A Hazardous Afterlife Analysis
Recycling Electronics
Electronic waste is defined as the term used to describe end-of-life or discarded devices using electricity. The majority of these devices contain toxins such as mercury, lead and cadmium, that can make their way into the earth once the device is discarded. According to “A Hazardous Afterlife”, an editorial written for the New York Times, recycling is the best option for disposing of electronic waste. Although this is the recommended way according to the article, many places such as Washington do not regulate recycling, and consequently, only 10 states have programs for recycling electronics as of 2008. The article forecasted that in 2010, consumers would no longer be allowed to throw electronics in the trash without …show more content…
By doing this, the author did not convince the reader about why recycling would be the best option for disposing of the waste. What the article also needed was reliable sources to support the argument that recycling was the best option. If the author would have had this in the article, the argument would have been much stronger, which would have helped convince the reader to recycle their old electronics. The article not only lacked in these areas, but it also lacked an opposing viewpoint. By introducing an opposing viewpoint, the author would have been able to clearly communicate why his or her point was correct and why the other was wrong. Instead, the author missed this opportunity, creating a need for the reader to independently research more about the topic. The bothersome part of this article was that the author did not even acknowledge the fact that there are plenty of other alternatives that could be more environmentally friendly than recycling. This made the author seem like he or she did not conduct enough research on the topic of recycling electronics, which made the article’s argument seem weak. Recycling may be a better solution versus simply tossing electronics in the trash, however, it is not the best way for disposing of …show more content…
Major phone companies usually take back old phones and distribute them to those in need, such as abuse victims or active duty soldiers in the military. These donated phones will be able to be used for emergencies only, and will only be allowed access to 911. This environmentally friendly option does not release any toxins like recycling does, and helps others in need. Sprint also offers the option to buy back phones from customers and gives credit for new ones. This convinces customers to sell them back, instead of dangerously recycling (Griffith). If more people committed to donating and selling back their electronics, the pollution that occurs during recycling would significantly
Electronic waste is defined as the term used to describe end-of-life or discarded devices using electricity. The majority of these devices contain toxins such as mercury, lead and cadmium, that can make their way into the earth once the device is discarded. According to “A Hazardous Afterlife”, an editorial written for the New York Times, recycling is the best option for disposing of electronic waste. Although this is the recommended way according to the article, many places such as Washington do not regulate recycling, and consequently, only 10 states have programs for recycling electronics as of 2008. The article forecasted that in 2010, consumers would no longer be allowed to throw electronics in the trash without …show more content…
By doing this, the author did not convince the reader about why recycling would be the best option for disposing of the waste. What the article also needed was reliable sources to support the argument that recycling was the best option. If the author would have had this in the article, the argument would have been much stronger, which would have helped convince the reader to recycle their old electronics. The article not only lacked in these areas, but it also lacked an opposing viewpoint. By introducing an opposing viewpoint, the author would have been able to clearly communicate why his or her point was correct and why the other was wrong. Instead, the author missed this opportunity, creating a need for the reader to independently research more about the topic. The bothersome part of this article was that the author did not even acknowledge the fact that there are plenty of other alternatives that could be more environmentally friendly than recycling. This made the author seem like he or she did not conduct enough research on the topic of recycling electronics, which made the article’s argument seem weak. Recycling may be a better solution versus simply tossing electronics in the trash, however, it is not the best way for disposing of …show more content…
Major phone companies usually take back old phones and distribute them to those in need, such as abuse victims or active duty soldiers in the military. These donated phones will be able to be used for emergencies only, and will only be allowed access to 911. This environmentally friendly option does not release any toxins like recycling does, and helps others in need. Sprint also offers the option to buy back phones from customers and gives credit for new ones. This convinces customers to sell them back, instead of dangerously recycling (Griffith). If more people committed to donating and selling back their electronics, the pollution that occurs during recycling would significantly