On disposal (at least to me), the onus should be on the supplier to get rid of the used gadgets. The tender for the supply of such gadgets should include disposal after say 4 years (or after a pre-determined life of the gadgets). Alternatively, there should be a replacement/swapping clauses on the tender documents that those gadgets should be renewed/swapped after X years (some sort of leasing the gadgets for a limited period). Anything shorter than this will leave millions of useless and dangerous (environmentally) gadgets out there. Of course, there can be (small) businesses than can specialise in mining the rare/precious metals (e.g. mercury) from the gadgets, how viable and environmentally sustainable this is needs to be explored. I think there is a business opportunity on the maintenance of the gadgets. I would imagine the implementers of this scheme would need the services of local individuals/companies to support the schools. Having a sort of a helpdesk/servicedesk in one school in a network that can be used for technical support including maintenance for the gadgets would be good. All support and maintenance requests would be dealt within the network where possible (or escalated to a higher office in cases where there is need for replacement or very specialised repairs). On 12 June 2013 23:14, Barrack Otieno <[email protected]> wrote:
Lister's,
Many thanks to all those who have contributed to todays discussion, the thread is still open, day four will focus on hardware:
What Maintenance & Disposal issues should the government take into account before the project is implemented? (issues of support, environmental concerns, etc)
-- Barrack O. Otieno +254721325277 +254-20-2498789 Skype: barrack.otieno http://www.otienobarrack.me.ke/
_