Extended Producer Responsibility for Waste Electronics: An Example of Printer Recycling in the United Kingdom

In February 2003, European Union (EU) policy makers implemented a Directive that will make producers responsible for waste electrical and electronic equipment at end-of-life (known as the "WEEE" Directive). Under this new legislation, producers are required to organize and finance the take-back, treatment, and recycling of WEEE and achieve mass-based recycling and recovery targets. This legislation is part of a growing trend of extended producer responsibility for waste, which has the potential to shift the world's economies toward more circular patterns of resource use and recycling. This study uses life-cycle assessment and costing to investigate the possible environmental effects of the WEEE Directive, based on an example of printer recycling in the United Kingdom.
For a total of four waste management scenarios and nine environmental impact categories investigated in this study, results varied, with no scenario emerging as best or worst overall compared to landfilling. The level of environmental impact depended on the type of material and waste management processes involved. Additionally, under the broad mass-based targets of the WEEE Directive, the pattern of relationships between recycling rates, environmental impacts, and treatment and recycling costs may lead to unplanned and unwanted results. Contrary to original EU assumptions, the use of mass-based targets may not ensure that producers adapt the design of their products as intended under producer responsibility.
It is concluded that the EU should revise the scope of consideration of the WEEE Directive to ensure its life-cycle impacts are addressed. In particular, specific environmental objectives and operating standards for treatment and recycling processes should be investigated as an alternative to mass-based recycling and recovery targets.     

Business‐to‐Business Information Technology User Practices at End of Life in the United Kingdom,Germany, and France

Business‐to‐business (B2B) electronics account for a significant volume of the electrical and electronic equipment (EEE) put on the market. Very little B2B waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE) is reported as collected in the European Union (EU) in compliance with the WEEE Directive, which uses the policy principle of extended producer responsibility (EPR) to ensure that WEEE is managed correctly. This presents a barrier to parties looking for access to the waste. Company practice dictates the channels into which B2B WEEE flows following primary use. This article presents a study that engaged with company actors directly to get a better understanding of business information technology (IT) EEE asset management. Data were collected to determine the barriers current practice could present to the collection of B2B IT EEE at end of life and the implications of these for the development of policies and strategies for EPR. A questionnaire was developed and data were gathered from organizations in three EU countries—the United Kingdom, Germany, and France—stratified by size. Some notable findings were that there are several routes by which end‐of‐life B2B WEEE can flow. The recycling and refurbishment of B2B IT units at end of use was shown to be commonplace, but it is likely that these units enter streams where they are not reported. The actors disposing of their units did not have information on the management or disposition of these streams. It is concluded that to achieve the goals of EPR for B2B IT WEEE, the networks and the operational practices of these streams need to be better understood when developing strategies and policies.     

Implementing Individual Producer Responsibility for Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment through Improved Financing

Under the European Union (EU) Waste Electrical and Electronics Equipment (WEEE) Directive, producers are responsible for financing the recycling of their products at end of life. A key intention of such extended producer responsibility (EPR) legislation is to provide economic incentives for producers to develop products that are easier to treat and recycle at end of life. Recent research has shown, however, that the implementation of EPR for WEEE has so far failed in this respect. Current WEEE systems calculate their prices according to simple mass‐based allocation of costs to producers, based on broad collection categories containing a mixture of different product types and brands. This article outlines two alternative approaches, which instead calculate charges for products sold by producers by classifying them according to their eventual end‐of‐life treatment requirements and cost. Worked examples indicate that these methods provide both effective and efficient frameworks for financing WEEE, potentially delivering financial incentives to producers substantial enough to affect their potential profitability and, as a likely consequence, the decisions relating to the design of their products. In particular they fulfill three important criteria required by the WEEE Directive: they can financially reward improved design, allocate costs of historic waste proportionately (on the basis of tonnes of new products sold), and provide sufficient financial guarantees against future waste costs and liabilities. They are also relatively practical for implementation because they are based solely on cost allocation and financing. Further research and investigation would be worthwhile to test and verify this approach using real‐world data and under various scenarios.     

Strategic, Financial, and Design Implications of Extended Producer Responsibility in Europe: A Producer Case Study

Extended producer responsibility (EPR) legislation, making producers responsible for financing and organizing take-back and recycling of waste batteries, packaging, end-of-life vehicles (ELVs), and waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE), has been or is currently in the process of being implemented in 29 different countries in Europe following introduction of European Union directives. This article reviews the potential impacts of EPR for waste batteries, packaging, and WEEE on producers distributing products in Europe through a case study of Sony Computer Entertainment Europe (SCEE)—responsible for marketing and distribution of PlayStation products.
There are presently more than 250 producer responsibility organizations (PROs) established to meet EPR obligations in Europe, which contrasts to the single national recycling schemes founded in the late 1990s. SCEE estimates it avoided anetcostof €408,000 in 2005 by introducing competitive review of PRO services (against a total net take-back cost of €401,000).To meet increasingly extensive compliance obligations, SCEE has initiated new activities, with considerable implications for the company's legal, sales data administration, procurement, accounting, and product and packaging approval practices.
Considering the ultimate aim of EPR to establish economic incentives for improved product design, several significant political and practical obstacles are described from SCEE's case and industry situation. Although the principle of EPR is indeed interesting, its practical application in Europe may require refinement. Producers, given adequate support by policy makers, still have opportunities to develop new processes under the WEEE Directive to facilitate design for the environment.     

From Legal Transplants to Sustainable Transition

Extended producer responsibility (EPR), which assigns significant responsibility to producers to take back their end‐of‐life products to create incentives for redesign of products with lower life cycle environmental impacts, has come to a crossroad facing a trade‐off between the original innovation‐oriented regime design and the cost‐efficiency challenges in practice. This is particularly true in its implementation in non‐Organization for Economic Co‐operation and Development (OECD) countries as they are trying to transplant the “best practices” from OECD countries, for there is increasing skepticism as to whether EPR is suitable for developing countries at all. As an important producer of electronic products and destination of electronic waste (e‐waste) flows in the world, China has been expected to play a vital role in the evolution of global governance based on the idea of EPR, either to create new ways for producers to perform their end‐of‐life strategies, or to reshape the mode of production and consumption with its fast‐growing market. However, the establishment of EPR in China has been long and full of difficulties. This article reviews the status and trends in the establishment of an EPR system for waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE) management in China. We use the framework of a multilevel perspective of transition theory in our analysis to characterize the complex interactions among various agents in the evolution of the Chinese system from initial innovation‐oriented design to the current efficiency‐oriented version. An ongoing research framework for evaluation of the EPR program in China is outlined as the research agenda in coming years.     

Feasibility of Using Radio Frequency Identification to Facilitate Individual Producer Responsibility for Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment

Regulatory measures that hold producers accountable for their products at end of life are increasingly common. Some of these measures aim at generating incentives for producers to design products that will be easier and cheaper to recover at the postconsumer stage. However, the allocation of recovery costs to individual producers, which can facilitate realization of the goals of these policies, is hindered by the practical barrier of identification and/or sorting of the products in the waste stream. Technologies such as radio frequency identification (RFID) can be used for brand or model recognition in order to overcome this obstacle. This article assesses the read rate of RFID technology (i.e., the number of successful retrievals of RFID tag data [“reads”] in a given sample of tagged products) and the potential role of RFID tags in the management of waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE) at current levels of technical development. We present the results of RFID trials conducted at a civic amenity site in the city of Limerick, Ireland. The experiment was performed for fixed distances up to 2 meters on different material substrates. In the case of white goods (i.e., large household appliances), a 100% read rate was achieved using an RFID handheld reader. High read rates were also achieved for mixed WEEE. For a handheld scan of a steel cage containing mixed WEEE, read rates varied from 50% to 73% depending on the ultrahigh frequency (UHF) metal mount tag employed and the relative positioning of the tags within the cage. These results confirm that from a technical standpoint, RFID can achieve much greater brand or model identification than has been considered feasible up to now, and thus has a role to play in creating a system that allocates recovery costs to individual producers.     

Screening of Metals in Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment Using Simple Assessment Methods

Abstract: Various toxic, useful, and/or scarce metals in waste electric and electronic equipment (WEEE) have rarely been assessed due to low data availability, except for the four metals regulated by the European Union's Directive on the Restriction of Hazardous Substances (RoHS). This article describes the results of screening 36 metals in WEEE using simple assessment methods for cases where the decision makers do not know for which substances in a product countermeasures should be taken and where data cannot be easily obtained. First, this study examines the decision-making process and prerequisites for screening, classifies existing assessment methods, and presents three simple indices for screening (resource consumption, water pollution affecting human health, and aquatic biota conservation) so that screening can be readily started for many (20–36) metals. Following this, a case study is conducted for waste TV sets, revealing which metal in which product module or component should be targeted by environmental countermeasures. Finally, the screening results are compared with those of six other methods using diagrams devised to indicate the superiority of screening methods, and several screening techniques are discussed. The conclusions are that the EU RoHS Directive does not necessarily cover all of the toxic metals that could be of concern and the screening methods presented could help identify such metals; the selection of methods is critical; and a more detailed method does not necessarily provide more accurate results.     

废弃电器电子产品产生量估算--方法综述与选择策略

开展废弃电器电子产品产生量估算是对其进行可持续管理的基础研究领域之一。选择适宜的估算方法与提高数据质量是废弃电器电子产品产生量估算工作中需要解决的关键问题。全面总结了国内外现有废弃电器电子产品产生量估算方法的研发背景、估算模型、输入参数与应用实例,对比分析了不同方法的数据需求与适用条件,进而探讨了废弃电器电子产品产生量估算方法的选择策略,即综合考虑估算对象的系统边界、产品类别、数据来源与质量等特征选择适宜的估算方法。可以为废弃电器电子产品产生量的估算和可持续管理提供理论支撑。     

Extended Producer Responsibility in Thailand

Waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE) sheds light on the dimmer side of production and consumption patterns in modern societies. The rapid increase in its quantity and complexity contribute to the challenges it poses to solid waste management systems. Several members of the Organisation for Economic Co‐operation and Development (OECD) have relied on the principle of extended producer responsibility (EPR) to tackle the issue, with varying degrees of success. Several non‐OECD countries, including Thailand, are now developing WEEE programs and are looking for lessons from these first movers. This case study aims to provide an understanding both of this context and of the EPR program for WEEE proposed for Thailand. It finds that EPR mechanisms in general, and the proposed buy‐back system financed by product fees in Thailand in particular, have a strong potential to consolidate WEEE collection for the formal recycling sector by offering end users monetary incentives. On the negative side, this is an expensive combination of policy instruments, and the institutional design of the governmental fund is rigid. The policy proposal also contains no mechanism for product redesign—one of the objectives in the national WEEE strategy. This article suggests that the effectiveness of the policy might benefit from more flexibility at the compliance scheme level, in order to lessen the monopoly of the governmental fund, as well as the introduction of differentiated fees to promote environmentally friendly products.     

Thermodynamic rarity of electrical and electronic waste: Assessment and policy implications for critical materials

The strategic relevance of extracting raw materials from waste from electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE) in the EU is increasing due to value chain risks caused by geopolitical instability, accessibility of specific minerals, and decreasing reserves due to growing extraction rates. This article examines the quantities of so-called critical raw materials (CRMs) originating within WEEE streams from a depletion perspective. Presently, current recycling targets are based solely on mass collection and recycling rates. We examine the potential limitations of this approach using an exergy-based indicator named thermodynamic rarity. This indicator represents the exergy costs needed for producing materials from the bare rock to market. The case of Italy is used to explore the application of the indicator at the macro (national) and micro (company) level for the product categories “small electronics” and “screens and monitors.” Our estimations show significant differences between the mass and rarity of materials within Italian WEEE streams. While iron accounts for more than 70% of the weight of the product categories analyzed, it accounts for less than 15% of the rarity. Similarly, several CRMs with a small mass have a higher rarity value, for example, tungsten with less than 0.1% of the mass and over 6% of the rarity. The policy context is reflected upon, where it is argued that thermodynamic rarity can provide novel insights to support end-of-life WEEE decision-making processes, for example, target development and recycling standards setting to help prioritize material monitoring and recovery options.     

Reducing Life Cycle Environmental Impacts of Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment Recycling

Collection and treatment of waste from electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE) is regulated in the European Union by the WEEE Directive. Producers are responsible for take‐back and recycling of discarded equipment. Valuable materials are, however, at risk of “getting lost” in current processes. Thus, strategies to minimize losses are sought after. The material hygiene (MH) concept was introduced to address this issue. Structural features, which are important for the outcome of reuse, recovery, and recycling, were investigated in an earlier field study of discarded dishwashers. It was proposed that a prestep, manual removal of copper prior to shredding could increase the purity of recovered material fractions. This article builds on the field study and theoretical reasoning underlying the MH concept. Dishwashers are assumed to be designed for disassembly when the prestep is introduced. A limited life cycle assessment was performed to determine whether the proposed prestep may be environmentally beneficial in a life cycle perspective. Two alternatives were analyzed: Case 1: the current shredding process. Case 2: prestep removal of copper before shredding. Targeted disassembly prior to shredding may reduce the abiotic depletion and global warming potential in a life cycle perspective. The prestep results in increased copper recovery, but, more important, copper contamination of the recovered steel fractions is reduced. The results also highlight the importance of minimizing energy consumption in all process stages.     

Substance Flow Analysis of Wastes Containing Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers

The present article examines flows and stocks of Stockholm Convention regulated pollutants, commercial penta‐ and octabrominated diphenyl ether (cPentaBDE, cOctaBDE), on a city level. The goals are to (1) identify sources, pathways, and sinks of these compounds in the city of Vienna, (2) determine the fractions that reach final sinks, and (3) develop recommendations for waste management to ensure their minimum recycling and maximum transfer to appropriate final sinks. By means of substance flow analysis (SFA) and scenario analysis, it was found that the key flows of cPentaBDE stem from construction materials. Therefore, end‐of‐life (EOL) plastic materials used for construction must be separated and properly treated, for example, in a state‐of‐the‐art municipal solid waste (MSW) incinerator. In the case of cOctaBDE, the main flows are waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE) and, possibly, vehicles. Most EOL vehicles are exported from Vienna and pose a continental, rather than a local, problem. According to the modeling, approximately 73% of cOctaBDE reached the final sink MSW incinerator, and 17% returned back to consumption by recycling. Secondary plastics, made from WEEE, may thus contain significant amounts of cOctaBDE; however, uncertainties are high. According to uncertainty analysis, the major cause is the lack of reliable values regarding cOctaBDE concentrations in European WEEE categories 3 and 4, including cathode ray tube monitors for computers and televisions. We recommend establishing a new, goal‐oriented data set by additional analyses of waste constituents and plastic recycling samples, as well as establishing reliable mass balances of polybrominated diphenyl ethers’ flows and stocks by means of SFA.     

International Cooperation for Metal Recycling From Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment

This article addresses a market‐based management concept for waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE) known as the “best‐of‐two‐worlds” approach. The concept is based on the idea that recyclers in developing countries and emerging economies can cooperate with technologically advanced refineries in industrialized countries to facilitate efficient recovery of valuable metals, such as gold and palladium, from e‐waste. The article provides an overview of technical and environmental concerns underlying the concept and sheds light on the political framework, the waste‐related trade issues, and the resource economics that need to be considered for further decision making. Building on this synthesis, I conduct a qualitative assessment of sustainability impacts of the proposed concept by analyzing two scenarios and their associated risks. The analysis suggests that, under certain preconditions, the best‐of‐two‐worlds concept could yield significant improvements in terms of management of hazardous substances, resource efficiency, greenhouse gas emissions, income generation, and investments into social and environmental standards. Generally, two potential implementation scenarios were identified: Whereas under Scenario 1 only WEEE generated within developing countries and emerging economies is managed through the best‐of‐two‐worlds approach, Scenario 2 additionally incorporates WEEE imported from industrialized countries. Although both scenarios can yield a variety of benefits, Scenario 2 might cause a net flow of hazardous substances from industrialized countries into developing countries and emerging economies, thus leading to less beneficial sustainability impacts.     

Producer Responsibility Organizations Development and Operations

Extended producer responsibility (EPR) regulations are now in effect in 27 European Union member states and are applicable to up to 100 million tonnes of waste packaging, batteries, automobiles, and electrical and electronic products annually. This article investigates the implementation of EPR through a case study of European Recycling Platform (ERP) UK Ltd., the UK arm of one of the largest producer responsibility organizations (PROs) in Europe, recycling more than 1.5 million tonnes of waste electrical and electronic equipment to date. Previous research is extremely limited on the detailed operations of PROs. This case is presented as an example illustrating typical operational challenges PROs face in implementing EPR, such as how PROs gain an understanding of the waste management infrastructure and legislation in each country, collect sufficient volumes of waste using cost‐effective arrangements, and maintain uninterrupted collection, treatment, and recycling services. The case study provides new insights and context on the practical implementation of EPR regulations relevant for both policy makers and researchers.     

Recycling plastics from e-waste: Implications for effective eco-design

This paper presents five case studies on waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE) recycling to provide a coherent overview on the likely impact of eco-design measures on recycling of plastics used in energy-related products within the EU. Whilst some eco-design measures, such as improving disassembly of plastic parts, may generally benefit recycling operations, other measures were found to be ineffective or requiring further investigation. For example, product polymer marking, and provision of product-specific information was rarely utilized by participant organizations, if at all. Additionally, this study highlights a disconnect between the aims of substance bans as an eco-design measure and the impact upon plastics recycling in practice. Future research could help with quantitative and/or statistical analysis of WEEE processing to investigate across a wider selection of recyclers and recycling processes. Despite 20 years of research on eco-design, it appears that EU eco-design policies and voluntary initiatives are still being devised without adequate understanding of their impact on different types of recycling practices. Empirical research on recycling processes can provide important insight to ensure eco-design measures are effective and avoid unintended consequences for the environment.     

Dimensionality Reduction and Visualization of the Environmental Impacts of Domestic Appliances

There is an increasing worldwide concern about the problem of dealing with the waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE), given the high volume of appliances that are disposed of every day. In this article, an environmental evaluation of WEEE is performed that combines life cycle assessment (LCA) methodology and multivariate statistical techniques. Because LCA handles a large number of data in its different phases, when one is trying to uncover the structure of large multidimensional data sets, multivariate statistical techniques can provide useful information. In particular, principal‐component analysis and multidimensional scaling are two important dimension‐reducing tools that have been shown to be of help in understanding this type of complex multivariate data set. In this article, we use a variable selection method that reduces the number of categories for which the environmental impacts have to be computed; this step is especially useful when the number of impact categories or the number of products or processes to benchmark increases. We provide a detailed illustration showing how we have used the proposed approach to analyze and interpret the environmental impacts of different domestic appliances.     

India's E‐Waste Rules and Their Impact on E‐Waste Management Practices: A Case Study

India, like many other developed and developing countries, has adopted an extended producer responsibility (EPR) approach for electronic waste (e‐waste) management under its E‐waste (Management and Handling) Rules, 2011. Under these rules, producers have been made responsible for setting up collection centers of e‐waste and financing and organizing a system for environmentally sound management of e‐waste. In this article, we use the implementation of these rules in Ahmedabad in western India as a case study to conduct a critical analysis of the implementation of India's Rules. Interviews of main stakeholder groups, including a sample of regulated commercial establishments, regulatory agencies enforcing the Rules, informal actors involved in waste collection and handling, as well as publicly available information on the implementation constitute data for our case study. Our results indicate that while there has been an increase in the formal waste processing capacity after the implementation of the Rules, only 5% to 15% of the total waste generated is likely channeled through formal processing facilities. While the EPR regulation forced the producers to take action on a few relatively inexpensive aspects of the Rules, the collection and recycling system has not been made convenient for the consumers to deposit e‐waste in formal collection and recycling centers. Based on our findings, we argue that Indian EPR regulation should go beyond simple take‐back mandates and consider implementing other policy instruments such as a deposit‐refund system. An important implication for developing countries is the need for careful attention to instrument choice and design within EPR regulations.     

Strategic Responses to Environmental Regulation in the U.K. Automotive Sector: The European Union End-of-Life Vehicle Directive and the Porter Hypothesis

As of 1 January 2006 all automotive OEMs (original equipment manufacturers) and component manufacturers operating within the European Union will need to comply with the End-of-Life Vehicle Directive (referred to hereafter as the EU ELV Directive). The EU ELV Directive compels all OEMs to take back and dismantle all motor vehicles for domestic use at the end of their useful lives. Each component part will then be either reused or recycled. To this end, the ultimate goal of the EU ELV Directive is that all motor vehicles for domestic use will have a reuse or recyclable content of 85% at the end of their useful lives, moving toward 95% by 2015. The burden of the EU ELV Directive falls on both the OEMs and their component manufacturers, forcing them to innovate and "design for disassembly." This being the case, it offers a unique real world example with which to test the Porter Hypothesis. Porter asserts that strict, correctly formulated environmental regulation can offer a firm secondary benefits through improved product design and the reduction of waste. This in turn allows the firm to offset the cost of compliance. Because the EU ELV Directive has been fashioned to force firms into a process of innovation and redesign, the magnitude of these so-called offsets can be judged. This article employs Rugman and Verbeke's 1998 strategic matrix of firm response to environmental regulation to examine qualitative details of the strategic response of automotive component manufacturers and OEMs in the United Kingdom to the demands of the directive to judge the volume of offsets generated. This analysis shows no support for the Porter Hypothesis and challenges the assumptions of Rugman and Verbeke's model.     

A study on the environmental aspects of WEEE plastic recycling in a Brazilian company

Purpose

The high consumption of electrical and electronic equipment motivated by the rapid technological advances seen over the years has lead to an increase in the generation of waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE). Such residues contain various dangerous substances and therefore deserve special attention. To that end, the Brazilian Policy on Solid Waste has provided guidelines on integrated and solid waste management, such as consumer electronics, aiming at their appropriate disposal and treatment through reverse logistics. In this context, the present work focuses on studying the recycling of some WEEE plastics.

Methods

This study was conducted using the methodological framework presented in the International Standard ISO 14040:2006 and aimed to determine the life cycle inventory (LCI) of a WEEE plastic recycling process in a company in Brazil. Having collected the data, it was possible to identify and quantify the environmental aspects caused by the recycling process of major plastics (acrylonitrile-butadiene-styrene (ABS) and high impact polystyrene (HIPS). The study was conducted in the only company in Brazil that operates WEEE plastic recycling in large scale.

Results and discussion

Some of the environmental aspects caused during the recycling process of the plastics under study were identified and quantified. As a result, besides presenting the inventory, it was also possible to determine a reduction in the consumption of energy and in CO₂ emissions. When compared to the production of virgin ABS and HIPS, the recycling processes for such plastics showed a reduction in energy consumption by approximately 90% for both plastics and a reduction in CO₂ emissions by approximately 84% for HIPS and 87% for ABS. The plastics recycled by the company retain over 90% of their virgin mechanical properties.

Conclusions

The study shows that recycling is highly relevant and that components present in WEEE received appropriate destination and treatment. Recycling avoids environmental impacts as it prevents WEEE from being disposed of in landfills and as the pellets of recycled plastics can re-enter the supply chain as raw materials. Considering the legislation in Brazil, the stage of collection/transport/treatment of WEEE conducted by the company under study presents strong indications of contributions to the environment, society, and economy of the country.

     

Closed‐Loop Supply Chains for Photovoltaic Panels: A Case‐Based Approach

Photovoltaic (PV) waste is expected to significantly increase. However, legislation on producer responsibility for the collection and recovery of PV panels is limited to the European Union (EU) Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment Directive Recast, which lays down design, collection, and recovery measures. Academic knowledge of closed‐loop supply chains (CLSCs) for PV panels is scarce. We analyze the supply chain using multiple cases involving the main stakeholders in the design, production, collection, and recovery of PV panels. Our article answers two research questions: How does the PV supply chain operate, and what are critical factors affecting the reverse supply chain management of used panels? Our research seeks to fill the gap in the CLSC literature on PV panels, as well as to identify barriers and enablers for PV panel design, collection, and recycling.