Back in 1987 we had an idea at Kodak to create a camera that was very easy to use. It was called a single-use 35-mm camera. When we first described the camera, and named it , we had the misfortune of calling this product a Fling camera. What we found shortly thereafter was that this term literally infuriated environmentalists. They quickly began calling this category of camera disposable and generated a lot of very negative press about it.

EVOLUTION OF AN IDEA
I'm now going to take you through the story of Kodak's single-use camera from 1987 to the present. The basic camera was a model called the FunSaver. Our original goal was to create a very simple, easy-to-use camera that took daylight pictures that were as good as those from a regular point-and-shoot, automatic-focus 35-mm camera. The FunSaver camera was born, and the image quality far exceeded customer expectations. We used a lot of what we believed to be world-class manufacturing and product development techniques -- like computer-aided design, like design for assembly, like an empowered work force, like just-in-time statistical process control -- to launch the program. The bottom line was very high quality, higher, in fact, than customers expected when they purchased the product.

THE PRODUCT LINE
Today there are five FunSaver models in production which actually share some common parts. Our strategy was to make the most of the product design, to "leverage" it, so basic sub-systems of the cameras have been utilized in different models.

The second camera that we launched was called the Stretch 35, and this featured a unique format. It makes pictures that are 3 1/2 by 10 inches, ideal for taking landscape shots.

When we initially developed this camera and the FunSaver, our goal was to make sure that the consumer could not reload the camera. It was our design intent. We welded the camera together. Later, when we began to recycle the cameras, we found the weld posed quite a problem, and we redesigned the camera so that it would snap together.

One of our major concerns was whether someone would take our engine and reuse it with non-Kodak film. I don't think it's special to Kodak that one product -- on our case, film -- is our cash cow. It's what fuels the corporate fire. So, we don't want people to take our single-use cameras and load them with non-Kodak film.. But as a matter of fact, that's not physically impossible to do. There are design deterrents built into the camera to make that difficult, but a clever technical person could figure out how to do that. We've actually seen one vendor in the United States attempt to commercialize the process. But this was fine with us, because he's reloading the cameras with Kodacolor film, and he appears to be doing it properly. We do have contingency plans to make the camera more difficult to reload, and if a large percentage of the cameras are actually being reloaded with non-Kodak film, we could initiate those plans. But these changes would only add to the cost of recycling, so we don't plan on making them unless necessary.

The next camera that we developed was the Weekend 35. This is basically a waterproof camera positioned to appeal to travelers going, for example, snow skiing or to a beach or scuba diving. Leveraging our current designs, creating just a few additional parts, generated this camera program.

As we sat back after launching these three cameras, we were feeling pretty happy about our accomplishments. Imagine that you're managing large groups of operations; you have three major new models go from concept to shipping to distribution center, within all cost goals, within eight months, delivering great picture quality to boot.

This was 1989, and we realized that we were at the beginning of a photography resurgence. These cameras were enjoying a growth rate of greater than 50 percent per year, which has continued for the last five years. As we started to count up all these cameras, we recognized that we were putting an incredible number into the waste stream, and they were multiplying faster than we could tally them.

DESIGN FOR RECYCLABILITY
The next camera was the FunSaver flash camera, and this was the first designed for recycling. We utilized many ideas from the previous models, but we designed this camera to be recycled. There had been a lot of negative press coverage about Kodak disposable cameras, but the engineering staff had a real passion for these products. One afternoon we sat together and penciled out a process whereby we might be able to recycle and reload these cameras. We proposed that process to our management, and they weren't exactly keen on it, so we put it on the shelf. But later on, in response to enormous social pressures from the press, the company decided to launch this program.

The flash camera posed some unique recycling problems. It needed a power supply, so we chose an alkaline battery, a no-mercury battery. The flash camera also has electronics, something we didn't have to deal with before. What we've done is build a counter into the electronics that shows the number of times the components have been through the system. They've been designed to go through the system ten times.

VARIATIONS ON A THEME
The last camera that we introduced, just within the last six months, is called the Telephoto 35. It is a sports camera with a telephoto lens -- it has 2.4 times the magnification of the other models -- and uses very high-speed film. The idea is that during the day, you can flip the camera into the sunlight position and take pictures from your seat in the bleachers, and then in the evening, when the floodlights come on, you can flip the camera into the floodlight mode and continue to take pictures.

Again, we leveraged our existing design and created some new parts. We also began to color code the top covers for recyclability, which I'll explain in a minute. It is interesting that the world-class manufacturing processes that made theses cameras such a success became very useful to us when we decided to make these products recyclable.

THE DESIGN PROCESS
The cameras are designed for a unique process of high-volume manual assembly. We applied our talents in some areas of automation, and we utilized local subassembly vendors to do a lot of the manual assembly for us. The assembler simply drops on parts that are very simple and straightforward, almost impossible to assemble improperly. The procedure requires no fixtures, gauges, or tools. What we found was this also makes the recycling process much easier.

Networked on-line in our system is our model shop, which cuts large blocks of solid plastic into prototype models. This allows the designer to create new models to evaluate them for engineering specifications. It is one of the key reasons we can create a product and put it in the marketplace in as few as eight months.

Our tool designers are also networked in the process on our CAD system. They concurrently evaluate the same camera parts' geometry, which will lead to the creation of the precision injection molds that will generate many millions of copies of the cameras.

Another key element of our process is our empowered work team. It is responsible for all elements of the process -- product delivery, product cost, scheduling -- and is empowered to turn the process off if things were to go out of control.

In-line statistical process control assures very high quality. This is important because the reputation of Kodak is riding on every image that's taken with any of these cameras.

When we start up production of a new camera, we keep in mind that the production process is not static. As volumes increase higher levels of automation are instituted. Another key decision is whether to use machine assemble or human assembly. Where subjective decisions need to be made, people are better than machinery. In assembling precision lenses, as in the Panoramic camera, machinery is the best choice.

Again, picture quality, or product reliability, is very high. One of our design goals was to have every camera work in the hands of our consumers, and to have every picture as good of better than a conventional 35-mm camera. We measure our defects in parts per million, and as we've increased the number of cameras that are actually being recycled, our quality level has continued to improve.

THE RECYCLING PROGRAM
At this point I'd like to take you through the steps of our recycling program. The process begins when the customer buys one of our cameras and uses it. The customer then takes the camera to the photo finisher. The photo finisher extracts the film, creates the prints, and delivers them to the user. Now what happens is that Kodak buys back the basic frame from the photo finisher (plus handling costs and transportation). We pay the photo finisher a five-cent-per-unit core fee for sending it to our recycling center in Rochester, New York.

I mentioned earlier that we have local assembly vendors doing the work for us. In this case, some of those local vendors are New York State "sheltered workshops," where mentally and physically disable people are provided with meaningful employment. These sheltered workshops also happen to be some of our best assembly vendors, making them an obvious choice. The process at the sheltered workshop is straightforward and simple, like most elements of single-use camera manufacturing.

Parts are color coded for easy sorting. Some parts are removed and reground. Some parts are tested and reused. Engines are reloaded with fresh film, and the process begins again. In that respect, it's a closed-loop process for recycling.

Our entire assembly operation has created well over 1,000 jobs in Monore County, New York. About 40 percent of those are non-Kodak jobs in partnership with local industries. Almost 15 percent of the operation is in sheltered workshops.

One of the critical elements in recycling is to ensure that all the metal is separated from the plastic. Nothing can ruin your day like having a few metallic pieces go through your $100,000 injection mold. So all the material goes through a metal detector before going back through the molding operation.

Some of the sorted pieces are reground into material. We can take polystyrene and remold it and regrind it for ten cycles of single-use cameras, and it will meet all out our performance specifications. Because some parts are directly resued while others are ground into pellets and remolded into new parts, 86 percent of the camera's material is actually reused in single-use cameras.

One thing that's interesting about this category is that since we introduced the recycling program in 1990, it has continued to grow very rapidly and consistently with the rest of our base. Before we began recycling, we talked to some experts in the soft-drink industry. We asked them how they were doing with aluminum cans, and they told us that after about ten years, they were recycling about 50 percent. They thought that was pretty good. We outlined our proposals for single use camera recycling. When we showed our ideas to the soft-drink people, they told us our goals were unrealistic. "We've been at this business for a long time," they said, "and you don't understand the complexity of it."

Despite these prediction, things have been going very well. In 1990, we recycled about a million cameras. In 1991, we recycled about 2.9 million cameras, and in addition to the U.S. recycling program, we added programs in Canada, Europe, and Japan. This year, through April, we've recycled about 1.2 million cameras, and we estimate that we will recycle well over 5 million by year's end. What that means is almost 5 million single-use cameras have been recycled to date, and that translates to over 700,000 pounds of material that has been diverted from the waste stream.