talking point


Waste not, want not A


Askar Sheibani of Comtek argues that the government should encourage organisations to break away from wasteful business practices and use existing ICT equipment for longer.


s the dust starts to settle around the UK’s election, all eyes are on the new coalition as it begins to lay out its political agenda. Green issues have certainly taken centre stage – in a speech delivered whilst visiting


the Department for Energy and Climate Change (DECC), prime minister David Cameron outlined his commitment to driving the green economy, creating green jobs and fostering green growth. Given the media frenzy which surrounded this election, it’s good to see the government get its head down to the important business of crafting policy. However, whilst its commitment to green issues can’t be denied, one has to question whether enough is being done to really make a positive impact on the environment. Previous schemes and directives have tried to


address this problem time and again. Indeed, earlier this year, the Carbon Reduction Commitment (CRC) Energy Efficiency Scheme came into force for UK organisations using more than 6,000MWh per year of electricity, aiming to save at least four million tonnes of CO2 per year by 2020. Going even further back, the Waste Electrical and


Electronic Equipment (WEEE) Directive that became European law in 2003 set out collection, recycling and recovery targets for all types of electrical goods in a bid to cut down the amount of e-waste being generated across Europe.


The fundamental problem with both of these strategies is that they only address part of the problem. For whilst they might encourage businesses to improve their green credentials, they do so by promoting the replacement of legacy IT equipment with new ‘environmentally friendly’ models in order to meet the new emissions targets. Unfortunately, these new products are produced via


Do you agree or disagree with Askar’s views? If you have a comment to make on this or any other aspect of the network infrastructure industry contact Michael Crane on 01353 616117 or email michael@ terringtonltd.co.uk.


extremely energy intensive manufacturing processes. And so, while they may offer slight energy improvements during their operating lives, the vast carbon footprint generated during the manufacturing process will already have undermined any green benefits gained from either using or recycling the product. With a staggering average of one billion pieces of computer equipment disposed of on average each year*, it’s quite clear that something here needs to change. Key to this will be a series of incentives to encourage organisations to break away from wasteful business practices and use existing ICT equipment for longer. It’s a little known fact that repairing, rather than replacing legacy equipment can actually extend the life


12


of most products by as much as four times the stated lifespan. This not only makes it a more environmentally friendly approach than simply buying in new solutions, but also a more economical one too. So why do so many businesses still favour replacing


old equipment over repairing it? Well, for one thing, manufacturers certainly don’t make it easy for businesses to repair their existing kit. The continuous withdrawal of suppor t for legacy products drives demand for new models, and leaves many businesses backed into a corner when it comes to maintaining their ICT infrastructures. In addition to this, replacing one piece of equipment with a newer model can cause a whole host of compatibility issues. This, ultimately, forces companies to upgrade more than they might have budgeted for. Despite the stigma surrounding repaired and


refurbished products, they can actually deliver a wealth of benefits that are often overlooked. Warranty periods of repaired products can often significantly exceed those that come with new equipment, and there is no need to get tied up in lengthy support contracts. Not only that, but prolonging the life of existing equipment helps to keep the damaging effects of e-waste to a minimum. If the new government is so committed to fostering


a green economy, it needs to actively empower UK businesses to adopt more environmentally friendly policies. By promoting sustainable ICT practices – rather than solely supporting investment in new ‘eco-friendly’ technologies – the government could steer businesses away from the disposable culture that has become so commonplace in our society. To achieve this goal, the government could consider giving businesses a tax incentive to take a greener approach to the maintenance of ICT infrastructures. Zero rating VAT on ICT repairs would encourage businesses to think twice about throwing out old kit at the first sign of malfunction, thus decreasing the amount of equipment being discarded, and boosting the amount of business available to local repair companies. The only losers in this situation would be the


foreign equipment manufacturers who would sell fewer pieces of brand new ‘replacement’ equipment. Local employment prospects would improve and less toxic equipment would be dumped into landfill sites, making the UK the clear winner in this situation. If the government really wants to make its agenda


the greenest yet, it should choose to get behind those businesses that are prepared to curb their wasteful habits and take a more practical approach to maintaining their ICT infrastructures. Only time will tell, but there’s a huge opportunity here to make a real impact on the UK’s carbon footprint. Let’s hope that the new coalition makes the most of it and lead us towards the greener society we so desperately need.


*The International Association of Electronics Recyclers.


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56