As technology continues to advance and improve, older technologies give way to next-generation technologies, which are in most cases better and more energy efficient than their predecessors. The consumerism ideology, which drives people to buy and own more stuff and to define their identity through what they own, coupled with humankind’s appetite for affluence and an overall attitude of entitlement has dwarfed our sense of frugality. Our dwindled sense of frugality has left in its trail a lot of obsolescence and waste that plague our fragile communities, environment and the Earth. Because of their strict enforcement of environmental laws and the high cost of disposal of used, outmoded technologies, developed countries find it convenient and cheaper to dump their used, older and obsolete technologies on developing countries, instead of dismantling and recycling them as required by law in many developed countries.
Dumping of environmentally harmful products is defined as “the practice of exporting to another country or territory products that: 1) contain hazardous substances; 2) have environmental performance lower than is in the interest of consumers or that is contrary to the interests of the local and global commons; or 3) can undermine the ability of the importing country to fulfil international environmental treaty commitments.”
Unprincipled companies tend to dump products that they cannot sell in the countries where the products were manufactured, in jurisdictions that have no or weak environmental laws and standards. Even where such jurisdictions have environmental laws and standards that ban or restrict the importation of dumped products, weak enforcement mechanisms make dumping possible and even lucrative. On top of that, exporting countries intentionally or unintentionally avoid applying the environmental standards applicable in their home countries to the products they export. In the case of dumped inefficient cooling appliances designed to use obsolete ozone-depleting and hydrofluorocarbon (HFC) refrigerants, these devices are “energy vampires” or “zombie appliances” that waste citizens’ and communities’ financial resources that could otherwise be applied for local social and economic benefit.
Why does dumping of these appliances constitute export and import of poverty?
The zombie appliances waste, exacerbate power demand and divert needed societal resources into avoidable power generation. The proliferation of energy guzzlers increases the electricity demand and creates the need to increase existing, often fossil-fuel-powered generation capacities. This phenomenon robs developing countries of the resources to improve education, health, road infrastructure, and other societal needs, thereby triggering the poverty spiral. Between July 2010 and December 2021, enforcement of minimum energy performance standards (MEPS), and mostly the prohibition of the importation of used cooling appliances have saved Ghana 11,367 GWh, which is more than the total output of the Bui hydroelectric dam, in Ghana, over 11 years. But for this intervention, it would have cost the country USD522 million in crude oil purchases of 7.1 million barrels to meet increased electricity demand (twelve-year average price of USD72.9 a barrel) 2010- 2022. The savings is enough to construct six (6) modern regional hospitals (assuming each costs USD87 million) or 348 kilometres of asphalt road (assuming an average cost of USD1.5 million per kilometre), or 1,045 modern six-classroom unit blocks for children’s education (assuming an average cost of USD500, 000 per block), depending on which one the country considers a priority.
The zombie appliances are expensive to run because spare parts are not readily available and even if they are, they come very expensive coupled with the frequent breakdown and the associated maintenance cost. Indeed, these appliances impoverish the already poor consumers in developing countries. Many households in sub-Saharan Africa have been impoverished in this manner. A study conducted in Ghana has shown that consumers who use “secondhand” refrigerating appliances, for instance, spend an additional USD80 annually than what they would have spent if they had opted for new and efficient refrigerating appliances. This phenomenon of high running costs aggravated by the high rate of breakdowns partly explains why the refrigeration and air conditioning mechanics shops are inundated with discarded fridges and air conditioners. Consumers take their broken-down appliances to the workshops to be fixed but abandon them when they learn of the spare parts they are to buy and the total cost of the repairs.
The zombie appliances hinder the market penetration of newer, efficient, and low-global-warming-potential refrigerant-using appliances. Investors are scared by markets that are flooded with used and new yet substandard appliances because of the availability of cheaper alternatives. One of the main barriers to energy efficiency is defined as a mechanism that inhibits a decision or behaviour that appears to be both energy efficient and economically efficient. Used and new substandard appliances turn markets into “market of lemons” that eventually chase away the quality appliances from the market leaving the bad products to dominate the market. In an era where the volume of investment flowing into a country is a measure of the attractiveness of the investment climate, the least a country can do is turn its jurisdiction into a junkyard to chase away investors.
Dumping is an enemy of the environment. Older technologies may not conform to rapidly evolving quality, environmental and other standards, and are more likely to contain obsolete refrigerants in the case of cooling appliances. This may greatly increase the servicing need for such refrigerants, which puts developing countries at risk of non-compliance with their Montreal Protocol obligations involving refrigerants. Further, as the capacity to manage appliances at the end of life in an environmentally sound manner is less likely to exist in developing countries, the likelihood that ozone- and climate-harmful emissions are released into the environment from such appliances is increased. Furthermore, used or new cooling appliances which have outlived their technological usefulness or which cost a lot to run, do not endure in the hands of their users, particularly when such users are living hand-to-mouth in a developing country and even though cooling appliances are increasingly becoming necessary for health and survival in a warm and increasingly warming climate. This situation exacerbates developing-country environmental problems with their attendant diseases.
The health consequences of dumping are extremely frightening. This year, the Francis Crick Institute and Cancer Research UK revealed in a newly published study on how air pollution can cause lung cancer in people who have never smoked in their lives. Other studies have found that children raised in and around polluted areas have high levels of lead in their systems, which renders them unintelligible and makes them susceptible to upper respiratory diseases.
More often than not, developing countries are tempted by the ideas of circular economies to accept the construction of recycling facilities, which is misunderstood as a tacit sanction to become dumping grounds for obsolete appliances. After coming to terms with the truth, the Asian nations that had invested in the recycling sector based on the myth of “hidden gold” have all changed their minds. In 2017, the Chinese government introduced a policy dubbed “National Sword” to aggressively enforce a prohibition on waste imports, which reduced waste imports by 99.9 per cent in its first year of implementation. In 2019, Thailand also prohibited the importation of residential waste on health grounds. If countries with superior health facilities are concerned about the health risks associated with dumping, Ghana should be similarly concerned.
To stop this dumping menace, Ghana, on behalf of Africa, has obtained a decision from the Montreal Protocol which makes it illegal for countries to export to Africa cooling appliances using obsolete ozone-depleting substances and HFC refrigerants (Decision XXXIV/4). Another request has been submitted by Africa to make dumping prohibition a shared responsibility to ensure that the exporting countries will commit resources to stop the menace. All parties to the Protocol are entreated to come together to find a lasting solution to this menace, to avoid the shifting of burdens to those countries that can least afford them each time nations agree to phase out harmful refrigerants and substances and to make the Earth a better place to live.
BY KOFI AGYARKO
