 |
E-Waste
Education Course One
Undergraduate
Level
Lecture
3: A Global Movement - Who is Doing What & Where?
Across the world many
countries have regulations and law to respond to
the challenge of E-Waste. RMIT
& Product Ecology[1]
studies
show that Netherlands, Sweden, Switzerland and Denmark
have either a landfill ban or material bans in their
take-back legislation; and that Norway, Denmark,
Belgium, Italy and Japan have either collection
and/or recycling targets in legislation. Some
of the strictest regulations are the European Union's
'Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment' (WEEE)
directive; 'Restriction of the Use of Certain Hazardous
Substances in Electrical and Electronic Equipment'
(RoHS) directive, and 'Registration, Evaluation
and Authorisation of Chemicals' (REACH). The European
Union's laws have influenced the governments of
many countries, particularly Asian countries where
e-product is manufactured, to introduce matching
laws so that their products can meet the standards
for import into the counties of the European Union.
| |
Brief
Background Information |
Summary
of Leading Legislation in E-Waste
1.
On average the legislation in European countries
focuses on e-products such as white goods, brown
goods and lighting, rather than computing equipment,
however the following examples show that e-products
are being considered:[2]
•
1997 Italian waste
management decree setting out take-back and recovery
obligations for certain ICT equipment.
•
1998 regulation
in the Flemish Region of Belgium, requiring manufacturers,
importers, distributors and retailers to take
back all ICT equipment free of charge.
•
1998 ordinance in
Switzerland on the take-back and disposal of waste
from electrical and electronic equipment.
•
1998 regulation
in Norway on the acceptance, collection, recycling
and disposal of waste
from electrical and electronic equipment.
•
1999 order in Denmark
making local authorities responsible for collection
and recovery of ICT equipment (funded by local
taxes or collection fees).
•
Producer responsibility
obligations in Sweden which allow customers buying
a new product to return an old product of the
same type free of charge. Producers are also obliged
to provide information on the content of the equipment
when requested by pre-treatment operators.
2. The EU now
has rules for battery collection. Associated Press[3]
reports:
'The European Union was expected to agree on new
rules for collecting and recycling batteries to
limit pollution caused when they are incinerated
or buried in leaky landfill sites, a program estimated
to cost industry at least euro200 million (US$253
million)... By 2012, a quarter of all batteries
sold must be collected once they run out. By 2016,
the target will rise to 45 percent. The rules also
determine how they must be recycled once collected...
If companies are to take cell phones and computers
back cost-effectively, the products' design will
have to change to make them easier to recycle. This
could actually save companies money because they'd
favor simpler designs with fewer parts.'
3. In a world-first
legislation of its kind in 1998, the Taiwanese Government
introduced the 'Environmental Protection Administration
Recycling Management Fund' to support and facilitate
the collection, transportation and disposal of computers,
printers, household appliances, televisions and
air conditioners. Financially, the fund is maintained
by recycling fees for computer manufacturers.[4]
4. Japan
is countering E-Waste by mandating upstream design
criteria and requiring the take-back of selected
e-products.[5]
In 2000, the approval
of a 'Basic Law for Establishing a Recycling-based
Society' saw the start of several specific recycling
laws.[6]
For example, since
2001, Japanese Businesses have been required to
recycle PCs; and since 2003, manufacturers have
been required to collect and recycle used computers,
with costs subsidised by a 3000-4000 yen (AU$34-45)
per unit fee absorbed into the purchase cost.[7]
5. Another
law to emerge from the Basic Law is discussed by
Meinhardt Infrastructure & Environment Pty Ltd:[8]
'The Law for Recycling
of Specified Kinds of Home Appliances [SHAR] (effective
as of April 2001) obligates Japanese manufacturers,
retailers and consumers to share the cost of disposing
of televisions, refrigerators, washing machines
and air conditioners. Manufacturers are required
to meet designated recycling rates for each product,
and to safely dispose of any hazardous materials.
Larger manufacturers have set consistent prices
for take-back of goods, and established recycling
plants to handle both materials covered by the Act
and other electronic goods. Retailers are obliged
to pick up discarded appliances and return them
to manufacturers, with consumers contributing towards
the cost of transportation and recycling.'
Japan 's Ministerial Order sets reuse and recycling
rate targets for various products at 50-60 percent
by weight.[9]
6. 'Another
US trial, which was unique in its development approach,
was conducted by the Minnesota Office of Environmental
Assistance (MOEA). The MOEA established a partnership
with the American Plastics Council, Panasonic- Matsushita,
Sony Electronics Inc and a waste management company,
each of which provided funding for the trial. The
MOEA called for and received participation by a
range of organisations, including Local Government,
electronics retailers and waste management contractors...
The MOEA and its partners managed the transportation
and disposal of the collected material from the
65 collection sites involved in the 3 month program...
The trial provided drop-off facilities for electrical
equipment to approximately 1.3 million people and
collected around 700 tonnes of material.'[10]
Standard
for Environmental Assessment of Personal Computer
Products (EEE1680TM)[11]
In
May 2006 the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
along with the Institute for Electrical and Electronics
Engineers Standards Association announced a new
voluntary environmental performance standard to
help large computer buyers make environmentally
sound purchases. The new standard - IEEE 1680TM,
'Standard for Environmental Assessment of Personal
Computer Products' - was initiated by a group of
manufacturers, environmentalists, and purchasers,
and developed with support from the US EPA.
'Determining
which computers are environmentally preferable
is a challenge for companies, government agencies
and other organizations, ' said Jeff Scott,
the EPA's waste division director for the Pacific
Southwest region. ' This standard will change
the marketplace and measurably reduce the environmental
impacts of computers. It is an excellent example
of government, industry, environmentalists and
academics collaborating to address an issue and
improve the environment'.[12]
According
to the EPA, IEEE 1680 is the first U.S. standard
to supply environmental guidelines for institutional
purchasing decisions involving desktop and laptop
computers and monitors. It offers criteria in eight
categories - materials selection, environmentally
sensitive materials, design for end of life, end-of-life
management, energy conservation, product longevity
and life-cycle extension, packaging, and corporate
performance. The new standard will encourage manufacturers
to design their products to be used longer, be more
energy efficient, easier to upgrade and recycle,
and contain less hazardous materials.
'IEEE
1680 will foster green product design by setting
challenging, yet realistic criteria for environmental
performance, ' says Larry Chalfan, co-chair
of the IEEE 1680 Working Group and Executive Director
of the Zero Waste Alliance, which ran the process
to develop the standard. ' It creates mechanisms
for identifying and verifying that computer products
meet these criteria without delaying time to market.
It also rewards leading product designs by giving
manufacturers a low-cost way to promote product
environmental performance.'[13]
Waste
Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE)
[14]
describes
the objectives of its Waste Electrical and Electronic
Equipment (WEEE) directive:
The
purpose of this Directive is, as a first priority,
the prevention of waste electrical and electronic
equipment (WEEE), and in addition, the reuse,
recycling and other forms of recovery of such
wastes so as to reduce the disposal of waste.
It also seeks to improve the environmental performance
of all operators involved in the life cycle
of electrical and electronic equipment, e.g.
producers, distributors and consumers and in
particular those operators directly involved
in the treatment of waste electrical and electronic
equipment.
European
Union is rigorous in its stipulations, detailing
the families of products that fall under the directive.
The next major target is an average waste collection
rate of four kilograms per capita annually by
31 December 2006. The directive has been criticised
for being unfair
to countries outside the European Union (EU) and
even for being illegal. The American Electronics
Association (AEA), which has 300 member companies,
claimed that the directive would violate international
trade law obligations with the World Trade Organisation
(WTO) by imposing requirements on foreign manufacturers.[15]
However, after investigation,
the AEA's claim was deemed unfounded.[16]
Restriction
of Certain Hazardous Substances (RoHS)
European
Union[17]
describes
the objectives of its Restriction of the Use of
Certain Hazardous Substances in Electrical and Electronic
Equipment (ROHS) directive:
The
purpose of this Directive is to approximate the
laws of the Member States on the restrictions
of the use of hazardous substances in electrical
and electronic equipment and to contribute to
the protection of human health and the environmentally
sound recovery and disposal of waste electrical
and electronic equipment.
The
directive stipulates that manufacturers cannot use
lead, mercury, cadmium or hexavalent chromium, or
the brominated flame retardants PBDE and PBB in
products from July 1, 2006.[18]
The EU's RoHS directive
is set to impact the Asian economies, whose industries
supply a large amount of the world's e-products.
A survey of 359 electronics manufacturers in Greater
China and South Korea that export to Europe found
that 51 percent are RoHS-compliant.[19]
By June 2006, this
figure is expected to be 93.3 percent.[20]
However,
some expect the directives to increase the manufacturing
costs, at least during the transition period.
In
response to the directive,
[21]
The
Chinese government is developing its own China
RoHS law, which is likely to be broader in scope
and even more comprehensive than the EU directive.
The new legislation will apply to every participant
in the electronics supply chain, from manufacturers
and distributors to importers and retailers. And
unlike the EU's 'self-certification' approach,
the new law will require every product to be tested
before it is allowed entry into China . All products
sold in China or imported to the country will
be required to comply with the law as of January
2007.
The
new laws, if implemented in a timely fashion, will
help offset the impacts of the EU directives.[22]
Like China, Taiwan
is also expected to feel the impact of the EU's
WEEE and RoHS directives. Taiwan 's export of EEE
to the EU is worth an average of $10 billion.[23]
According to
the semi-official Industrial Technology Research
Institute, the WEEE and RoHS directives could
increase costs between 3 percent and 5 percent
for branded electrical and electronics product
vendors and raise producers' manufacturing costs
from 5 percent to 10 percent.[24]
Preparations
to accommodate the directives are underway. 'According
to a survey conducted by the bureau, 63 percent
of domestic manufacturers have started to prepare
for WEEE regulation, while 87 percent of them said
they have begun to comply with RoHS'.[25]
Registration,
Evaluation and Authorisation of Chemicals (REACH)
Council
of the European Commission[26]
describes the
purpose of its proposed Registration, Evaluation
and Authorisation of Chemicals (REACH) regulatory
framework:
The
purpose of this Regulation is to ensure a high
level of protection of human health and the environment
as well as the free circulation of substances
on the internal market while enhancing competitiveness
and innovation.
Under
REACH, chemical producers and importers whose volume
is at least one ton per year must register those
chemicals with a Chemicals Agency.[27]
Producers and importers
must also disclose safety information so their chemicals
can be used with minimal hazard. Each registered
chemical and proposal for animal testing is evaluated.
For those chemicals that cause cancer, mutation
or problems with reproduction, or chemicals that
bioaccumulate - authorisation that is use-specific
must be sought.[28]
This restriction on
highly hazardous chemicals is expected to encourage
substitution with safer chemicals.[29]
The regulation was
first proposed in 2003 and has since been through
revisions and the Council has produced a Common
Position. The final agreement and adoption of the
proposal is expected by the end of 2006. [30]
1.
RMIT & Product Ecology (2004)
Electrical and electronic
products infrastructure facilitation,
RMIT & Product Ecology,
p. 32.
http://www.deh.gov.au/industry/waste/electricals/infrastructure
(viewed 9 May 2006) (Back)
2. Meinhardt Infrastructure &
Environment Pty Ltd (2001) Computer
& peripherals material project,
Meinhardt Infrastructure & Environment Pty Ltd,
p. 55. (viewed 10 May 2006)
(Back)
3. Associated Press (2006) EU
to agree on new battery recycling plan, officials
say, Environmental
News Network. http://www.enn.com/today.html?id=10384
(viewed 5 May 2006) (Back)
4. Environment Victoria (2005)
Environmental report card
on computers 2005: computer waste in Australia and
the case for producer responsibility,
Environment Victoria, p. 30.
http://www.envict.org.au/file/EWaste_blue_report_card.pdf
(viewed 9 July 2006) (Back)
5. Puckett,
J., Byster, L., Westervelt, S., Gutierrez, R., Davis,
S., Hussain, A. and Dutta, M. (2002) Exporting
harm: the high-tech trashing of Asia, Basel Action
Network, p. 4. http://www.ban.org/E-waste/technotrashfinalcomp.pdf
(viewed 1 May 2006); OECD
(2001) Extended Producer
Responsibility: A guidance manual for governments,
OECD, p. 105. www.oecd.org/publications/e-book/9701041e.pdf
(viewed 12 May 2006) (Back)
6. Environment Victoria (2005)
Environmental report card
on computers 2005: computer waste in Australia and
the case for producer responsibility,
Environment Victoria, p. 29.
http://www.envict.org.au/file/EWaste_blue_report_card.pdf
(viewed 9 July 2006) (Back)
7. Ibid (Back)
8. Meinhardt Infrastructure &
Environment Pty Ltd (2001) Computer
& peripherals material project,
Meinhardt Infrastructure & Environment Pty Ltd,
p. 57-58. (viewed 10 May 2006)
(Back)
9. Article 4, Ministerial Order
cited in Tojo, N. (2005) Extended
producer responsibility as a driver for design change
- utopia or reality?,
Lund University, Sweden, p. 78.
www.iiiee.lu.se/Publication.nsf/$webAll/
8D43CC08DD00501DC1256EFA0051513B/$FILE/tojo.pdf
(viewed 9 May 2006)
(Back)
13. Ibid (Back)
14. European Union (2003a) 'Directive
2002/96/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council
of 27 January 2003 on waste electrical and electronic
equipment (WEEE)', Official Journal of the European
Union. europa.eu.int/eur-lex/pri/en/oj/dat/2003/l_037/l_03720030213en00240038.pdf
(viewed 1 May 2006) (Back)
15. Hunter, R. and Lopez, M. (1999)
Position of the American
Electronics Association (AEA) on the European Commission's
draft directive on Waste from Electrical and Electronic
Equipment WEEE),
Silicon Valley Toxic Coalition. http://www.svtc.org/cleancc/weee/euweee/directive/weeeaea.htm
(viewed 12 May 2006); Knight, D. (2000)
Sony monitoring environmental
activists, Interpress.
http://www.svtc.org/cleancc/sonyspy.htm
(viewed 8 May 2006) (Back)
16. Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition
(1999) Clean computer campaign:
analysis of the AEA claims that the proposed European
Directive on Waste from Electrical and Electronic
Equipment (WEEE Directive) will conflict with the
WTO trade rules, Silicon
Valley Toxics Coalition. http://www.svtc.org/cleancc/weee/directive/
ccc_aea.htm
(viewed 8 May 2006) (Back)
17.
European
Union (2003b) 'Directive 2002/95/EC
of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27
January 2003 on the restriction of the use of certain
hazardous substances in electrical and electronic
equipment ', Official Journal of the European
Union. http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/pri/en/oj/dat/2003/l_037/
l_03720030213en00190023.pdf
(viewed 1 May 2006) (Back)
18.
Bannerman, M. (2004) Phone
recycling claims called into doubt, Australian
Broadcasting Commission. http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2004/
s1260911.htm
(viewed 7 May 2006) (Back)
19.
Global Sources (2005) RoHS
compliance readiness survey: mainland China, Taiwan,
Hong Kong and South Korea,
Global Sources, p. 3. http://static.globalsources.com/SITE/PDF/ROHS.PDF?source=ROHS
(viewed 15 May 2006) (Back)
20.
Ibid (Back)
21.
Li, Z. (2006) EU "Green"
Directives cast challenge to China 's electronics
industry, Worldwatch
Institute. http://www.worldwatch.org/features/chinawatch/
stories/20060222-1
(viewed 15 May 2006) (Back)
22.
China View (2005) Electronic
waste poses mounting challenge,
China Daily. http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2005-04/06/content_2791639.htm
(viewed 9 May 2006) (Back)
23.
Global Sources (2005) RoHS
compliance readiness survey: mainland China, Taiwan,
Hong Kong and South Korea,
Global Sources, p. 3. http://static.globalsources.com/SITE/PDF/ROHS.PDF?source=ROHS
(viewed 15 May 2006) (Back)
24.
Ho, J. (2005) Two environmental
Rules to be upheld in Taiwan,
Taipei Times. http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/biz/archives/2005/03/26/2003247879
(viewed 9 May 2006) (Back)
25.
Ibid (Back)
26.
Council
of the European Commission (2006) Regulation
(EC) No ./2006 of the European Parliament and of the
Council of concerning the Registration, Evaluation,
Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH),
establishing a European Chemicals Agency, amending
Directive 1999/45/EC of the European Parliament and
of the Council and repealing Council Regulation (EEC)
No 793/93 and Commission Regulation (EC) No 1488/94
as well as Council Directive 76/769/EEC and Commission
Directives 91/155/EEC, 93/67/EEC, 93/105/EC and 2000/21/EC,
Council of the Erupoean
Commission, p. 39. http://register.consilium.europa.eu/pdf/en/06/
st07/st07524.en06.pdf
(viewed 31 July 2006) (Back)
27.
Ibid, p. 3 (Back)
28.
Ibid, pp. 3-4 (Back)
29.
Ibid, p. 4 (Back)
30.
Europa (2006) REACH.
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/chemicals/reach/
reach_intro.htm
(viewed 31 July 2006) (Back)
|
|