> On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 4:38 AM, Charles <hopil...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > There is a disgrace that comes with shredding and dismantling of old
> > computers that we fail to recognize.  Nearly all laptops and
> > notebooks, and most desktops dating back to the Pentium II, are still
> > useful tools for poor students in developing nations.

> > In fact, any computer than can connect to the Internet is a virtual
> > encyclopedia, and a valued commodity to poor and struggling students
> > in developing nations.

> There are organisations which do refurbish and distribute computers.
> Sometimes they are distributed to schools or people within the
> countries they come from.
> There are costs associated with shipping computers overseas.
> There are also concerns about sending older tech overseas in case it
> is seen as dumping
> into other nations. People do do it but are careful about doing it well.

> I think saying that a whole sector is a national disgrace, and not
> being specific about which nation
> is a pretty broad brush. If your interest is in finding groups which
> do recycle you could
> perhaps ask a question rather than posting a criticism.

> Janet

> Computer Recycling Industry:  A National Disgrace

> Industrialized nations are experiencing a global slowdown while
> thousands become unemployed daily. Many newly unemployed are skilled
> technical workers, with the majority having used a personal computer
> at work.

> These workstations will become idle, along with millions of others,
> and will soon be considered obsolete.  Their ultimate destination will
> be the e-waste recycling bin, to be dismantled or shredded.

> There is a disgrace that comes with shredding and dismantling of old
> computers that we fail to recognize.  Nearly all laptops and
> notebooks, and most desktops dating back to the Pentium II, are still
> useful tools for poor students in developing nations.

> In fact, any computer than can connect to the Internet is a virtual
> encyclopedia, and a valued commodity to poor and struggling students
> in developing nations.

> Computers which we consider obsolete, along with older CRT monitors
> which we consider toxic, are being reconditioned to bring prices
> upward of $200 (USD) each in developing nations.

> Why then, in the United States and other developed nations, are these
> computers being shredded, and their basic components melted down and
> recycled?

> Computer service technicians in developed nations prefer to work with
> new equipment, often refusing to repair or refurbish anything more
> than a few years old.

> It is more cost effective to destroy a used computer than to
> recondition and ship it where it is needed for education. Once
> shipped, distribution procedures must be monitored
> for abuse.

> Assisting students in developing nations with our unwanted technology
> requires our time, expertise, and money. Recycling and reusing our old
> technology becomes a charitable service, more so than a concern for
> the the bottom line, or an environmental excuse.

> In the short run, it is more cost effective to destroy and recycle our
> used technology than to reuse it effectively, yet in the meantime,
> poor students in developing nations continue to struggle without the
> tools necessary for achievement in the global marketplace.

> --

> Charles DiBella lives and works in Phnom Penh, Cambodia, where he
> teaches young adults from extreme poverty. He is the founder and
> administrator of the Nonprofit Recycling and Reuse Network, a computer
> technology, and office equipment exchange network for schools,
> churches, and nonprofit organizations located at
> http://www.Recycles.Org