Background
As technology continues to advance, outdated electronics are becoming an increasing part of the waste
stream. Waste Age reports that electronics, such as computers, monitors and printers, are typically
replaced every two to four years. According to the National Safety Council, in 1998 approximately 20.6
million personal computers became obsolete in the United States. This number is predicted to increase
to 315 million by the year 2004. With this in mind, electronics disposal is becoming an important issue
for solid waste administrators.
One response to this growing concern is for local governments to initiate collection programs for
discarded electronics. As with almost all recycling programs, the collection of electronics will entail
some costs. These costs will depend on factors such as producer responsibility initiatives, the advent of
advance disposal fees or other funding mechanisms, and the development of end- use markets. At the
state level, advance disposal fees for electronics could be modeled after those for white goods and
tires, thus providing an ongoing source of funds for locally- operated electronics recycling programs.
Before designing and implementing a local electronics recycling program, administrators should first
determine any associated costs. Cost accounting is one technique that estimates the full cost of
delivering services to citizens. By breaking down the total cost into distinct categories, hidden and
often overlooked costs are extracted.
Methodology
This report is intended to determine the basic, additional costs of establishing and linking an
electronics recycling program to an existing solid waste collection infrastructure. As a result, sunk costs
such as land, existing buildings and major pieces of equipment like trucks are outside the scope of this
report and therefore not included. However, these costs should be considered when local governments
calculate the full cost of providing solid waste related services. The Environmental Protection Agency,
as well as the N. C. Division of Pollution Prevention and Environmental Assistance, provide detailed
spreadsheets to help administrators determine the full cost of implementing a new recycling program.
In North Carolina, six pilot electronics recycling programs were operating by summer 2001. Of this
population set, three communities were chosen to reflect the different types of recycling
methodologies. Each community was contacted and sent a letter of project intent along with a cost
analysis spreadsheet. The sample set is as follows:
Iredell County – One- time electronics “ take- back” event
Mecklenburg County – Ongoing collection of electronics at convenience centers
Town of Cary – Curbside electronics recycling on an as- needed basis
The group is a small sample size and was hand picked rather than randomly selected due to the
heterogeneous qualities of the programs. These factors prevent results from being extrapolated to the
population. However, respondents’ answers are valuable in that they reflect the additional costs
associated with operating an electronics recycling program.
N. C. Division
of Pollution
Prevention and
Environmental
Assistance
1639 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699- 1639
( 919) 715- 6500
( 800) 763- 0136
Cost Analysis of Electronics Recycling
In North Carolina Communities
Cost Analysis of Electronics Recycling - 2 - October 2001
In North Carolina Communities
As shown below, costs were broken down into three categories and their corresponding expenses to determine the true
cost of operations.
Category 1: Salaries/ Wages
A) Staff time to organize program
B) Staff time to train employees/ site attendants/ collectors
C) Event labor/ on- site labor/ curbside labor
Category 2: Capital Costs
A) Storage space
Category 3: Non- Capital Direct Costs
A) Advertising
B) Contract services/ vendor charge
C) Supplies ( pallets, shrinkwrap, etc.)
D) Hauling costs
E) Cost to recycle monitors
Not all expenses apply to each community and some expenses may be nested in other areas ( i. e. hauling costs may be
included in the vendor charge). In such cases, respondents were instructed to simply enter zero for that item.
Results:
Collection Method
Iredell County
One- Time
“ Take- Back” Event
Mecklenburg County
Ongoing Collection at
Convenience Centers *
Town of Cary
Curbside Recycling
as Needed **
Net Cost $ 2,260 $ 4,900 $ 10,932.62
Tons of Material
Recycled 11.92 60 9.94
Number of Units
Recycled Estimated 500 Not available 367 monitors
Number of
Households Served Estimated 100 210,000 29,797
Total Cost per Ton $ 189.59 $ 81.67 $ 1,099.86
Total Cost per Unit $ 4.52 Not available $ 29.79
Total Cost per
Household $ 22.60 $ 0.02 $ 0.37
* Figures for Mecklenburg County reflect annual costs
** Figures for the Town of Cary are based on a seven- month period, from program initiation in November 2000 to June 2001
Cost Analysis of Electronics Recycling - 3 - October 2001
In North Carolina Communities
Several general observations can be made from the resulting data to determine the costs associated with electronics
recycling. However, in some cases the data presented by the respondents was a best estimate, since not every
community tracked each variable. For example, Iredell County did not count the number of units collected or the
number of participants at their take- back event. This uncertainty affects the reliability of their total cost per unit and
total cost per household figures. Similarly, Mecklenburg County did not track the number of units collected annually,
while the Town of Cary only tracked the number of monitors received. In addition, Iredell County utilized volunteer
labor, free advertising and donated supplies to minimize the cost of sponsoring the take- back event. As a result, most
of their non- capital, direct costs were best estimates. Finally, the communities who sponsored ongoing collections only
allowed households to participate in the program, while Iredell County opened its event to both residential and
business customers. This expansion of eligible participants increased the potential for more material to be collected.
Observations
Program administration, which encompassed salaries and wages, proved to be the most expensive cost for each
community. Iredell County spent $ 760, Mecklenburg County paid $ 3,800, and the Town of Cary spent $ 8,891 on wages
for the planning and collection of electronics. Iredell County’s direct cost for salaries was really $ 160 for staff time to
organize the program. The additional $ 600 included in the original figure is the estimated cost of necessary labor to
staff the event. However, Iredell did not pay this amount since they used volunteer event labor.
Interestingly, even though Mecklenburg County and the Town of Cary both operate ongoing programs, the
administrative costs for Cary are more than double those for Mecklenburg. Salaries for curbside labor to collect
electronics contribute to this cost difference. Electronics recycling comprises 26 percent of Cary laborers’ time, while
on- site attendants in Mecklenburg only spend 2 percent of their time on electronics recycling. This curbside labor effort
by Cary, although more costly, translated into 367 monitors collected in a seven month period, or 52 monitors collected
per month.
Budget analysts usually consider capital costs, such as land, buildings and equipment, to be sunk costs. Since these costs
are part of the initial recycling infrastructure, they were not included in this analysis. However, storage space for
electronics was included for those communities that might have to rent additional space. Mecklenburg County was the
only community to pay a nominal storage fee of $ 100 per year. The Town of Cary utilized existing space, while Iredell
County did not have this storage concern when sponsoring its one- day take- back event.
Non- capital direct costs, for advertising, supplies and vendor/ contract services, seemed to be unique for each
community. These expenses ranged from $ 1,000 in Mecklenburg County to $ 2,041 in the Town of Cary. Costs for
advertising and supplies, at $ 500 each, made up the non- capital expenses for Mecklenburg. In contrast, the Town of
Cary paid little for advertising ($ 206) since local newspapers like The News & Observer and The Cary News provided
free coverage of the program. However, Cary did incur an additional expense of $ 1,835 to recycle the computer
monitors through Chatham Salvage. This fee significantly increased its overall direct costs. Iredell County’s non- capital
direct expenses were based on best estimates of what services typically should cost. The recycling coordinator estimated
that $ 1,500 would have been spent on advertising, supplies and hauling costs had these services not been rendered at
no charge.
When examining the total net costs of operating various electronics recycling programs, the one- time take- back event
was the least expensive. As expected, curbside collection was the most costly method of electronics recycling. However,
the administrative costs of both ongoing collection programs will most likely be reduced in future years since the
planning and implementation phase of the programs are now over, leaving only salaries for laborers to be included in
the cost analysis.
Mecklenburg County received 60 tons of material, the most tonnage collected out of the three communities. Cary
reported that 9.94 tons were accumulated in a seven- month period. Extrapolating this figure to a twelve- month period
yields over 17 tons of electronic material collected per year. This figure exceeds the amount generated at Iredell
County’s one- day event.
Cost Analysis of Electronics Recycling - 4 - October 2001
In North Carolina Communities
As a result of the tonnage collected and associated net costs, the cost per ton for electronics recycling is lowest for
Mecklenburg County and highest for the Town of Cary. Therefore, it seems that Mecklenburg has the most efficient
( lowest cost per ton) and effective ( most tons collected) electronics recycling program.
It is difficult to analyze the recycling cost per unit and cost per household for these communities because of missing
data and figures that were based on estimates. However, a comparison can be made between Mecklenburg County and
the Town of Cary concerning total cost per household. Ongoing collection at convenience centers is significantly less
expensive per household than curbside collection ($ 0.02 per household versus $ 0.37 per household). It should be
pointed out, however, that Cary offers a higher degree of service to its citizens.
Conclusion
In general, the methodology of cost accounting can provide key information needed by managers for conducting their
operations and planning future programs. The main advantage of this type of analysis is the exposure of true program
costs. By calculating the total net cost and then examining it in terms of tons recycled, number of units recycled, and
number of households served, solid waste administrators can evaluate their program and compare costs to
communities with similar infrastructures. The cost analysis of these three North Carolina electronic recycling
infrastructures provides managers with data to determine program popularity and overall efficiency.
The North Carolina Division of Pollution Prevention and Environmental Assistance provides free, non- regulatory
technical assistance and education on methods to eliminate, reduce, or recycle wastes before they become pollutants or
require disposal. Telephone DPPEA at ( 919) 715- 6500 or ( 800) 763- 0136 for assistance with issues in this fact sheet or any
of your waste reduction concerns.
DPPEA- FY01- 10. 35 copies of this public document were printed on recycled paper at a cost of $ 0.41 or $ 0.01 per copy.
State Publications Collection
