New Gadgets This Christmas? Here's How to Make Sure Your Old Ones Aren't Hurting the Environment

http://www.newsweek.com/did-you-get-new-gadget-holiday-season-you-may-be-hurting-environment-294729
BY LAUREN WALKER


n employee arranges discarded computers at a newly opened electronic waste recycling factory in Wuhan, Hubei province. STRINGER/ REUTERS

Did you receive new gadgets this Christmas? If so, you probably aren’t paying much attention to your old ones. But failing to dispose of old electronics properly can have lasting negative impacts on the environment, public health and even data security. 

According to the EPA, the U.S. generated nearly 3.5 million tons of electronic waste (e-waste) in 2012. Among those items, Americans recycled 40 percent of computers, 17 percent of televisions and 10 percent of cellphones. So, what happened to the rest of the outdated devices?

Some people (possibly yourself included) let old electronics collect dust in their homes, or handed them off to family or friends to use. But a large portion of e-waste ultimately winds up in landfills, which can have devastating affects. 

Try Newsweek for only $1.25 per week 

Many electronics contain toxic materials such as lead, arsenic, beryllium and mercury. If these materials seep into the ecosystem they can harm plant, animal and human life. People are exposed to mercury, for instance, almost entirely by eating contaminated fish or wildlife, with unborn children being the population most at risk. If a pregnant woman ingests enough mercury, her child can experience neurological development issues. 

Lead exposure can also cause developmental issues. While lead poisoning is usually associated with lead-based paint, one can also be exposed to the substance through contaminated air, water and soil. Such exposure can be particularly damaging for the mental and physical development of children under six years old. 

Improper disposal of e-waste can also pose a risk to your data security; any information that has not been wiped from a device can usually be extracted with ease.

The Consumer Electronics Association predicts that this holiday season will see the highest levels of spending on electronics—a record $33.76 billion, up 2.5 percent from the previous year. This also means that the generation of e-waste will likely hit record highs as well. 

E-waste recyclers offer one way to respond to this problem. You can drop off your used electronics at many large retailers like Best Buy, Home Depot and Staples, many of which have in-store collection boxes managed by Call2Recycle. According to the company, their collection boxes exist within 10 miles of 89 percent of North American consumers.

The EPA provides tips on reducing and recyling e-waste, and has a list of state and regional e-waste recycling programs.

Other recyclers, like Electronic Recyclers International (ERI), serve larger generators of e-waste, like cities and corporations. John Shegerian, CEO and co-founder of ERI told Newsweek that when his company launched in April of 2005, it recycled 10,000 pounds of e-waste its first month. In October, Shegerian says ERI recycled nearly 25 million pounds.

So this gift-giving season, enjoy your new toys, you deserve it. But be mindful of what you do with your old ones, too.

Building green costs more and takes patience

http://www.haaretz.com/business/real-estate/.premium-1.633820
By Israel Fisher


Photo by Eyal Toueg

Living the green life sounds great. Lower electricity bills, insulation from heat, cold and noise too. So why is the demand for green housing so small?

Opponents claim the high construction costs make the end-game uneconomical for homeowners hoping to save earlier, not later. The Israel Green Building Council rejects that argument, however, pointing to an ILGBC report on the costs of green building as proof that green construction in Israel costs just 2 to 4 percent more than ordinary construction.


Still, with the average price of housing in Israel (the average of all dwellings sold in a period of time) higher than 1.3 million shekels ($332,000,) even that minimal addition adds almost 30,000 shekels to the price. It takes years for the return on the added investment in terms of saving on electricity to trickle in.

“Research has shown that green construction according to the standard added 2 to 4 percent to construction costs, and these were the first buildings to be built according to the standard,” says Hilla Beinish, director-general of the Israel green Building Council (ILGBC.) With 120 green buildings already erected in Israel, experience has been gained, she says; the builders know what they’re doing, know the technologies and costs are dropping. Australia has managed to even out the costs of green and ordinary construction, she adds.

To understand the issue of cost, let’s understand what green building involves.

The Israeli standard for green building was issued in 2005 and amended in 2011. Today, its demands encompass energy economy, land management, waste, water, transportation, health and welfare, construction materials, innovation and construction site management. The bottom line is that green construction is supposed to economize on energy and water, and use more environmentally-friendly materials.

In the past, any building that met the green building standard was rated “pass” or “outstanding”. Today the buildings are rated by stars, and a building that doesn’t pass 55 points in the Standards Institute rating doesn’t get even one star and is not recognized as green.

“Green building is mainly an issue of the construction materials,” says Dalia Rosenzweig, a partner in ESD (Environmental Survivability Development,) which was a partner in a project in Karkur four years ago. Built by Shikun & Binui, it was one of the first green projects in Israel. “They used materials that met the green standard, built combined systems that save energy and reduce lime buildup (calcification in pipelines because of hard water) and provided solar systems for all the stories, even though the law demands them only for the top floors.”

ESD CEO Shmulik Lifshin says the process starts with a company deciding that it wants to plan green construction, and instructing its planners to find out what that requires. In Karkur, that included all the architectural aspects, including things such as shading.

In the space between the Karkur buildings, one feels a breeze that one doesn’t feel in open space. “We analyzed the main wind direction and positioned the openings and their size accordingly,” Lifshin explains, demonstrating how the windows in the apartments were adapted to make the apartments cooler. “The windows are planned so the sun doesn’t penetrate in the summer, making the climate inside the building more comfortable, with good ventilation and better lighting. The size of the window openings is also different from ordinary construction.”

“We were also involved in planning the city master plan before getting into the planning stage of each building,” says Rosenzweig. “The buildings aren’t in a straight line but in a receding one, to create a breeze in the garden. Each apartment has three fronts, as opposed to buildings with four apartments per floor and two fronts per floor. More fronts enables better ventilation and passive heating.”

Green building insulates, passively reducing the differences between hot and cold, says Lifshin. “The green building standard took the original insulation standard and upgraded it.”

The two are proud that a cross-section of walls in the Karkur project shows they’re much thicker than in ordinary construction: 35.5 centimeters, compared with 26.5cm in standard construction. In other words, the contractors undertook extra costs for the sake of insulation. Everyone building green now adheres to the strict standard, Lifshin claims.

TheMarker: If it demands more from the builder, how is the cost difference so low?

“It doesn’t necessarily demand more, just proper planning,” says Beinish. “If you locate a building at a certain place, you get a shading effect.” With correct passive planning, the right position and shading, the building can be better suited to the environment, she says. That’s one thing. The second is technological and insulation systems that indeed can jack up construction costs to a degree, she adds.

TheMarker: But the builder is building a thicker wall with more material, which increases the cost.

“Yes and no,” Beinish says. “You can invest in a façade that costs more but doesn’t provide better insulation. Green building means higher quality building. You invest in insulation and in better materials. There are places where it will cost more and places where that isn’t necessarily true.”

TheMarker: How much of the extra cost gets passed on to the homebuyer?

Lifshin: “As far as we know, these apartments are not more expensive. The contractors absorbed the costs.”

According to a study on green building in projects in Nes Ziona and Netanya by Dr David Katz and Hagai Kot of Haifa University, the additional cost ranged from 2.1 to 4.1 percent, mostly on components to improve energy efficiency and other systems.

After planning, the Israel Standards Board steps in, examining the plans at three stages. First it goes over the plans and determines if the building meets the standard at the level of planning. The contractor enters at the second stage, taking the Standards Board on a tour to examine the foundations. At the third stage, occupation, they check that all the elements are in place.”

“You look and say to yourself, that looks like any other project in Israel,” says Beinish. “But the residents feel the difference. They have more natural light and ventilation, less need to turn on the air conditioner.” Green building on a massive scale would ultimately have a significant environmental impact, she claims.

Figures from the ILGBC and Standards Board show they’re handling about 200 green projects, of which 35 were approved under the old standard from 2005; another 88 are under construction and 67 are in the planning stages. Of all the projects, 53 percent are residential, 23 percent office space, 20 percent private building (such as houses) and 4 percent are public building. The Standards Board supervises throughout the construction, sending representatives to the site to inspect.

Can a house be green?

The debate on green construction raises questions of broader scope. For instance, aren’t neighborhoods of single-family houses bad for the environment? If so, how can a house be defined as green?Meanwhile, despite the talk about energy economy, the Israeli consumer is in no rush to invest in green building. “Unfortunately, we aren’t seeing any change in demand,” admits Beinish. Surveys show the public smiles on green building and understands its importance but in practice, isn’t choosing to pay more for it.

At least awareness has grown, she says, partly because a forum of 15 big Israeli cities has been gradually adopting the green building standard. At first it was applied to buildings with more than 30 stories, then that dropped to 15. “We are seeing more projects in the direction of green building and more new neighborhoods, like those going up in Yavne, Yokneam or Ofakim, which are taking an interest in it; or in Dimona, which wants this kind of building.”

TheMarker: But the trend has to be led from the top.

“I think the reality in the real estate market does not allow the issue to be debated genuinely and widely, because all anybody’s talking about is housing prices and how to lower them, so the issue of green building got shunted aside.”

Still, the ILGBC is optimistic, noting corporate research on creating a better-insulating brick, or better solar systems. The solar water heater can be adjusted according to the number of dwellers and their average shower time, saving a lot of energy, Beinish says.

If the authorities were to promote green projects in poor areas, and make existing buildings “green,” the savings on energy would go to those who truly need it, says Lifshin. The problem is that these residents can’t pay for renovation of their buildings or handle the maintenance costs of the new, more sophisticated systems.

One couple shares its satisfaction with their life in a green building. Ortal Hakimi, a resident in the Karkur project, says she didn’t understand what green building meant until she moved in. “I have a friend who lives in the Naveh area of Pardes Hana and she tells me, ‘when I come to your home, it’s really pleasant and calm.’ It’s true. There’s something very calm in this building. You don’t hear the neighbors. That’s great.”

Her husband, Shimi Hakimi, says they’ve been there for three years now and feel it in their electricity bills. “We turn on lights less, we hardly use our air conditioning, because it’s really pleasant here in both summer and winter. It’s insulated at a level I never knew before. Most of the apartments here had central air conditioning put in, but we said we’d just have one for the living room and see how it went. And we hardly ever turn it on.”

Asked for details, Hakimi says he’s saving 200 shekels a month compared with his last apartment, but isn’t sure it’s all because of the green building. Even if it is, it will take 15 years of cheaper electricity bills to return the investment in the construction cost. One can understand the Israeli consumer who wants to save here and now, certainly when making the biggest investment of his life.

Old laptop batteries could power slums, IBM says

http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-30345221
By Dave Lee


About 400 million people in India are off grid, and use other sources to get power

Old laptop batteries still have enough life in them to power homes in slums, researchers have said.

An IBM study analysed a sample of discarded batteries and found 70% had enough power to keep an LED light on more than four hours a day for a year.

Researchers said using discarded batteries is cheaper than existing power options, and also helps deal with the mounting e-waste problem.

The concept was trialled in the Indian city of Bangalore this year.

The adapted power packs are expected to prove popular with street vendors, who are not on the electric grid, as well as poor families living in slums.

The research, which comes from IBM's India-based research team, will be discussed at a conference in San Jose, California, according toTechnology Review from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Cheap

The IBM team created what they called an UrJar - a device that uses lithium-ion cells from the old batteries to power low-energy DC devices, such as a light.

The researchers are aiming to help the approximately 400 million people in India who are off grid.


The UrJar uses lithium-ion cells from the old batteries to power low-energy DC devices

Options such as solar power are considerably more expensive and logistically more cumbersome at the moment.

If the UrJar, which would last a year, is made in sufficiently large volume, researchers estimate the price per unit at just 600 rupees (about £7)

They conclude: "UrJar has the potential to channel e-waste towards the alleviation of energy poverty, thus simultaneously providing a sustainable solution for both problems."

Feedback from the trial was positive, the team said. Among the improvements suggested by users was a call for rat-resistant wires.

Urgent

E-waste is a major problem, particularly in the developing world, where the majority of the West's unwanted technology ends up.

IBM's research said 142,000 computers are thrown away in the US daily - around 50 million a year.

India's predicament is particularly urgent. Not only does the country receive a lot of e-waste from other countries, but with a booming IT market it is also generating huge amounts of its own - around 32 tonnes a day, according to one estimate.

Computer Aid, a UK-based charity that redistributes unwanted old technology, welcomed the initiative.

"We think that this is an excellent initiative as it is in line with our practice of reusing and refurbishing rather than recycling," said Keith Sonnet, its chief executive.

"Refurbishing has definitely a more positive impact on the environment and we should encourage more companies to adopt this practice."

Scaling Up Climate Action – Starting Now

http://blogs.worldbank.org/climatechange/scaling-climate-action-starting-now?cid=EXT_TWBN_D_EXT&hootPostID=f65f908dd2bb8efd827ccf439965effa

RACHEL KYTE


COP20 Opening Session - UNFCCC Photo

Over the next few months, governments worldwide will be preparing their national contributions to our collective need to combat climate change. These plans will form the foundation of a new international climate agreement to be agreed in Paris in one year’s time. Collective ambition matters now more than ever. We all have a responsibility to make the choices that will lower the risks created by decades of greenhouse gas emissions and usher in an era of job-rich, more-inclusive, cleaner economic development.

Scientists have provided us with a remarkable consensus. We believe that with this evidence, we have the strong foundation for action. That’s good news, because climate action has to scale up now.

This week and next at the UN climate negotiations in Lima (COP20), there is a sense that gridlock may be easing. The U.S. and China – the world's two largest emitters – set a strong pace last month when Presidents Barack Obama and Xi Jinping stood together and jointly announced their top-line commitments for cutting emissions. Their pledges, along with commitments from the European Union and donor support for the Green Climate Fund, auger well for the Lima talks. But this was always billed as the finance COP, and how we finance the transition to deep decarbonization and lasting resilience requires a coming together that has eluded us to date.

At the UN Secretary-General’s Climate Leadership Summit in September, the discussion of how we finance climate action saw private sector groups moving forward and a focus on a number of subnational initiatives. At the same time, a remarkable coalition of 74 countries and over 1,000 businesses came together around pricing carbon. This coalition is now focusing its work. It will bring companies and governments together to learn from existing carbon pricing structures and find effective ways to encourage sustainable business decisions. It will focus on how globally networked carbon markets can emerge and how to get prices right.

That’s why we will be talking at Lima about how to put the right economic drivers in place and what countries need to include in their national contributions. If demand is strong, prices will be robust and then finance can flow.

In this context, we will continue to support the Green Climate Fund and, together with our colleagues in the other multilateral development banks, offer ways to direct its initial capitalization of $9.7 billion into highly leveraged, impactful mitigation and adaptation action. We will be talking about our commitments to measure and report and build common criteria for how we use development finance and climate finance to aid in making climate finance flows more transparent and therefore increase trust.

We will agree that the evidence is clear that we need to mainstream resilience into development and that we need an injection of new development finance to meet the clear needs of the most vulnerable to climate change.

Landscapes Day at the COP will take place Dec. 6-7. We’re delighted that the broader land-use communities are coming together. If the goal is clearly to decarbonize by 2100, then the way we manage landscapes and the value we place on nature and ecosystems will need to shift and soar to the top of the agenda.

We believe government policies, planning, and business practices can help rein in deforestation and improve land management practices. At the World Bank Group, we are helping countries to change from business-as-usual land use to climate-smart development that integrates forestry and agriculture. Results-based payments that provide additional value to countries that successfully reduce deforestation and forest degradation offer promising lessons. The programs that support working in these areas need to be more streamlined and better coordinated if we are to move to scale. We are excited by the number of countries that are poised to move forward.

We’ll be talking about all of these action areas in Lima, and focusing all of our conversations on the impact on the poorest people. Every piece of research we commission or complete tells us we must start now to build resilience into all development decisions. 

Last week, we released the third report in the Turn Down the Heat series. The world is already 0.8°C above pre-industrial times, and we are seeing the impacts of climate change as glaciers disappear and extreme weather becomes more common. If we continue with business as usual, the studies suggest that today's teenagers will be left with a planet of more heat waves, droughts, rising sea levels, and loss of water and food security in many regions. It will impact their health, crops, and businesses, as well as livability. The costs will only continue to rise without action.

The evidence is sobering.

A few days ago, I was explaining the plot of the new movie Interstellar to my young son. After listening carefully to this tale of plundering of planet Earth, the failure of food systems and a space mission to find a hospitable environment in another galaxy, he turned to me and said, “so it wasn’t really science fiction then.” His reaction left me still.

We don’t have to get to the point of a dystopian world. There is a place for every country to start the transition to cleaner development, decisions that every policy maker can make, contributions that every country can make, and a collective responsibility to manage the global economy that global economic leaders need to assume now to spur momentum in the right direction.

​Rachel Kyte
World Bank Group Vice President & Special Envoy for Climate Change
www.worldbank.org/climate
Twitter: @rkyte365

Photo: COP20 opens in Lima, Peru. Credit: UNFCCC