IT is an industry that’s incredibly proud of its contribution to progress and creating efficiency in operations, but there’s one major flaw. While there’s nothing wrong with aiming for constant improvement, little thought has been given to what happens to the equipment that’s no longer fit for purpose.

There’s the belief that it gets recycled, but out of sight out of mind. As long as there is something new and shiny that can do the job better, what’s thrown out because it’s old, doesn’t really matter. But it should, and here’s why:

Electronic devices contain precious metals that could be recycled and reused to make new devices. Instead, tons of gold, silver, copper, platinum, palladium and more gets sent to landfill. Conservative estimates place this at a global value of almost $60 billion. Imagine if that value could be unlocked to finance future technologies?

“Ah, but it’s not that simple!” you say. The percentage of precious metals in tech devices is small. It takes specialized facilities to be able to extract them and volumes to make it economically viable. All true. The challenge is that statements like this imply that it’s not viable. That it would take too much effort, too much investment, and too much expertise for IT companies, they’re rather focus on the future.

But the future will require new components. The demand for resources to build these will continue to increase while the cost to extract these resources is likely to climb exponentially. In reality, extracting precious metals from e-waste is up to 800 times more efficient than traditional mineral ore extraction. (It’s also far less damaging to the environment just by the way)

Which means one thing: There’s a lot of money being thrown away, because companies don’t recognize the value of the resources they’re discarding.

Of course, tapping into this value requires systemic change. With no federal legislation forcing it, unfortunately there’s little incentive to do so. Knowing that that they should or could do things differently is rarely enough to motivate companies to change their whole way of operating. Not when there’s the slightest chance that it will impact profits. Will economics change this?

The future facing view that tech is so proud of, means resourcing for the future and this includes considerations further down the supply chain. There’s an opportunity to contribute to positive change before it becomes a “have to” and make the business more resilient in the process.

It starts with understanding the impact that whole product lifecycle has on futureproofing the industry. There are companies that have the technology and equipment to process e-waste and mine it for precious resources, but they are not widely known. Also, because a large portion of e-waste is shipped to developing countries, securing sufficient local e-waste to make processing viable is a challenge.

This can change if the tech industry starts to develop working relationships with local processors. It may be a completely different approach but if it can contribute to a more economically sustainable future, maybe, just maybe, it’ll be worth it.