Diana Maria Ceballos1, Zhao Dong2. 1. Department of Environmental Health, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA. Electronic address: ceballos@hsph.harvard.edu. 2. Department of Environmental Health, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: E-waste includes electrical and electronic equipment discarded as waste without intent of reuse. Informal e-waste recycling, typically done in smaller, unorganized businesses, can expose workers and communities to serious chemical health hazards. It is unclear if formalization into larger, better-controlled electronics recycling (e-recycling) facilities solves environmental and occupational health problems. OBJECTIVES: To systematically review the literature on occupational and environmental health hazards of formal e-recycling facilities and discuss challenges and opportunities to strengthen research in this area. METHODS: We identified 37 publications from 4 electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Environmental Index, NIOSHTIC-2) specific to chemical exposures in formal e-recycling facilities. DISCUSSION: Environmental and occupational exposures depend on the degree of formalization of the facilities but further reduction is needed. Reported worker exposures to metals were often higher than recommended occupational guidelines. Levels of brominated flame-retardants in worker's inhaled air and biological samples were higher than those from reference groups. Air, dust, and soil concentrations of metals, brominated flame-retardants, dioxins, furans, polycyclic-aromatic hydrocarbons, or polychlorinated biphenyls found inside or near the facilities were generally higher than reference locations, suggesting transport into the environment. Children of a recycler had blood lead levels higher than public health recommended guidelines. CONCLUSIONS: With mounting e-waste, more workers, their family members, and communities could experience unhealthful exposures to metals and other chemicals. We identified research needs to further assess exposures, health, and improve controls. The long-term solution is manufacturing of electronics without harmful substances and easy-to-disassemble components.
BACKGROUND: E-waste includes electrical and electronic equipment discarded as waste without intent of reuse. Informal e-waste recycling, typically done in smaller, unorganized businesses, can expose workers and communities to serious chemical health hazards. It is unclear if formalization into larger, better-controlled electronics recycling (e-recycling) facilities solves environmental and occupational health problems. OBJECTIVES: To systematically review the literature on occupational and environmental health hazards of formal e-recycling facilities and discuss challenges and opportunities to strengthen research in this area. METHODS: We identified 37 publications from 4 electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Environmental Index, NIOSHTIC-2) specific to chemical exposures in formal e-recycling facilities. DISCUSSION: Environmental and occupational exposures depend on the degree of formalization of the facilities but further reduction is needed. Reported worker exposures to metals were often higher than recommended occupational guidelines. Levels of brominated flame-retardants in worker's inhaled air and biological samples were higher than those from reference groups. Air, dust, and soil concentrations of metals, brominated flame-retardants, dioxins, furans, polycyclic-aromatic hydrocarbons, or polychlorinated biphenyls found inside or near the facilities were generally higher than reference locations, suggesting transport into the environment. Children of a recycler had blood lead levels higher than public health recommended guidelines. CONCLUSIONS: With mounting e-waste, more workers, their family members, and communities could experience unhealthful exposures to metals and other chemicals. We identified research needs to further assess exposures, health, and improve controls. The long-term solution is manufacturing of electronics without harmful substances and easy-to-disassemble components.
Authors: Andrew Kalweit; Robert F Herrick; Michael A Flynn; John D Spengler; J Kofi Berko; Jonathan I Levy; Diana M Ceballos Journal: Ann Work Expo Health Date: 2020-03-10 Impact factor: 2.179
Authors: Zoey Laskaris; Stuart A Batterman; John Arko-Mensah; Bhramar Mukherjee; Julius N Fobil; Marie S O'Neill; Thomas G Robins Journal: Am J Ind Med Date: 2021-02-01 Impact factor: 2.214
Authors: Alana M W LeBrón; Ivy R Torres; Enrique Valencia; Miriam López Dominguez; Deyaneira Guadalupe Garcia-Sanchez; Michael D Logue; Jun Wu Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2019-03-24 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Diana M Ceballos; Daniel Côté; Bouchra Bakhiyi; Michael A Flynn; Joseph Zayed; Sabrina Gravel; Robert F Herrick; France Labrèche Journal: Am J Ind Med Date: 2020-08-26 Impact factor: 3.079
Authors: Jonathan D Yuen; Lisa C Shriver-Lake; Scott A Walper; Daniel Zabetakis; Joyce C Breger; David A Stenger Journal: Sensors (Basel) Date: 2020-04-06 Impact factor: 3.576
Authors: Richard Todd Niemeier; Pamela R D Williams; Alan Rossner; Jane E Clougherty; Glenn E Rice Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-08-31 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Paul T J Scheepers; Radu Corneliu Duca; Karen S Galea; Lode Godderis; Emilie Hardy; Lisbeth E Knudsen; Elizabeth Leese; Henriqueta Louro; Selma Mahiout; Sophie Ndaw; Katrien Poels; Simo P Porras; Maria J Silva; Ana Maria Tavares; Jelle Verdonck; Susana Viegas; Tiina Santonen Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-12-09 Impact factor: 3.390