Wow this article had a major impact on me. The main reason was that I didn’t even know that this massive environmental crisis was going on.
One thing that I struggled in my opinion was the thing archaeologists called e-waste. “Future archaeologists will note that at the tail end of the 20th century, a new, noxious kind of clutter exploded across the landscape: the digital detritus that has come to be called e-waste,” (ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2008/01/high-tech-trash/carroll-text/2).
The second thing that I struggled in my opinion was “A switchover to digital high-definition television broadcasts is scheduled to be complete by 2009, rendering inoperable TVs that function perfectly today but receive only an analog signal. As viewers prepare for the switch, about 25 million TVs are taken out of service yearly,” (ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2008/01/high-tech-trash/carroll-text/2). I didn’t know that TV is taken out of repair each year.
The third thing that struggled in my opinion “Currently, less than 20 percent of e-waste entering the solid waste stream is channeled through companies that advertise themselves as recyclers, though the number is likely to rise as states like California crack down on landfill dumping,” (ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2008/01/high-tech-trash/carroll-text/3). The reason that this struggled with me is why are companies that advertise that they recycle and they don’t recycle.
The proactive steps that I might take to help with this major problem are making sure I recycle. If a lot of people do what they have to in order to recycle. It is very important for everyone to recycle no matter what the product is.
The thing that I took away from the link called Field Notes: Essick was the fact that he went around to different countries to study the e-waste. Also the fact of the