental harm. This law also limits the use of dangerous materials in batteries and ensures they are labeled as safe for the environment. In 2020, the EU proposed a new rule to make sure all batteries sold in the EU are recyclable and safe.
The EC passed the Batteries Directive in 2006 and revised it in 2013. This law helps manage battery waste and ensures safe recycling. The EU regularly reviews this law to improve its effectiveness.
Potential Future Recommendations
To improve policies and actions that reduce e-waste and its effects, several steps can be taken. Teaching the public about the dangers e-waste poses to the environment and human health can help people reduce their own e-waste. This effort may also involve electronic companies, as raising awareness could encourage the creation of longer-lasting, more sustainable technologies. Education programs can also help informal e-waste recyclers by informing them about the health risks they may face from their work.
More specific language about used and waste materials should be studied. This could help fix gaps in rules like the Basel Convention and Ban Amendment.
Governments and businesses can support formal recycling programs to protect workers' safety while ensuring they can continue earning a living. This is especially important in countries with lower and middle incomes, where informal recyclers often rely on this work to support their families, such as in parts of Ghana. It is also important to ensure that low-income areas receive equal access to waste management improvements.
To reduce the health risks caused by e-waste and its recycling, medical programs and resources should be improved or created in areas where people are heavily exposed to e-waste pollution.