Wanaka Wastebusters guardian Matt Plant with some of the
electronic waste saved from the landfill for eCycling.
Queenstown has saved more than five tonnes of toxic
electronic waste from poisoning land and water from June 31,
but it is still lagging behind Wanaka, which eCycled almost 20
tonnes in the same period.
The latest statistics from Wanaka Wastebusters for e-waste
collection in the two resorts show Wakatipu people have
almost always responsibly deposited fewer obsolete
televisions, monitors, computers, laptops and mobile phones
than their neighbours over the Crown Range.
On the annual e-waste amnesty ''E-Day'' in 2009, Queenstown
eCycled seven tonnes of e-waste compared with 12 tonnes in
Queenstown improved on E-Day 2010 with eight tonnes, more
than the 5.53 tonnes in Wanaka.
However, Queenstown slipped again when RCN eCycling began
year round in 2011-12 and 3.26 tonnes were deposited,
significantly less than the 17.25 tonnes eCycled in Wanaka by
the same initiative in the same period.
Queenstown doubled its efforts in 2012-13 at 6.46 tonnes of
e-waste in 2012-13, but Wanaka responsibly deposited 17.5
tonnes in the same period.
Wastebusters collected 57.23 tonnes of televisions from both
resorts as part of the national TV Take-back programme in
April to August last year.
A total of 23.63 tonnes, or 675 TVs, came from Queenstown,
but 33.6 tonnes, or 960 TVs, came from Wanaka.
Wastebusters spokeswoman Gina Dempster said statistics for
Wanaka were higher than for Queenstown because the
community-owned enterprise pays for eCycling advertising and
marketing in Wanaka, but cannot afford to do so in
''Our last pick-up [in Queenstown] was in January,'' Ms
''We will be coming over soon for the next pick-up. We try to
do it every three months or so to keep the cost down and make
sure we have a full load to bring back.
''We aim to break even on collecting e-waste from Queenstown,
but it's not a money-earner for us.''
Wastebusters did pay for advertising of TV Takeback in
Queenstown because staff wanted all Wakatipu residents to
have the opportunity to recycle their TVs at the subsidised
price, she said.
''That was reflected in the numbers. We collected 23 tonnes
of TVs from Queenstown during the programme.
''TVs cost $5 to recycle for households during that time,
compared to $25 normally.''
Ms Dempster said TVs and CRT (cathode-ray tube) monitors were
the most difficult and expensive to deal with because they
contained few materials of value to offset the cost of
Wanaka Wastebusters and the Community Recycling Network
advocate for having the cost of recycling an electronic
product included in its purchase price.