MAR/APR 2025 ENVIRONMENTAL LAW REPORTER 55 ELR 10219
E-CIGARETTES AS WASTE
AND THE NEED TO REGULATE
“DISPOSABLE” PRODUCTS
by Cameron S. Quackenbush
Between January 2020 and March 2023, U.S. electronic cigarette sales grew 43%, from 15.6 million devices
per month to 22.4 million devices. During this time frame, the portion of sales comprising disposable devices
grew from 4 million to 11.9 million per month. The impact upon the environment has been largely overlooked
by policymakers. Containing nicotine, batteries and circuitry containing heavy and precious metals, and
plastics, e-cigarettes can qualify as hazardous wastes under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act,
and contain hazardous substances for purposes of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensa-
tion, and Liability Act. Due to the diffuse nature of this waste, existing regulations have failed to address this
issue. This Article details each phase of the issue, painting a realistic image of current regulations around
waste management and cleanup, and provides a pathway to responding to this disaster through both state
and federal action.
SUMMARYSUMMARY
Cameron S. Quackenbush is a recent graduate of Lewis & Clark Law School, and
Legislative Assistant in the Office of Oregon State Sen. Lew Frederick.
Electronic cigarettes, or e-cigarettes,1 are “battery-
operated devices that heat a liquid containing nic-
otine, propylene glycol or glycerol, and avoring
1. U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), E-Cigarettes, Vapes, and Other
Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems (ENDS), https://www.fda.gov/tobacco-
products/products-ingredients-components/e-cigarettes-vapes-and-other-
electronic-nicotine-delivery-systems-ends (last reviewed May 31, 2024). Al-
though electronic cigarettes are referred to by a broad category of terms, this
Article elects to refer to them as “electronic cigarettes” to continually remind
the audience that these devices are electronic and hazardous in nature. ey
are not like other nicotine replacement therapies (NRTs), but are instead
agents into an inhaled aerosol.”2 rough the process of
superheating a metal coil exposed to an oil-containing nic-
otine, an electronic cigarette a llows its user to smoke with-
out combustion. Electronic cigarettes come in a variety of
shapes, sizes, and ma kes—both reusable and disposable.3
However, due to the hazardous nature of many of their
constituent parts, electronic cigaret tes present a puzzle
with which policymakers continue to struggle.
Since their explosion into U.S. markets in 2007,4 elec-
tronic cigarettes have been a subject of tumultuous debate,
with consumer safety a nd market availability pitting
tobacco corporations against lobbyists, product users, doc-
tors, and regulatory entities.5 Despite the discovery of new
diseases caused by electronic cigarette usage (e.g., “pop-
chemically addictive electronic devices. Scientic literature generally refers
to electronic cigarettes as “electronic nicotine-delivery systems (ENDS).”
However, the Article refers to ENDS as electronic cigarettes in order to
continually remind the reader of what these devices are—electronic devices.
2. Marc W. Beutel et al., A Review of Environmental Pollution From the Use
and Disposal of Cigarettes and Electronic Cigarettes: Contaminants, Sourc-
es, and Impacts, 13 S 1, 6-7 (2021), https://www.mdpi.
com/2071-1050/13/23/12994.
3. C D C P (CDC), E-C,
V, P V D 6 (2019), https://www.cdc.gov/
tobacco/basic_information/e-cigarettes/pdfs/ecigarette-or-vaping-products-
visual-dictionary-508.pdf.
4. Amika K. Sood et al., Electronic Cigarettes: One Size Does Not Fit All, 141 J.
A C I 1973 (2018), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jaci.2018.02.029.
5. Daniel G. Aaron, Tobacco Reborn: e Rise of E-Cigarettes and Regulatory
Approaches, 25 L C L. R. 827, 830-38 (2021).
Author’s Note: Special thanks to Jim Kite, a remarkable
professor at Lewis & Clark Law School, for advising and
overseeing the writing of this Article. His support made this
work possible.
Since January 2023, I have served as an intern and Legis-
lative Assistant in the Office of Sen. Lew Frederick (Oregon
State Senate District 22). I shared this student capstone
Article and its state law proposals with Senator Frederick
and his Chief of Staff, Nathan Soltz, whose combined inter-
est in my work led to introduction of a bill embodying the
producer responsibility and refundable deposit mandates
spelled out in Section IV(B)(2). I anticipate providing testi-
mony for the bill based on the contents of the Article when
the bill comes before its respective Oregon Senate and
House of Representatives Committees. The Article does not
necessarily reflect the views of Senator Frederick, and all
views herein are my own.
55 ELR 10220 ENVIRONMENTAL LAW REPORTER MAR/APR 2025
corn lun g”), 6 many users and ma nufacturers cling to the
“harm reduction” electronic cigarettes may oer as a path
away from traditional smoking.7 e regulator y battle over
consumer health continues for the U.S. Food and Drug
Adm inist ration (FDA).8
However, between the laundry list of toxic constituent
parts of an electronic ciga rette9 and the sheer sca le of the
problem due to the number of devices manufactured and
sold monthly,10 electronic cigarette waste is a crisis of toxic
and haz ardous wa stes.11 ese devices should not go into
the tra sh,12 and yet there are no better ideas on how to han-
dle them beyond incineration.13 Due to nicotine contami-
nation, electronic cigarettes cannot be readily recycled.14
So, what happens to electronic cigarettes at the end of
their life? According to a 2022 sur vey by the Truth Initia-
tive, more than half the young electronic cigarette users
polled self-reported throwing their “used” nicoti ne pods or
empty disposable devices directly in the trash.15 M ore ove r,
17% reported throwing their electronic cigarette waste in a
standard recyclin g bin, which is not designed for electronic
6. Perry Dinardo & Ellen S. Rome, Vaping: e New Wave of Nicotine Addic-
tion, 86 C. C J. M. 789, 794 (2019), https://www.ccjm.org/
content/ccjom/86/12/789.full.pdf.
7. See Brian King, Looking Back, Looking Ahead: FDA’s Progress on Tobacco Prod-
uct Regulation in 2022, FDA (Jan. 31, 2023), https://www.fda.gov/tobacco-
products/ctp-newsroom/looking-back-looking-ahead-fdas-progress-tobac-
co-product-regulation-2022. See also omas J. Glynn et al., E-Cigarettes,
Harm Reduction, and Tobacco Control: A Path Forward?, 96 M C
P. 856, 856-58 (2021), https://www.mayoclinicproceedings.org/ar-
ticle/S0025-6196(20)31382-3/fulltext (discussing the clinician’s dilemma
between seeking cessation of traditional smoking, but also noting the harms
that electronic cigarettes can and do cause); Shue Sing Churk, E-Cigarette
Regulation and Harm Reduction: e Case of Hong Kong, 71 F D
L.J. 634, 634 (2016), https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29140648/. See
also generally Andrew P. Ray, Treading Lightly: Why the FDA Should Use Its
New Authority to Regulate Electronic Cigarettes Sparingly, 36 J. L M.
215 (2015).
8. See generally Aaron, supra note 5.
9. See Section I.B, for a thorough discussion of the various internal parts of an
electronic cigarette and the individual challenges they pose.
10. See CDC F, D B, M U.S. E-C S:
N T (2023), https://www.cdcfoundation.org/National-E-
CigaretteSales-DataBrief-2023-Mar26?inline (units recorded monthly). See
also T I, A T, P P: E-C W
E 1 (2021), https://truthinitiative.org/sites/default/
les/media/les/2021/04/E-Cigarette-Waste-Report-FINAL-042821.pdf.
11. See generally Max J. Krause & Timothy G. Townsend, Hazardous Waste
Status of Discarded Electronic Cigarettes, 39 W M. 57, 60 (2015),
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25746178/.
12. See U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), How to Safely Dispose
of E-Cigarettes: Information for Individuals, https://www.epa.gov/hw/how-
safely-dispose-e-cigarettes-information-individuals (last updated Feb. 26,
2024). See also O H A, P M
E-C W O R, https://www.oregon.gov/
oha/PH/PREVENTIONWELLNESS/TOBACCOPREVENTION/Doc-
uments/Final_TRL_NicotineDisposalGuide-508Compliant_5_5_22.pdf
[hereinafter OHA, M E-C W R];
O H A, P M E-C
W O S, https://www.oregon.gov/oha/PH/PRE-
VENTIONWELLNESS/TOBACCOPREVENTION/Documents/Nico-
tineDisposalGuide_Schools%20FINAL.pdf [hereinafter OHA, M-
E-C W S].
13. L R G, U.S. PIRG E F, V W:
T E H D V (2023), https://pub-
licinterestnetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/Vape-Waste-Report-
PIRG-Embargoed-7.11-3am-ET-1.pdf (“Currently, there is no standardized
way to recycle e-cigarettes in the U.S.”).
14. Id.
15. T I, supra note 10.
or hazardous waste, and 10% reported “simply throwing
them on the g round.”16
ese statistics are underscored by the sheer number of
devices manufact ured and sold each month. e Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) notes that nearly
22.4 million devices were sold monthly within the United
States as of March 2023, with 11.9 million sold as purely
“dis posable” unit s.17 e CDC reports that sales peaked in
March 2022, with 26.1 million electronic cigaret tes having
sold in that month alone.18 is issue of mounting elec-
tronic cigarette waste is dire, as noted by Time Magazine ’s
reference to the electronic cigarette waste epidemic as an
“environmental disaster.”19
With millions of electronic cigarettes t hrown in the
trash every year20 in contravention of federal policy,21 haz-
ardous waste law has fai led to stop the electronic ciga-
rette waste crisis from unfolding. For those electronic
cigarettes handled according to federal law, the cost of
proper disposal can reach 85 cents per unit in states like
New York, with much of this cost falling on the public
institutions (notably schools) where the waste coagulates.22
Reports show that this high cost is due to mass incin-
eration of electronic cigarettes as “the only way to keep
the nicotine-lled devices out of sewers, water ways and
landlls, where their lith ium batteries can catch re.”23
For example, to comply with the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act (RCR A), Monroe County, New York,
has resorted to packaging discarded electronic ciga rettes
turned in at household hazardous waste receptacles to be
sent to Arkansas for industria l incineration.24
Althoug h incinerat ing massive quant ities of ha zardous
materials is environmentally destructive, there is simply no
16. Id.
17. CDC F, supra note 10 (units recorded monthly).
18. Id.
19. Jamie Ducharme, e Overlooked Environmental Impact of Vaping, T ( July
11, 2023), https://time.com/6293772/disposable-vapes-plastic-waste/.
20. See AP, Communities Can’t Recycle or Trash Disposable E-Cigarettes. So What
Happens to em?, E P (Oct. 19, 2023), https://english.elpais.com/
climate/2023-10-19/communities-cant-recycle-or-trash-disposable-e-cig-
arettes-so-what-happens-to-them.html. See also CDC F, supra
note 10 (units recorded monthly).
21. 42 U.S.C. §6924(c)-(h) (Resource Conservation and Recovery Act’s
(RCRA’s) “land ban”).
22. AP, supra note 20 (“Monroe County schools pay $60 to dispose of each one-
gallon container of vapes. More than two thirds of the e-cigarettes collected
by the county come from schools.”). See also P H L C-
M H S L, D E-C
W: FAQ S O I 2 (2023), https://
www.publichealthlawcenter.org/sites/default/les/resources/FAQ-e-cig-
disposal-schools.pdf.
23. AP, supra note 20:
In late August, sanitation workers in Monroe County, New York,
packed more than 5,500 brightly colored e-cigarettes into 55-gal-
lon steel drums for transport. eir destination? A giant, indus-
trial waste incinerator in northern Arkansas, where they would be
melted down. Sending 350 pounds of vapes across the country to
be burned into ash may not sound environmentally friendly. But
local ocials say it’s the only way to keep the nicotine-lled devices
out of sewers, waterways and landlls, where their lithium batteries
can catch re.
See also P H L C M H S
L, supra note 22.
24. AP, supra note 20. See also 42 U.S.C. §§6901 et seq.
