People in the West enjoy their technological gadgets and new technology appears at a relentless pace. Thus, it is hardly surprising that there is an ongoing replacement of older technology by newer items. Mobile phone users generally switch to a new phone every 18 months. People update their computers less often, typically every three years, but a computer system is considerably larger than a phone. Televisions and other items are updated less often, but are replaced as they break or are considered obsolete. Naturally enough, most people just toss the old hardware into the trash. In accord with the cute naming practices of the internet age, this waste is commonly known as e-waste. While most people do not think about what happens after their old technology is carted away, obviously all that e-waste must be going somewhere.

A significant proportion of the items, at least in the United States, end up in landfills. For example, currently less than 1% of mobiles phones are recycled. There are two main problems with the landfill solution. First, it is wasteful of resources and space. Second, many high tech items contain toxic elements and thus pose environmental and health risks. Give the harm generated by dumping high tech items into landfills, this approach is not morally acceptable.

Some high tech items do end up being recycled. While there are some recycling plants in the United States and Europe, a significant amount of e-waste is shipped outside the West to places in Asia and Africa. While Western recycling centers must meet fairly stringent guidelines, those outside the West tend to be poorly regulated at best. Even worse, a considerable amount of the recycling is done by individuals who, from necessity, follow extremely risky practices. For example, people burn the insulation off copper wire in open fires-thus exposing themselves and the environment to dioxins and heavy metals. In another example, people melt lead from circuit boards using the same pots and pans they later cook their meals in. Not surprisingly, the impact on the health of those around the plants and those individual working directly with the e-waste is rather serious. This recycling can come back to harm the West as well. For example, it is suspected that the lead tainting those toys imported from China was recycled from Western sources.

From a moral standpoint, these recycling practices are unacceptable for two main reasons. The first is the matter of responsibility. The West is enjoying the benefits of high technology while passing a serious cost on to people who do not benefit from such technology. While this has long been the way of the world, it is irresponsible to cause others to pay the price for the benefits one receives. To use an analogy, this would be like one person getting the enjoyment out of smoking cigarettes while contributing to someone else suffering all the ill effects of smoking. The second is the matter of harm. The unregulated and crude recycling practices are clearly injurious to the health of the people involved (and those in the area) as well as to the environment. Allowing such unnecessary harm to take place is, intuitively, wrong.

One common proposed solution is that the West should recycle its e-waste and thus bear the cost of its technology luxury. This addresses both of the moral concerns raised above. First, the West would be taking responsibility for its e-waste. Second, the recycling conditions in the West would be far safer for individuals and the environment.

Of course, this solution does raise another problem. The people outside the West who are involved in this recycling are obviously not doing it for their health or as a hobby. They are recycling the material in order to make a living. Thus, one irony is that recycling in the West would deny them the means by which they have been earning a living. While they would be protected from the harms of dangerous recycling, they would need to find another way to earn a living. Presumably these people chose recycling over something they regarded as even less desirable. Hence, they could well be worse off if the West were acting responsibly by recycling the e-waste.

A more ethical solution would be to establish properly equipped and regulated recycling plants in these countries- with the West bearing a portion of the costs. This practice would have three main virtues. First, the people of the West would be acting in a responsible manner by taking a role in dealing with the waste generated by their way of life. Second, the environment and individuals would be protected from the harms of unregulated and unsafe recycling practices. Third, a better source of income would be available to the local people, thus enabling at least some people to have a better life. The recycling would also save money in the West. For example, a PC built using recycled material would require 43% less energy and thus would be cheaper to make. Obviously, it could also be cheaper to buy-thus allowing Westerners to save money. Thus, e-waste could very well become an opportunity for doing what is right while also doing what is economically advantageous.