Meet Ismail Oyekan, Founder, Electronic Waste Journal & International Electronics Recycling Conference & Expo (IERCE)

Posted on January 21, 2010 by admin

The Electronic Waste journal will periodically interview dynamic personalities, businesses and organizations making news in the electronics waste management industry. Anna Gonzales, a staff writer with the E-waste journal interviewed E-waste journal Publisher and Program Director of the International Electronics Recycling Conference & Expo, Mr Ismail Oyekan in Los Angeles, California. Here are some excerpts from the conversation:

E-waste Journal: Ismail, thank you for your time. Now moving ahead, what is the International Electronics Recycling Conference & Expo?

Ismail: The International Electronics Recycling Conference & Expo (IERCE) is an annual informative and networking event for individuals, environmental organizations or any business involved in electronics waste management. In October 2009, we held our first event in Los Angeles California and had a follow up event last year in San Francisco. More than a thousand people from over 20 nations attended both events . What’s impressive is we are just getting started. I believe this demonstrates that we are in a fast emerging industry where businesses cherish the opportunity to network, learn and display their products and services. That is also the motivation behind the launch of our new magazine; electronic waste journal.

E-waste Journal: What is the climate of the electronics waste management industry?

Ismail: The electronics waste management industry is a derivative of the $52 billion dollar waste industry. As we all grow more dependent on computers, cellular phones and information technology assets we will certainly generate more e-waste. Electronic waste is now the fastest growing waste stream in developed nations and the issue of electronic waste containing toxins and been dumped in nations where there are no facilities to process this waste stream is well documented. More than 20 states have now introduced some form of legislature to combat e-waste. National laws are in development and more businesses are realizing the social and environmental benefits of proper e-waste management. There are more players in this rather new industry and the industry itself is introducing new standards. Also commodities such as copper, silver and gold are rising in value which is a contributing factor to the increase in the rates of recycled electronic waste.

E-waste Journal: Is the United States behind Europe when it comes to electronics waste management?

Ismail: When you look at the technology, legislature and recycling activity, I’m afraid the answer is “yes”, the Unites States is behind. However, I believe the tide is changing and the public, business sector, government and academia are more interested in sustainability here than say 5 years ago. The “green revolution” is not a fad or a trend. More municipalities, telecom service providers and electronics manufacturers are looking for ways to reduce their carbon footprint & save costs. In return, OEM manufacturers are using less resources and toxins such as lead and mercury in the design of their products. More electronics manufacturers, retailers and end users are also taking responsibility for the proper disposal of their surplus, defective & end of life electronics assets. There is a growing awareness & more publicity about the environmental impacts of e-waste thanks to NGO’s like Basel Action Network and Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition’s investigative reports. These are all positive trends.

E-waste Journal: Tell us about the new standards been introduced to electronics recyclers?

Ismail: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and other stakeholders introduced a new standard called the R2 and a Seattle based environmental watchdog group, Basel Action Network (BAN) also recently introduced a competiting standard known as the e-stewards program. These new standards are much welcomed by the electronics recycling community, although there is a lot of misinformation and confusion about their differences. An “ISO 14001 Environmental Management System Certification” is the International standard but these newly introduced standards include export guidelines, safety and continuous reviews by 3rd party auditors to ensure compliance. I believe an ISO 14001, e-stewards or R2 certification, gives a recycler tremendous credibility, saves costs and is also a huge marketing advantage over competitors. Currently less than 25% of the approximate 700 electronic collectors and recyclers participating in the California SB-20/SB-50 program have any certification. This will change because the industry is becoming more regulated and certification which is currently voluntary will obviously become a necessity in the coming months and years. Our intent is to keep our readers informed on the certification process and newest developments.

E-waste Journal: How long is the ISO certification process and what are the costs and benefits?

Ismail: The costs are quite high, but the great news is we are developing relationships with the best consultants, registrars and auditors in the Industry which will result in savings of up to 70% for any interested electronics recycler or OEM manufacturer in regards to ISO:9001 & ISO:14001. The process will also take less time to achieve certification and produce a significant return on investment. The leaders in this industry are ISO:14001 certified. Any business entity with ISO certification, has more credibility and therefore will earn more business from municipalities, OEM manufacturers and large enterprises. Historically, in the event of a violation, regulators will fine you less if you have a documented environmental management system(ISO:14001) in place. Most importantly, the process is designed to save costs while minimizing the environmental impacts of your recycling process. More OEM manufacturers, large businesses and municipalities are requiring recycling vendors to attain certification as part of a green supply chain and transparent downstream processing, making certification a necessity. This trend is expected to continue and will become the norm within the e-waste management industry.

E-waste Journal: What is in the works for you? When is the next International Electronics Recycling Conference & Expo (IERCE)?

Ismail: The 3rd IERCE event will be held, May 2011 in Las Vegas, Nevada. We are expecting more than 90 exhibitors and at least 800 participants. We will keep providing a much needed interactive platform for presentations and discussions by leaders and visionaries in this industry. Our last event had more than 40 speakers, 600 attendees and 65 exhibitors. Of course, we just launched our new publication, the electronic-waste journal which is a much needed educational and marketing platform for industry stakeholders. Thankfully, we are quite busy.

E-waste Journal: What new trends have you observed within the electronics waste management industry?

Ismail: I’ve been involved with electronics waste management in some capacity or form for the past decade. There are certainly more players now than a decade ago. The new standards are much needed and overall the industry is very receptive to certification and regulation. More electronics recyclers are investing in software and technology to improve their yields, increase worker safety and generally most electronics recyclers are making a rebound from the harsh economic climate a few years ago. Manufacturers are also taking more responsibility due to legislative requirements. More manufacturers are realizing the economic and environmental benefits in reusing what was previously considered end of life assets, so they are developing innovative take-back schemes. A great example is the wireless-handset industry. Many non-profits, schools and churches are now using e-waste collection as a unique fundraising tool. The industry is vibrant and booming and I’m extremely happy to be a witness and part of the growth.

E-waste Journal: What is the role of Government in electronics recycling?

Ismail: The Government plays a crucial role in the management of e-waste and recycling generally. Awareness and education are important as well as regulation and enforcement of recycling laws. The United States, should also reconsider signing the Basel Convention, a pledge which bans the export of electronics waste. At the same time we have to have practical laws in place that allow for the monitored exportation of valuable commodities to markets that have a strong demand for them without harming the environment. In California, New York and a growing number of states, legislation including the cell phone recycling act and the ban on dumping electronic waste have increased recycling activities while protecting the environment. The Obama administration should really consider introducing a nationwide ban on electronics waste dumping, like we have here in California. It saves the environment and creates thousands of green jobs.

E-waste Journal: What do you expect in the next few years?

Ismail: I expect electronics recycling rates and activities to keep rising domestically and globally. There will be more electronics waste, but hopefully there will be more electronics resellers, repair facilities and recyclers to prevent this waste stream from ending up in landfills. We also expect emerging markets & nations such as Nigeria, Pakistan, India and China to have more local recycling facilities. The United States and Europe export and dump most of our electronics waste in these nations that lack the facilities to process e-waste. In my opinion, this is the biggest challenge and opportunity for the industry. The volume of electronics waste generated internally in these developing nations are growing exponentially. They also need environmentally friendly solutions for the disposal of their retired, defective and obsolete e-waste. We also expect electronics manufacturers to design products that are more sustainable, use less toxins and are easier to recycle. It’s a work in progress, but I remain optimistic about us as an industry in reaching these goals.

California Integrated Waste Management Board Honors 250 Businesses That Reduce Waste Sent To Landfills

Posted on December 1, 2009 by admin

The California Integrated Waste Management Board on Monday honored more than 250 businesses and nonprofit organizations for efforts to reduce the amount of waste sent to landfills.

Winners in the state’s Waste Reduction Awards Program ranged from tech giants Hewlett-Packard Co, Intel Corp and NEC Electronics America Inc. Hewlett-Packard’s Roseville campus now diverts 91 percent of its waste material, from recycling cardboard and paper products to reusing bubble wrap. NEC’s manufacturing plant, also in Roseville, last year diverted 82 percent of its solid waste, raising $430,625 in recycling revenue for the company.

Driven by aggressive state mandates, recycling has become a major industry in California. The sector employs 85,000 and produces $10 billion in goods and services annually, according to the waste board.

To make the list of recycling honorees, a company must demonstrate an annual improvement in its waste-reduction practices, according to Beatriz Sandoval, a spokeswoman for the Integrated Waste Management Board.

The agency has been publishing the list since 1993. Because of the breadth of industries represented, there are no set standards for qualifying, Sandoval said. Nearly every company submitting documentation to the agency wins an award.

Nokia Files Lawsuit Complaint Against 11 LCD Manufacturers In San Francisco Court. Alleges Price Fixing

Posted on December 1, 2009 by admin

Nokia Corp. is suing 11 companies and a number of their units in the U.S., alleging they colluded to fix prices on liquid crystal displays.

Nokia’s suit comes as the LCD industry begins to emerge from a long downturn that had led to weak panel prices. LCDs are used in screens for mobile phones, personal computers and televisions.

The Finnish mobile handset giant alleges in the complaint—filed Nov. 25 with the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California in San Francisco—that the companies raised “the price of LCDs above the price that would have prevailed in a competitive market” from at least Jan. 1, 1996 through Dec. 11, 2006.

Nokia said it purchased LCDs from the companies and then incorporated them into its mobile wireless handsets.

Three of the LCD makers accused in the suit said Tuesday they hadn’t received any documents from the U.S. court, three others said they were looking into the matter, two declined to comment and the rest couldn’t be reached for comment.

Nokia spokesman Mark Durrant said his company also filed related complaints in the U.K., against makers of LCDs and cathode ray tubes, which are used in older televisions.

Nokia believes it has a strong position in the case because there is no doubt that price fixing has been going on, Mr. Durrant said, though he declined to say how much money could be involved.

Mr. Durrant said it could take a few years to reach a settlement in court, but added that his company is interested in discussing compensation outside of the court system.

Analysts said legal battles take a while to settle so the suit won’t likely have an immediate impact on the LCD makers, though they said the companies may need to set aside provisions from their earnings in the longer term.

The complaint against the group of companies—which includes AU Optronics Corp., Chunghwa Picture Tubes Ltd., Samsung Electronics Co., Sharp Corp. and LG Display Co.—is the latest in a string of accusations of price fixing in the LCD industry.

AT&T Corp. alleged in a suit filed in October in U.S. District Court in San Francisco that AU Optronics, LG Display, Samsung Electronics and other LCD makers were involved in a “long-running conspiracy” from January 1996 to December 2006 to fix prices of LCD panels.

That complaint, filed by AT&T and its BellSouth and Pacific Bell units, Southwestern Bell Telephone Co. and others, alleged the LCD makers formed an international cartel to illegally restrict competition in the U.S. for LCD panels.

Nokia’s complaint also comes about a year after the U.S. Justice Department fined several LCD makers for price fixing.

Sharp, Chunghwa and LG Display agreed in November 2008 to plead guilty to the U.S. charges of price fixing in the LCD market from as early as April 2001 to December 2006. The companies paid $585 million in criminal fines.

Samsung Electronics, the world’s largest LCD maker, wasn’t cited in the Justice Department’s decision but it cooperated with U.S. investigators in the probe, people close to the case said. The probe into the LCD industry became public in 2006.

The European Commission in May 2009 sent formal charges to a number of companies supplying LCDs on suspicion that they have operated a cartel. The commission didn’t name the companies at the time but in July, Philips Electronics N.V. confirmed it received cartel charges from the European Commission alleging price fixing.

Other companies named in Nokia’s suit include Philips Electronics, Tatung Co., Seiko EpsonCorp., Samsung SDI Co., Hitachi Displays Ltd. and Toshiba Corp.

Hitachi Displays agreed in March to plead guilty to the U.S. Justice Department’s price-fixing charges and paid a $31 million fine. Hitachi isn’t a defendant in the AT&T case.

“Nokia suffered damages as a result…and is entitled to treble damages and injunctive relief to remedy these injuries,” Nokia said in its complaint.

Chunghwa Picture Tubes deputy spokesman Wilbur Chien said Tuesday his company hasn’t received any court documents and declined to comment further on the Nokia case. Freda Lee, a spokeswoman for AU Optronics, also said the company hasn’t received any court documents from the U.S.

A Tatung investor relations official also said the company hasn’t received any official documents from the court.

Toshiba spokesman Keisuke Ohmori declined to comment. Samsung Electronics also declined to comment.

Officials at Seiko Epson, Samsung SDI and LG Display said they were looking into the matter, while officials at Sharp, Hitachi, and Philips, weren’t immediately available for comment.

Huge Marketing Budget Drives Motorola Droid Sales. Expects to Sell 1 Million Units In 2009.

Posted on December 1, 2009 by admin

Motorola’s and Verizon Wireless’ $100 million marketing campaign for the Motorola Droid seems to be paying off with strong sales that will likely result in more than 1 million devices being sold by the end of the year.

The Droid, the only smartphone currently on the market that uses Google Android‘s 2.0 operating system, is Motorola’s second Android device and it’s available only on Verizon Wireless’s network. The device is turning out to be the hit phone of the season, thanks in large part to an expensive and extensive advertising campaign.

Motorola Droid

(Credit: Motorola)

Neither company is reporting sales figures. But analysts say sales look good. The companies have likely sold between 700,000 and 800,000 Droids since the device was launched in early November, according to equity analyst Mark Sue of RBC Capital Markets.

“Verizon’s big marketing push for the Droid is strengthening as we close in on the holidays, and following our round of checks, we believe about 700,000 to 800,000 Droids have been sold, making our hurdle of 1 [million] Motorola Droids achievable for 4Q09 [ending December 31],” Sue said in his research note. “Motorola, for its part, has done a good job on the production side, and our survey of over 100 stores indicates strong demand, limited stock outs, and very few returns.”

John Stratton, executive vice president and chief marketing officer for Verizon Wireless, said when the device was launched in late October that Verizon would be pouring in more money to market this device than any other phone it has ever sold. And now it looks like the money has been well spent. From advertisements that specificallyhighlight the Droid to ones that focus on Verizon’s extensive and reliable 3G wireless network, it’s clear that the company has AT&T and the Apple iPhone in its crosshairs.

AT&T has actually sued Verizon over the advertisements about its 3G wireless network coverage.

Some Verizon Wireless stores, especially in major cities, are selling between 100 and 200 Droids per week since the launch in early November, Sue added.

The success of the Droid is good news both for Motorola and for Verizon Wireless.

Motorola comeback
For Motorola, the Droid represents a chance to make a comeback in the cell phone market. The iconic American company that practically invented the cell phone market has struggled for the past several years now. After the runaway success of the ultra-thin Motorola Razr in 2004, the company has been unable to come up with a hit phone. And it has steadily lost market share to other competitors, such as Nokia, Samsung, and LG Electronics. It’s also ceded market share in the fastest growing segment of the market, smartphones, to newcomers like Apple and Research In Motion.

Motorola’s mobile devices CEO Sanjay Jha took a bold gamble more than a year ago when he decided to dedicate the company’s resources to building phones using the Google Android operating system. The Droid and theMotorola Cliq, which is exclusively sold on T-Mobile USA’s network, are the first two Motorola Android phones to hit the market.

But Jha said the Google Android operating system will not only be used in high-end devices like the Droid, but it will also be used to power less expensive phones, creating a new tier of smartphones that will eventually replace the basic feature phone category. Jha said the company will launch at least 20 more Android devices in 2010.

The success of the Droid is an important first step in getting Motorola back on track. But equity analyst Ittai Kidron of Oppenheimer said in a research note Monday that sales of the Motorola Cliq are falling short of expectations. Motorola is expected to sell 1.5 million smartphones in the fourth quarter. And two-thirds of them are expected to be Droids.

Kidron said the Cliq is not selling well mostly because of issues with battery life. Motorola is supposedly preparing a software patch to fix the problem. But he also noted that T-Mobile appears to be losing interest in the device and is not marketing it heavily.

But T-Mobile says that the Cliq is doing just fine. And the carrier said that it’s committed to marketing the phone through the holiday season.

“The Motorola Cliq is very popular among our highly connected customers and is the only device with Motorola’s innovative Motoblur solution,” a company spokesman said. “T-Mobile is excited about the Motorola Cliq for the holidays and continues to showcase it prominently in T-Mobile retail stores and with recent holiday deals.”

Verizon’s iPhone alternative
The Droid’s success is also important to Verizon Wireless, the nation’s largest wireless operator in the country. It is the first device that offers a true challenge to Apple’s iPhone, which runs exclusively in the U.S. on AT&T’s network. While Verizon has a strong reputation for its network, consumers often complain about its lack of cool phones. Up to this point, Verizon has mainly competed against AT&T and the iPhone with RIM’s BlackBerry devices. But RIM’s touch-screen BlackBerry Storm, which was first introduced a year ago, was largely a disappointment.

The Droid offers Verizon customers an alternative to the iPhone on the Verizon network. This fact could help Verizon retain some consumers who were thinking of leaving for the iPhone. But it might also attract new customers who are either disappointed with AT&T’s service or have heard bad things about the network.

Verizon Wireless representatives say the Droid is certainly an important part of the company’s device line-up.

“We are pleased with sales over the holiday weekend,” Brenda Raney, a spokeswoman for the carrier said in an e-mail. “This phone clearly fits the needs of a number of customers who are excited about its availability on the Verizon Wireless network.”

But if analyst data is to be trusted, it is clear that the huge marketing budget for the Droid is at least part of the reason why the device has been so successful. The HTC Droid Eris, another Android device sold exclusively on Verizon’s network, is not selling as well as the Droid, Sue said in his note. The HTC Droid Eris went on sale the same day the Droid was launched, but with much less fanfare.

Part of the problem is the fact that there are many Android devices coming to market. And the number will only increase next year. The lesson from the success of the Motorola Droid is clear. If device makers and carriers hope for break-out success, then they will have to spend big on marketing.