Mad copper fiasco in IT

 Copper wires are valuable but often wasted

 Crazy Copper Carousel, showing mains leads being made, not used and then heading back to China

 HP Scanner - CD, 300 pages of manual in 9 different languages and 3 mains leads containing copper

Stripping wires

Simon Barfoot from Blackmore.it 

Copper now sells for somewhere between £4000 a tonne and £5000 a tonne depending on where you look.  That's why it's being stolen from telephone exchanges, from electricity stations and from railways - train disruption from copper theft is becoming nearly as common as suicides.

In IT equipment copper is common - particularly in wires.  And many of these wires are made in China.  So demand for copper in China is huge.

I've discovered that something really crazy is happening.   When you buy a computer or a printer in the UK, it always comes with a cable, whether you want one or not.  I've got lots in my office from previous machines, so I don't need another one.  I'm not alone.  Most people end up with an excess of these mains leads.  So they chuck them out.
  
If we're lucky the discarded leads will end up being recycled.  Many of them are transported to Scandinavia, where the plastic coating is melted off.  And the remaining copper is then sold back to China, to make more leads that we don't want. Apart from being completely bonkers, there's a significant environmental impact to all this.  Melting down the copper and plastic and all the transport, not to mention the packaging.
 
I went to see an IT recycling company last week - Blackmore.IT.  Simon Barfoot, the CEO, told me about the 'Crazy Copper Carousel', as he called it.  And, after we left, he sent me the photo (see above) of all the stuff  along with an HP scanner.  There was, not one, but three mains leads included because it meant they could ship the product to different countries, without changing the packaging - eek.  In the same package there was also a set up CD and manuals in 9 different languages which amounted to about 300 pages in all. 
 
This is just one small example of how wasteful the IT industry is.   If the cost of copper, and other raw materials, isn't getting them to change, one wonders what will.   Instead of sending me answers on a postcard - send me a tweet @juliahailes. 


I've been told about one solution that's being used in Norway.   Sean Feeney, who took over as CEO of Environcom in January 2011 used to work in Scandinavia and says they are far better at reducing E-waste, than we are in the UK.   Their approach to manuals, CDs and cables is to put them in separate boxes to the computer itself.  This means that only the equipment that's needed is actually sent to the country in question.  Hewlett Packard should get in touch and revamp their systems accordingly. 



I've started working with Environcom on E-waste issues.  They're leading the way on re-use - see previous blog I've written about them.   



 Some key facts about copper:

• A tonne of copper results in 300 tonnes of waste
• 40% of copper is recycled but 99% is potentially re-usable
• 4.4 million tonnes of copper are used each year
• 15.3 million tonnes of CO2 emissions are produced from copper mining each year
• 1.3 billion mobile phones produced each year account for 12,000 tonnes of copper
• It's estimated that demand for copper will outstrip supply (what's in the ground) by 2100

Some of these facts have come from 'Reinventing the wheel - A circular economy for resource security' a Green Alliance Report, published in 2011. 

Why aren't restaurants more sustainable?

Bluefin tuna is one of the most endangered species on the planet but it's still being served in London restaurants.

Monkfish is not very sustainable either - if it's on the menu, ask the restaurant about their sustainable fish policies

The Hive Beach Cafe in Burton Bradstock is one of the first to sign up to the Marine Stewardship Council guidelines
Photo taken in October 2011

In some ways I’m a restaurant’s dream customer because I eat out a lot.  But in some ways I’m a nightmare because I ask lots of questions, particularly about sustainability policies – or more often the lack of them.  Recently, I’ve taken to tweeting about this too.

Recently, I went to Brinkley’s Restaurant in Hollywood Road.   My friend asked what type of tuna they were serving.  The waitress had no idea, so she went to ask in the kitchen.   Her answer horrified me - bluefin tuna!  Anyone with a glimmer of interest in sustainability issues will know that this is one of the most endangered fish species on the planet.  It’s a bit like eating a panda or a tiger.

A very charming manager came to our table.  She explained that Brinkley’s food was bought centrally, for all eight of their restaurants, so it wasn’t something she got involved with. 

I suggested that she should recommend they check fish species with Fish Online.  It’s a brilliant website where you can look up the sustainability rating of any fish.  The higher the rating, the more problematic the fish – and 5 is the worst.  That’s what bluefin tuna gets. 

The River Café in Hammersmith wasn't much better.   The waiter was also baffled by our question about their policies on sustainable fishing.  So he asked Ruth Rogers, the owner, to help us out. She said that all their fish were ‘line caught’.  But when we explained that this wasn’t the only relevant sustainability criteria, she appeared to flounder.  We didn’t point out that monkfish, which was on the menu, is not line caught!

Rick Stein is another celebrity chef who really ought to know better.  But when I went to his Fish & Chip restaurant in Padstow in 2009, I had a similar experience.  The waitress didn’t even know what sustainability meant.   

However, I haven’t just had negative experiences.   Dorset’s Hive Beach Café in Burton Bradstock has signed up to the Marine Stewardship Council guidelines on sustainable fishing.  And it has a blackboard telling you about where their fish comes from. It makes it so relaxing to eat there.  If you want find out other restaurants with good fish policies you can look them up on Fish 2 Fork.  

Of course, sustainability is not just about fish.   It’s about how much energy, water and waste, as well as where the food comes from and even about community engagement too.   That’s where the Sustainable RestaurantAssociation comes in – they offer advice to restaurants to improve their practices.   And they have a ranking system too, so customers can see who’s doing well. 

The SRA’s most recent campaign is to encourage the provision of doggy bags.  They’ve worked out that the average restaurant produces 21 tonnes of food waste a year, which is about half a kilo per customer.   I suspect that Yo Sushi produce even more than that.  When I interviewed one of their staff, they estimated that they threw away about a third of what they make.   And none of it appeared to be recycled.  Clearly, they’d benefit from joining the SRA. 

Waste is actually one of my biggest concerns.  I have a particular problem with the number of disposable napkins handed out.   My children seem to think I’m a nightmare in restaurants, but I could be a dream if there was more sustainability on the menu!  

A version of this article is being published in Restaurant Magazine

Nappy recycling makes sense!

Bronwen Jameson and Paul Richardson from Knowaste

The smell wasn't very noticeable until I went into the building.  Then it hit me like a wall.  I remember from visiting a sewage farm that the trick is not to breathe through your nose.   And after a few minutes it wasn't quite so bad.   My Knowaste guides – Bronwen Jameson and Paul Richardson - were showing me around their nappy recycling plant.   Actually, it's not just nappies they're recycling but incontinence pads and sanitary products too – in the trade this is known as 'offensive waste'!

Pretty well everything coming into the plant is from the commercial sector - care homes, hospitals, day nurseries, washrooms etc.  However, they do have plans to collect nappies and incontinence pads from households.   There's more than a million tonnes of this type of waste produced in the UK each year.  Knowaste are unique in recycling it.   And they've only been fully operational with their current process for a month - so they're still fine-tuning the process.  If it were going full pelt they'd be able to recycle about 36,000 tonnes a year.   But they're aiming to increase capacity with another 5 plants within the next three to four years.  

Almost half of what comes into the plant is moisture, which has to be evaporated.   This is done during sterilisation at the beginning of the process.   Then the different materials are separated.   About half of what's produced is fibre and a quarter is plastic.  Surprisingly, the fibre is a good quality cardboard material, which can be used in outer or protective packaging, for example replacing foam plastics.  The plastic bits are used to make roof tiles and rubbish bins, amongst other things.  Knowaste are still researching potential applications.  But they say that they aim to use all of what they produce within the UK, rather than exporting it. 

One of the challenges that Knowaste have had to overcome is dealing with the super absorbent polymer in nappies - known as SAP.  They have to release moisture from the gel and stop it being so absorbent, so it can be separated from other materials.  This, along with the faecal matter is then part of the small fraction of waste that isn't recycled.  

Bizarrely, glass and metal is extracted from the waste.   This comes from stray products such as drinks cans, cutlery and glass bottles being put in the wrong bin!  But all of it is recycled.

My key interest was hearing about how the environmental benefits stack up.   And Knowaste have the figures.  When compared to either landfill or incineration, recycling reduces carbon emissions by more than 70%, roughly halves acidification and resource depletion and almost eliminates toxics.

This sounds good but most of the carbon benefits come from replacing virgin materials in the products made from recycled waste, rather than the process itself.   Knowaste admit that they can improve.  For example, they have planning permission for greener energy from waste gases, which would be a big step forward.

The economics for Knowaste look quite promising too.  They charge about the same for recycling as it would cost to landfill - a total of about £85 a tonne, including landfill tax of £56 per tonne.   But landfill costs are rising steeply with the tax alone set to be £80 a tonne in 2014 - and who knows what after that.   For local authorities there's another benefit too.   Nappies are almost the only wet and smelly waste that's left in our non-recyclable rubbish bins.   So, removing them might reduce complaints from the public about less frequent non-recyclable rubbish collections.

My view is that the biggest eco-flaw with disposable nappies is waste - see leaflet I've written comparing disposable nappies with re-usables.   Knowaste have shown that they have a good solution for this.  The challenge now is for companies that produce disposable hygiene products to come up with a good system for collecting them from households.   This is not just a problem for councils and the waste industry but for manufacturers too.  

Inspiring E-Waste Company Leads on Re-use

Sean Feeney from EnvironCom standing on fridge foam bits

 Washing machines being tested

I'm rather surprised to discover that there are quite a few people who don't know what E-Waste is.  I mentioned our E-Waste Campaign, when I was speaking to a large audience last week - and someone asked me to clarify. That wasn't the first time.  The 'E' stands for electronic.  And it covers anything from waste computers, to fridges, hairdryers, lamps and electric drills.   A term more widely used by the industry is WEEE - Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment.

Whatever it's called, there's far too much of it.   Our disposable society spews out electronic equipment as if it's as worthless as an apple core or a banana skin.  Most of it still ends up on landfill sites - unceremoniously dumped. Some of it is recycled.  But what this generally means is that it gets put into huge crushing machines and smashed up into lots of little bits.  The different materials are then separated and recycled - but some of the valuable materials get lost in the process.

It would be far better if more E-Waste could be re-used.  But the government have set a pathetic target of re-using 5% of what's collected - and remember this is only an aspiration!

I went to Grantham last week to visit a company called EnvironCom (website still under construction).   If I'd been only a year ago, it would have been no different from other E-Waste recycling plants.   Now, it's very different.   They're re-using 15% of the stuff they bring in and they aim to increase this to at least 30% within 2 years.  Perhaps even more impressive is that they've done this by almost doubling their employees and turning the company from a significant loss to £1m profit, in nine months.

This transformation has been brought about by Sean Feeney.  He took over as CEO in January 2011, having previously worked for Dixons, which coincidentally is one of EnvironCom's biggest customers.  He says that his experience in Norway helped shape his thinking about E-Waste - actually, it made him ashamed to be British.  Over there, all waste electronics are banned from landfill sites - so there are really good systems for both re-use and recycling.

One of the worrying things about recycling in this country is that there's actually a perverse incentive for manufacturers to prevent it happening.   Regulations mean that companies have to pay for recycling.  How much they pay depends on their share of the market.  So, for example, if a manufacturer sells 10% of TVs in the UK, they will pay 10% of recycling costs for any TVs collected.

The problem with this system is threefold.  It means that the more that's collected for recycling, the higher the costs to the companies.  It means that companies producing good quality merchandise that lasts don't get any benefit of producing less waste.  And it means that there's no benefit in re-using equipment because anything that's sold could reduce sales of new stuff.

Going back to EnvironCom.  Sean says that their objectives are:  1. To re-use as much as possible  2. To re-use parts if they can't re-use the whole machine and 3. To make sure that everything ends up in the right place.

I asked him about exports.  This is a real problem for E-Waste - much of it is illegally exported and ends up in toxic dumps in developing countries.   Even stuff that's exported within the rules can be a problem because it's difficult to be sure exactly what happens once it's left our shores.   Sean explained that EnvironCom did export E-Waste to Africa but they were planning to stop this by the end of this year.  Having spoken to him since my visit, he says he's brought forward the deadline to the end of October!   I was impressed.

Most of the repaired household goods, such as fridges and washing machines, from EnvironCom are sold by British Heart Foundation shops.  I saw the repair workshops on site.  Piles of spare parts - and machines ready to be re-sold.  I decided that when I need to replace equipment in my house, I'll be buying a refurbished one.  It's cheaper, greener - and they have a 6 months guarantee.

Probably the most surprising thing about my visit to EnvironCom was to hear about the quality of some of the things they receive.   For example, they've had lots of Ipads - even an Ipad 2, which was launched in March 2011!  And Sean's expecting quite a few more in January 2012, when the Ipad 3 comes out.

One of Sean's inspiring ideas has been to give one of these 'waste' Ipads to any member of his team that's committed to go paperless!   He's also opening a new plant just outside London in October.   I'm sure it won't stop there - this is a company doing the right thing and reaping the rewards.

E bikes are brilliant

We've had great fun with our E-bikes.  I've been lent a couple for the Summer holidays from Just E Bikes.   One's a mountain bike - Haibike - which my teenage boys like the best.  And the other is a Koga, which I prefer because it's more comfortable, although not quite as powerful.

The bikes only give you power when you're pedalling, so it's nothing like riding a scooter.  And you do get some exercise.  Actually, it feels like you've got bionic legs.  Going up hill is a breeze.

The best thing about the bikes is that we've really used them - including for journeys when we would have gone by car.  My sons have cycled to the station, to friend's houses and to the shops.  They're quite fit, so they could easily have cycled without using the E-bikes but the truth is they wouldn't have.  My partner, Jamie, and I are the same.   We've used the E-bikes much more than we would have if they didn't have the extra power.   And we've gone much further afield.

Now for some of the technical details.   The bikes can go for about 65km (about 40 miles) before they need to be re-charged - a bit less if there are lots of hills, as there are where I live.   Apparently, it takes about 2 hours to fully re-charge them but we generally left them for several hours - or overnight - and the process is quite simple.  The cost of re-charging works out at about £1 per 1500 miles.

The bikes come with a small screen that you simply click on the handlebars to start the electrics working.  You can ride them without getting any extra power, if you want to get more exercise - or on one of three settings, number three for full power.  And the Koga has a little device on the handle bars to give you an extra boost when you need it - I found it rather useful.

My main gripe with both bikes was that the screen information appeared to be a bit erratic.  So if you wanted to get your average speed, trip time, range etc it didn't appear to be accurate.  This could easily have been because I never managed to work out the system.   But if that's the case, it needs to be simpler, because I like getting the stats!

Sadly, our bikes have to be returned soon, so we have to think about whether we want to buy our own.  That's the biggest drawback.   These bikes are not cheap.   Over £2,000 each.   Before you reel over in horror though, you should consider how much they might save you.   For families with one parent working within 5 miles of home (22% of UK workers) - or even a bit further afield - an E-bike could actually replace a second car.  Work out how much that would save in tax, insurance and fuel.  And you'd be fitter and healthier too.

You can get cheaper E-bikes, but the Dutch ones I've borrowed are good quality and should last a lifetime.  So perhaps we shouldn't be working out how much they are to buy, but how much they cost over 20 years.  It's a bit like buying an energy saving light bulb - the up-front costs are more but the actual cost over the life of the bulb is less.   And let's not forget that the bikes are a lot more fun than a light bulb!

But we won't be buying them for the children - they'll have to get back onto normal bikes, or persuade us to lend them ours!

We need more computer re-use

We travelled up to Arnos Grove - an area of London I'd never been to before.  My companion was Melinda Watson, who has set up the E-Waste Campaign, with me.  We'd arranged to look round the office and depot of Computer Aid.

The factory floor was piled high with computer parts - hard drives, circuit boards, screens and wires.   Computer Aid takes in about 30,000 computers a year.  When they've been refurbished, most of them are destined for countries in Africa and Latin America. 

The idea is to re-use the equipment to help 'alleviate poverty' - by supplying schools, hospitals and similar institutions.  Computer Aid also offer software solutions too - and training.

I was most impressed by the on site workshop, almost entirely manned by volunteers.  They were separating parts, repairing faults and generally refurbishing equipment, so it could be used again.  Apparently, the average after-life, for what they send out, is between three and four years.   Anything prior to 2002 is considered to be too old for repair.   These are recycled along with other unrepairable stuff.

Computer Aid get most of their machines from businesses - but they do accept donations from individuals too.  The problem is that they don't have a budget for collection - so if you want to donate your old equipment, you have to get it to them.  Having said that, it's not very expensive to transport and the 'feel good factor' is huge.

Considering the number of computers that are chucked out each year, it's surprising that Computer Aid, don't get more.  Many businesses don't have any idea what's happening to their E-Waste.  And that's a big problem.    Even when they assume that it's being recycled, it's quite likely to end up in massive waste dumps in far flung places, with children sifting through the toxic components. 

Actually, there's so much abuse in exporting E-waste that many countries are beginning to refuse to import even refurbished computers.  In Uganda, for instance, Computer Aid is one of very few organisations who have permission to bring in equipment because they're a trusted supplier. 

At a government level there appears to be complacency.  The WEEE (Waste Electronic and Electrical Equipment) Directive sets targets for recycling.   But it doesn't stipulate that the recycling should happen in the UK - in fact it's actually cheaper to export it.  And there's very little checking to verify what happens once it leaves our shores.  And another problem is that there's currently no target in the legislation for re-use.  Computer Aid estimate that about 75% of the equipment they receive is good enough to be used again.  An amendment to the WEEE Directive is coming in which sets a target of 5% (only!) to be re-used.

We need more Computer Aids.  More re-use.  More recycling.  And much more happening in the UK.   Join our E-Waste Campaign to help sort this out.  We're not just focused on computers though - we're looking at all E-Waste from hair driers to toasters and from electric drills to cameras. 

Walking into Slovenia

We walked over the mountains from Italy into Slovenia.   At the top the view was blue - we could see mountain ridges into the distance.

No-one else was there.  We didn't come across any other walkers all day.  The first person we saw was an elderly farmer scything grass in a meadow.   The other striking thing about Slovenia - and actually Northern Italy - was the number of bell towers.  Every settlement had one.

 The Soca river was turquoise blue.  After a couple of nights in Kobarid we walked along the valley to the town of Bovec.   The 20km walk wasn't as arduous as the one over the mountains, even though it was longer.   But we were quite stiff when we arrived - and very pleased that we'd booked a massage.

We changed hotel to one with spectacular views and a spa.  But we soon discovered why it wasn't on our itinerary - the food was terrible.   Actually, with one notable exception - Hotel Hvala in Kobarid - the the food wasn't a highlight of this trip.

The trip was arranged by Inn Travel, who are brilliant at walking and cycling holidays.  Most appealing was that they transport all your luggage between hotels.   They also set up a great itinerary that wasn't too challenging.

I found them through the Green Traveller website.  But I have to admit that we flew to Venice and took the train North from there before starting the walk. 

Haller in the Horn of Africa

I got a very encouraging email this week.   It was from Louise Piper, director of Haller - an organisation I helped to set up nearly 10 years ago.   As follows:

 

"In light of the extensive media coverage on the drought faced in the Horn of Africa, and some very harrowing footage of barren landscapes in Northern Kenya which depict families in great distress, I wanted to let you know that water conservation projects you have funded at Haller have ensured that the communities we work with are not in the same situation. 

The drought is clearly of great concern for the region as a whole - but despite the reduced rain fall, the water harvesting techniques the communities have learned has ensured that the rain fed dams contain enough water for them to continue to farm. The dams and wells they now have access to will have  great impact in the second half of the year enabling them to continue to grow enough food to support themselves until the next rains are due in November."

Clearly, the work that Haller has done 'releasing potential' has made an enormous difference to the communities involved.