Environmental Audit Committee Oral Evidence

Walking into even a virtual evidence session for the Environmental Audit Committee (EAC) felt a little bit like a David and Goliath moment. The EAC exists to hold government to account on how policies and programmes contribute to environmental protection and sustainable development. Unlike other select committees, it cuts across government rather than being tied to one particular department and is all the more influential for that.  It was a fantastic surprise when we were asked to provide oral evidence to the inquiry on electronic waste and circular economy after having submitted written evidence last year. All the more so when we discovered we would appear alongside Amazon, Samsung, DixonsCarphone, Beko and Fairphone.

Recent outputs from EAC work have been the banning of microbeads in cosmetics, a greater focus on sustainable fashion and a need for large companies to report their carbon risk. Having an invitation to provide evidence to the committee is a privilege but also a huge responsibility. With a chance of helping drive real change, it was vital to be as accurate as possible… and as a 180 colleagues had a live link to the Parliamentary TV session (commencing at 15:48:20) it was very important to do right by them.   

E-waste, and solutions for reducing it, is an important issue, not just for Techbuyer but for most people I talk to outside of work. Many feel uncomfortable about the electronics piling up in their houses, irritated by how quickly devices can become obsolete, and concerned about how few answers there are for processing the waste. There is growing public awareness of the rare materials that electronics contain, and how ill equipped we are to recover these effectively.  

Circular solutions to e-waste

So much of our lives are reliant on technology and digital connection, that it is difficult to see a way out of the mountain of waste our lives create. Collection of large and small electronic items is problematic and the science on recycling complex micro-manufactured products needs improving. Policy makers are looking towards the circular economy as a solution – reusing and redeploying where possible, designing for disassembly and improving recycling technologies at end of life.

Mapping the new normal

The past few months have taught us that digital devices can function as a kind of back-up power for our society. We have proved it is possible to continue working, educating our children and keeping in touch with friends and family using interconnected computers and other devices. It is a lower grade substitute for some of these functions, but at the same time offers unexpected benefits like time, cleaner air and reinvigorated wildlife. However, if the cost of that connectivity is piles of waste products and depleted mines worldwide, then we have a problem.

Electronics production, use and waste processing spans the entire world. Mapping it is a challenging process but one that could provide real value globally. In general, raw materials flow in from the developing world, are used by the developed world and then return to the developing world at end of life. Production and destruction processes are often polluting, meaning that the journey from mine to waste is a net negative environmentally and socially. The issue is large enough for individuals to feel but far too big for them to solve alone. Finding better circular solutions in the UK would have positive effects abroad too.

As a successful UK company in the refurbishment sector, part of our contribution was demonstrating that refurbishment is a viable business model. A lot of circular economy discussion can be abstract, so showing how product life extension works in the real world is useful. Coming from a sector that facilitates reuse and redeployment, we could also provide insight into why more organisations do not sell to, or buy from, the secondary market.

Bringing reuse into the mainstream

Many of the barriers to reuse are around perceived risk, often in quite an abstract way. Our return rates sit somewhere between 0.4-0.8%, slightly lower than those of manufacturers. Research carried out by the University of East London and Techbuyer demonstrates refurbished products perform as well as new on energy draw and compute power (and can even out-perform with the correct component level upgrades). Despite this, the choice of refurbished equipment is outside of the mainstream. The choice to do something different is seen as a roll of the dice.

For this reason, we suggested policy makers could structure regulation to force organisations to consider refurbished and recycled alternatives to new. This could be as simple as having a declaration attached to tenders stipulating why new equipment must be used in this particular case. In a similar way to the modern slavery declarations, this would not be difficult for organisations to create. The act of writing it would force them to consider other options, and justify why they are not considering them.

Techbuyer’s contribution slotted into a far wider conversation, which covered extended producer responsibility, waste collection models and procedures, consumer take back schemes, accountability and transparency. Taken as a whole, this will hopefully lead to very positive change in the UK, which we will look forward to hearing more on. Another ongoing inquiry is on Greening the post-Covid recovery. The committee is seeking evidence until the 14^th August and we would encourage organisations large and small to have their say.    

Techbuyer is a sustainable IT solutions specialist. Starting with just two people in Harrogate, UK in 2005, the company has grown to become a global supplier with seven sites across Europe, the US and Asia Pacific. Find out more about our sustainable projects and research here, or take a look at our refurbished IT equipment.