E-WASTE
DISPOSAL
IN
SEVERAL
COUNTRIES-
A DETAILED ANALYSIS
Manu Seth
Campus Law Centre, University of Delhi
As an annexure to the
former report, it focuses on e-waste disposal systems in different countries
namely-U.S.A, China, Brazil & Germany.
The primary aim of
carrying out such a task was to see as to how different countries deal with the
problem of e-waste & the effective measures that India can employ seeing
the situation and different laws as precedent.
E-waste(electronic
waste) or high-tech trash refers to items such as computers, televisions,
cellphones, transistors, various machinery equipments etc. when being disposed
terming it as ‘old-fashioned’ or when they become obsolete.
Unlike typical
garbage, e-waste is non-biodegradable and poses large scale threat to the life
and limb.
A report by Assocham (Indian Express dated
June5,2012) states that less than 5% e-waste is recycled in India due to
absence of proper infrastructure, legislation and famework.
In its analysis on the World Environment Day,
it said that India, growing at a compounded annual growth rate of about 20 per
cent, annually generates over 4.4 lakh tonnes of e-waste.
Almost half of all unused and end-of-life
electronic products lie idle in landfills, junkyards and warehouses, it said.
Computer equipment accounts for almost 68% of
e-waste material followed by telecommunication equipment (12 %), electrical
equipment (8%) and medical equipment (7%). Other equipments including household
e-crap account for the remaining five per cent, it said.
"Over 90 per cent of e-waste generated in
India is managed by the unorganised sector and scrap dealers in this market
dismantle the disposed products instead of recycling it," Assocham General
Secretary D S Rawat said, while releasing the findings of the chamber's
analysis.
However most of these products can be
recycled, refurbished and redeployed going down the value chain and reused by a
bit of reconstruction process, reducing overall impact on the environment, he
said.
Another report which moved me further to go
neck deep into researching the topic is by United Nations University Institute for Sustainability and
Peace dated 22Feb.2010.[1]
According to the same,
sales of electronic products in countries like China and
India and across continents such as Africa and Latin America are set to rise
sharply in the next 10 years.
And, unless action is stepped up to properly collect and recycle
materials, many developing countries face the spectre of hazardous e-waste
mountains with serious consequences for the environment and public health,
according to UN experts in a landmark report released today by UNEP.
Issued at a meeting of Basel Convention and other world chemical
authorities prior to UNEP’s Governing Council meeting in Bali, Indonesia, the
report, “Recycling
– from E-Waste to Resources,” used data from 11 representative
developing countries to estimate current and future e-waste generation – which
includes old and dilapidated desk and laptop computers, printers, mobile
phones, pagers, digital photo and music devices, refrigerators, toys and
televisions.
In South Africa and China for example, the report predicts that
by 2020 e-waste from old computers will have jumped by 200 to 400 percent from
2007 levels, and by 500% in India. By that same year in China, e-waste from
discarded mobile phones will be about 7 times higher than 2007 levels and, in
India, 18 times higher.
By 2020, e-waste from televisions will be 1.5 to 2 times higher
in China and India while in India e-waste from discarded refrigerators will
double or triple.
China already produces about 2.3 million tonnes (2010 estimate)
domestically, second only to the United States with about 3 million tonnes.
And, despite having banned e-waste imports, China remains a major e-waste
dumping ground for developed countries.
“China is not alone in
facing a serious challenge. India, Brazil, Mexico and others may also face
rising environmental damage and health problems if e-waste recycling is left to
the vagaries of the informal sector.” said UN Under-Secretary-General Achim
Steiner, Executive Director of UNEP
“In addition to curbing health problems, boosting developing
country e-waste recycling rates can have the potential to generate decent
employment, cut greenhouse gas emissions and recover a wide range of valuable
metals including silver, gold, palladium, copper and indium -- by acting now
and planning forward many countries can turn an e-challenge into an
e-opportunity,” he added.
The report cites a
variety of sources to illustrate growth of the e-waste problem:
·
Global e-waste generation is growing by about 40 million tons a
year
·
Manufacturing mobile phones and personal computers consumes 3
per cent of the gold and silver mined worldwide each year; 13 per cent of the
palladium and 15 per cent of cobalt
·
Modern electronics contain up to 60 different elements -- many
valuable, some hazardous, and some both
·
Carbon dioxide emissions from the mining and production of
copper and precious and rare metals used in electrical and electronic equipment
are estimated at over 23 million tonnes – 0.1 percent of global emissions (not
including emissions linked to steel, nickel or aluminum, nor those linked to
manufacturing the devices)
·
In the US, more than 150 million mobiles and pagers were sold in
2008, up from 90 million five years before
·
Globally, more than 1 billion mobile phones were sold in 2007,
up from 896 million in 2006
·
Countries like Senegal and Uganda can expect e-waste flows from
PCs alone to increase 4 to 8-fold by 2020.
·
Given the infrastructure expense and technology skills required
to create proper facilities for efficient and environmentally sound metal
recovery, the report suggests facilitating exports of critical e-scrap
fractions like circuit boards or btteries from smaller countries to OECD-level,
certified end-processors.
Country Situations
The report assesses
current policies, skills, waste collection networks and informal recycling in
11 developing economies in Asia, Africa and the Americas: China, India, South
Africa, Uganda, Senegal, Kenya, Morocco, Brazil, Columbia, Mexico and Peru. It
also outlines options for sustainable e-waste management in those countries.
The data includes
equipment generated nationally but does not include waste imports, both legal
and illegal, which are substantial in India, China and other emerging
economies. Broken down by e-waste type, the report estimates e-waste generation
today as follows:
|
China:
|
500,000 tonnes from refrigerators,
1.3 million tonnes from TVs, 300,000 tonnes from personal computers
|
|
India:
|
over 100,000 tonnes from
refrigerators, 275,000 tonnes from TVs, 56,300 tonnes from personal
computers, 4,700 tonnes from printers and 1,700 tonnes from mobile phones
|
|
Colombia:
|
about 9,000 tonnes from
refrigerators, over 18,000 tonnes from TVs, 6,500 tonnes from personal
computers, 1,300 tonnes from printers, 1,200 tonnes from mobile phones
|
|
Kenya:
|
about 9,000 tonnes from
refrigerators, over 18,000 tonnes from TVs, 6,500 tonnes from personal
computers, 1,300 tonnes from printers, 1,200 tonnes from mobile phones
|
U.S.A.
These days, it's often
cheaper and more convenient to buy a new PC than to upgrade an old one. But
what happens to those old computers once they've been abandoned for newer
models?
The refuse from
discarded electronics products, also known as e-waste, often ends up in
landfills or incinerators instead of being recycled. And that means toxic
substances like lead, cadmium and mercury that are commonly used in these
products can contaminate the land, water and air.
"The fruits of
our high-tech revolution are pure poison if these products are improperly
disposed of at the end of their useful life," said Ted Smith, founder of
the Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition.
Where does E-Waste
go?
Many
old electronic goods gather dust in storage waiting to be reused, recycled or
thrown away. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) estimates that as
much as three-quarters of the computers sold in the United States are
stockpiled in garages and closets. When thrown away, they end up in landfills
or incinerators or, more recently, are exported to Asia.
Landfill: According to the EPA, more than
4.6 million tons of e-waste ended up in U.S. landfills in 2000. Toxic chemicals
in electronics products can leach into the land over time or are released into
the atmosphere, impacting nearby communities and the environment. In many
European countries, regulations have been introduced to prevent electronic
waste being dumped in landfills due to its hazardous content. However, the
practice still continues in many countries. In Hong Kong, for example, it is
estimated that 10-20 percent of discarded computers go to landfill.
Incineration: This releases heavy metals such
as lead, cadmium and mercury into the air and ashes. Mercury released
into the atmosphere can bioaccumulate in the foodchain, particularly in fish -
the major route of exposure for the general public. If the products contain PVC
plastic, highly toxic dioxins and furans are also released
Reuse: A good way to increase a
product's lifespan. Many old products are exported to developing countries.
Although the benefits of reusing electronics in this way are clear, the
practice is causing serious problems because the old products are dumped after
a short period of use in areas that are unlikely to have hazardous waste
facilities.
Recycle: Although recycling can be a good
way to reuse the raw materials in a product, the hazardous chemicals in e-waste
mean that electronics can harm workers in the recycling yards, as well as their
neighbouring communities and environment.
In developed countries,
electronics recycling takes place in purpose-built recycling plants under
controlled conditions. In many EU states for example, plastics from e-waste are
not recycled to avoid brominated furans and dioxins being released into the
atmosphere. In developing countries however, there are no such controls.
Recycling is done by hand in scrap yards, often by children.
Export: E-waste is routinely exported
by developed countries to developing ones, often in violation of the
international law. Inspections of 18 European seaports in 2005 found as much as
47 percent of waste destined for export, including e-waste, was illegal. In the
United States, it is estimated that 50-80 percent of the waste collected for
recycling is being exported in this way. This practice is legal because the
United States has not ratified the Basel Convention.
How did the trade
evolve?
In the 1990s,
governments in the EU, Japan and some U.S. states set up e-waste
"recycling" systems. But many countries did not have the capacity to
deal with the sheer quantity of e-waste they generated or with its hazardous
nature.
Therefore, they began exporting
the problem to developing countries where laws to protect workers and the
environment are inadequate or not enforced. It is also cheaper to
"recycle" waste in developing countries; the cost of glass-to-glass
recycling of computer monitors in the United States is 10times more than in
China.
Demand in Asia for
electronic waste began to grow when scrap yards found they could extract
valuable substances such as copper, iron, silicon, nickel and gold, during the
recycling process. A mobile phone, for example, is 19 percent copper and eight
percent iron.
CHINA
As the
world’s second-largest producer of electronic waste, every year China
produces more than 1 million tons of e-waste. In China, after earning profit
with e-waste people throw garbage to land and rivers. According to Scientific
report, toxins only contained by a computer monitor can pollute 80 tons of water, which is
amount to a lifetime drinking water. Since 2003, China scrapped at least 5
milliontelevision
sets, 4 million refrigerators,
5 million washing machines, 5 million computers and tens of millions of mobile
phones, becoming the world’s second
largest electronic
waste producer
just behind the United States.
The picture shows 17 August
2010, a small courtyard of Xiaoliu Village in Xingtai City, Hebei Province is
filled with television
sets and
other scrapped TV sets.
In
western developed countries, because of the strict supervision of safety
regulations, the cost of processing electronic waste is
very high. Therefore, many countries export e-waste to developing countries like
China.
The picture shows June 1,
2009, a electronic
waste dismantling
area in an industrial park of Taizhou City, Zhejiang Province
For
China’s “importer”, they not only can import e-waste without money, but also
get “handling charges” by foreign “exporters”; after e-waste has been treated,
some components, and heavy metals can also re-sell. Although international
conventions ban the import and export of electronic waste, but economic
benefits make the convention on useless.
In all
trash stations in China, people process electronic waste in
a very extensive way, recycle value objects – burning wires and cables; wash
the electronic board with sulfuric acid; manually dismantle power board. For
hardly dismantling electronic circuit board, they will use method of “cooking
method”, after molted solder on circuit board, they disassembled useful
components down.
Guiyu, China,
in Guangdong Province is made up of four
small villages. It is the location of what may be the largest electronic
waste(e-waste) site on earth.Guiyu is appropriately nicknamed the
"electronic graveyard" .
E-waste
trade begins in China’s east coast, and makes local farmers get rich quickly.
Guiyu in Guangdong, for example, of 150,000 people in the town, 12 million
people are engaged in e-waste industry, processing millions of tons
ofelectronic waste every year, the transaction amounts to $
75,000,000. After ten years Guiyu has become a wealthy town.
The picture shows the 20 November 2005, Guangdong Guiyu, the
disassembled parts
Health Impact
Many of the primitive recycling operations in Guiyu are toxic and dangerous to workers'
health with 88% of children suffering from lead poisoning. Higher-than-average
rates of miscarriage are also reported in the region. Workers use their bare
hands to crack open electronics to strip away any parts that can be reused-
including chips, or valuable metals such as gold, silver, etc. Workers also
"cook" circuit boards to remove
chips and solders, burn wires and other plastics to liberate metals such as copper anduse
highly corrosive and dangerous acid baths along the riverbanks to extract gold from the microchip. The soil has been saturated with lead, chromium, tin, and other heavy metals.
Discarded electronics lie in pools of toxins that leach into the groundwater, making
it so polluted that the water is undrinkable.
Large amount of various dumping dismantling electronic
waste has
polluted local water system, lead content of most of the surface water and
shallow groundwater in Guiyu has exceeded twice than the EU`s safety standard,
unable to drink.
Speaking of local environmental issues, most people of Guiyu choose
silence or evasion. However, when talking about the future of their children,
their attitudes clear up: hope kids to study hard, to go to college and leave
Guiyu, a place of suffering pollution.
Clean Up Efforts
Since 2007, conditions in Guiyu
have changed little despite the efforts of the central government to crack down
and enforce the long-standing e-waste import ban. Recent studies have revealed
some of the highest levels of dioxin ever recorded. However, because of the
work of activist groups and increasing awareness of the situation, there is
hope for the site to be improved. "It can be done. Look at what happened
with lead acid batteries. We discovered they were hazardous, new legislation
enforced new ways of dealing with the batteries which led to an infrastructure
being created. The key was making it easy for people and companies to
participate. It took years to build. E-waste is going the same route. But
attitudes have changed and we will get there," Mr. Houghton says. Zheng
Songming, head of the Guiyu Township
government has published a decree to ban burning electronics in fires and
soaking them in sulfuric acid, and promises supervision and fines for
violations. Over 800 coal-burning furnaces have been destroyed because of this
ordinance, and most notably, air quality has returned to Level II, now
technically acceptable for habitation.
The picture shows 14 June 2007, Guangdong Qingyuan, several
law enforcement agencies were cleaning up waste materials dismantling point.
BRAZIL
Brazil is the fifth biggest electronics and IT market
globally. Although computers and electronics can be a social and economic
driver, they also create waste that can be harmful to the environment and human
health. A recent United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) report highlighted
Brazil, along with Mexico and Senegal, as “generating more e-waste per
capita from personal computers than the other (11) countries surveyed”.
Mato Grosso, a state in Brazil, became the first Latin
American state to pass a WEEE (WASTE ELECTRICAL &
ELECTRONIC BILL) in 2008 which passes a specific law to prevent eWaste.
The new law creates a
take-back regime and makes manufacturers and importers of WEEE responsible for
setting up in the state systems for the recycling, reuse, treatment and/or
final disposition of their end-of-life (EOL) products. It’s worth taking
a look at the law, as it is likely to be studied and used as a model for bills
introduced in other state legislatures.
For the purposes of
the Law, “technological trash” is defined as obsolete or damaged computer
equipment, or “leftovers of consumer electronic devices that are discarded,
obsolete or out-of-use, which can be reused or contain integrated into their
structure, chemical elements harmful to the environment and to humans, but
still can be recycled.” The Law specified that it covers computers,
informatics equipment, batteries and piles, televisions and monitors, microwave
ovens, photographic machines, fluorescent lamps and “electro-electronics.”
Consumers/users are to
return damaged, obsolete or out-of-use “technological trash” to the
establishments that sell them or technical assistance networks authorized by
manufacturers, who are required to take back EOL products similar to those that
they market. Manufacturers and importers of products sold in MT that
become “technological trash” are required to adopt, either under their direct
administration or through third parties, systems for the recycling, reuse,
treatment or “environmentally adequate” final disposition.
Products that can be
reused (perhaps with fixing) are to be earmarked for “social ends” such as
donating them to schools and technical training centers. EOL products
found not to contain hazardous elements, or are stripped of such elements, can
be disposed of in sanitary landfills that permit it. EOL products that
cannot be recycled, reused or put into landfills must undergo “thermal
destruction” that obeys all the restrictions of the mandatory Brazilian norm on
incineration of hazardous waste set by the Brazilian Standards Association (ABNT), NBR-11175, and the applicable air pollution standards set by the National Environment Council (CONAMA).
All transport,
treatment and final disposition activities associated with “technological
trash” are subject to prior environmental licensing by the State Environment
Secretariat
(SEMA).
The responsibility
(liability) for measures to prevent or correct pollution or contamination due
to spillage, leakage, dumping or inadequate disposal of “technological trash” shall
be shared by manufacturers, importers, vendors of products that become such
wastes, and any third party that might be assigned the task of transporting,
treating or disposing of the equipment.
The state of Santa Catarina passed a similar law promoting recycling and reusing of old electronics instead of
landfilling the products.
The Brazilian state of Paraná has implemented a Zero Waste bill, which is geared toward developing a Design for End of Life strategy with manufacturers in order to help protect the environment.
The Brazilian state of Paraná has implemented a Zero Waste bill, which is geared toward developing a Design for End of Life strategy with manufacturers in order to help protect the environment.
Brazilian state of Paraná adopted a law requiring
manufacturers, distributors and vendors of “informatics” equipment operating in
that state to set up a system for the recovery, recycling or destruction of
their end-of-life (EOL) products that “does not pollute the environment.”
“Informatics” is not
defined in the law, but in Latin America the term usually refers to computers,
other IT equipment and their peripherals. Obviously a key point that needs to
be addressed in the implementing decree to be issued in coming months will be
defining exactly which products are covered by the law.
Another key point that
the implementing decree will have to flesh out and clarify: just what
constitutes a “Program of Recovery, Recycling or Destruction” acceptable to
environmental authorities in Paraná. For those IT companies perhaps thinking
that this might be paper tiger or that they can simply opt to thermally destroy
the collected equipment, think again. Paraná
is officially committed to the Zero Waste concept, strongly favors
maximum recycling and frowns on incineration.
I might add that these
companies should be skeptical of any claims by their local management that this
is just “an isolated case” within Brazil. Fact is, several states already have
WEEE clauses in their waste laws, several state legislatures (and the national
Congress) are contemplating WEEE bills (one has already been subject to a veto
battle) and the National Environment Council (CONAMA) has a request before it
to create a working group to draft binding rules on e-waste. Furthermore, many Brazilian states are already looking to copy or adapt much, if not most, of
Paraná’s Zero Waste policy and program. People will be watching what Paraná does in
implementing this law.
Under the new law, the
manufacturers, distributors and “enterprises that sell the equipment” must
provide the public of Paraná with “collection services” within their
establishments for consumers to bring back (free of charge) EOL or damaged
equipment. The collection point must issue an “entry note” for each piece
brought in, sending a copy to the State Environment Secretariat (SEMA).
The collection point turns over the collected EOL products to the manufacturer
or distributor, who has to document all the WEEE that they get.
Establishments not
complying with the new law will be fined about R$54,000.
GERMANY
[2]General Information Waste Management in Germany
What is waste
management about?
Avoidance, recovery,disposal.
This is the principle of the waste hierarchy which is the basis for waste
management in Germany. In the past waste was simply landfilled, but it has
since been recognised that waste contains valuable raw materials which can be
used to conserve natural resources. Waste avoidance means consuming less raw
materials and reducing burdens on the environment. Waste recovery means that
raw materials and energy are reintroduced into the economic cycle. German waste
management is an important industrial sector and provides high-quality
technology for the efficient use of waste as a resource and the environmentally
sound disposal of the remaining residual waste.
Objectives
The German government
aims to achieve almost complete high-quality recovery, at least of municipal
waste, by 2020. This will eliminate the need to landfill wastes, which has
adverse effects on the climate. Resource and climate protection will be
incorporated into waste management to a greater extent at European and
international level over the next years, for example by minimising methane andCO2 emissions or
substituting fossil fuels. Germany contributes know-how and innovative
technology to reaching this target.
THE GERMAN
GOVERNMENT’S POLICY
Towards materials flow
management
The German government
wants to develop waste and closed cycle management into a sustainable
resource-efficient materials flow management over the next years. By strictly
separating wastes, through pretreatment, recycling and the recovery of energy,
Germany aims to make full use of substances and materials bound in wastes and
therefore make landfilling of wastes superfluous. Significant ecological
progress was made with the entry into force of the ban on landfilling untreated
household wastes or general waste from industry on 1 June 2005.
Key instrument -
product responsibility
Product responsibility
is at the heart of waste management policy in Germany. It puts the idea into
practice that waste avoidance is best achieved by holding the generator of
waste responsible. This way, producers and distributors must design their
products in such a way as to reduce waste occurrence and allow environmentally
sound recovery and disposal of the residual substances, both in the production
of the goods and in their subsequent use. The legal bases for this are the Act
for Promoting Closed Substance Cycle Waste Management and Ensuring
Environmentally Compatible Waste Disposal and the Federal Immission Control
Act.
Using innovative waste
concepts for responsible resource management and climate protection
Sustainable waste
management that includes modern and efficient treatment technologies for waste
helps to protect both resources and climate. The German government therefore
advocates the further development of waste management at European and
international level. Germany often takes on a pioneering role in shaping EU waste law. At national
level the German government supports sustainable waste management concepts for
obtaining raw materials or energy from wastes. German waste management has the
highest waste recovery quotas worldwide, and thus already contributes
significantly to sustainable management and climate protection.
Strengthening
supervision under waste management law
The German government
advocates an efficient and economical supervision of waste. The act for
simplification of supervision under laws pertaining to waste management, which
entered into force on 1 February 2007, was an important step to ease the
bureaucratic burden on waste management administration and industry and to
strengthen the efficiency of supervision under waste management law. German
commitment against export of e-waste. Every year, tonnes of valuable raw
materials such as copper or platinum are lost to the German raw materials cycle
due to export of waste. The German government champions a clear European
regulation under which exporters must prove that the appliances to be exported
still function and are not waste. Exporters will be charged for the costs of
monitoring.
Consumer information
Waste avoidance starts
in the shop. Consumers can use baskets or shopping bags instead of plastic or
paper bags, choose products with simple packaging over products with multiple
packaging and buy reusable bottles and cans instead of one-way packaging. It is
relatively easy to help avoid waste and help protect the environment. For
example, it only takes 25 recycled PET bottles to make an L-sized fleece
sweater. If packaging cannot be avoided, it should not be thrown out with
general waste, but placed in containers for recyclables. The more carefully
consumers separate their waste, the greater the benefit for the environment.
Batteries, paints, lacquers or old electric appliances do not belong in general
waste. In this case, too, it is better spend some time on smart disposal today
rather than having to pay for the solution of environmental problems tomorrow.
E-waste management in Germany by United Nations
University-a Report[3]
In 2008, around 10 million
tonnes of electrical and electronic equipment (EEE) were put on the markets of the European Union member
states. With some delay, the amounts of waste from these devices, the e-waste,
has grown as well to the magnitude of around 10 million tonnes a year, and according
to (Huisman 2008), the amount of EEE sold in the EU still grows with 2.5 % to
2.7 % every year. As a reaction, in order to environment-friendly collect and
treat the e-waste, the (WEEE Directive 2003) was enacted in the EU in 2003. It
extends the producers’ responsibility towards the end of life of their products
and sets minimum targets for collection, recovery and recycling of e-waste.
The EU member states
transposed the WEEE Directive into their national legislations. The member
states have certain freedoms in how they transpose and implement the provisions
of the WEEE Directive so that each member state has individual e-waste legislation
with the WEEE Directive as the common denominator.
Prior to the WEEE
Directive, Germany collected and treated e-waste within the legislative and
infrastructural framework for wastes. The public waste management authorities
(PuWaMA) were responsible for the collection and treatment of e-waste, and
consumers were charged for its treatment and disposal.
The (ElektroG 2005), the
German transposition of the (WEEE Directive 2003), shifted responsibilities to
the producers. Since 2006, consumers can bring e-waste free of charge to the
municipal collection points. The PuWaMA are further on responsible for collection.
Their responsibility ends with the handover of the collected e-waste to the producers
who organize and finance the logistics, treatment and disposal of this waste.
Each producer putting EEE
on the German market is responsible to take back the amounts of e-waste
corresponding to his market share in the EEE put on the market (PoM). Producers
establish takeback systems or otherwise organize the takeback of the e-waste.
Different from most other EU member states, collective takeback systems are not
common in Germany. Producers normally directly contract end-of-life service
providers (ESPs) organizing the logistics, treatment and disposal of e-waste, for
which each producer is responsible in accordance to his market share in PoM.
The German e-waste
management system exceeds the minimum collection, recovery and recycling
targets stipulated in the (WEEE Directive 2003).
The treatment operators
are audited and certified annually by third party auditors in order to ensure
they have adequate technology, knowhow and organization for a state-of-the-art
treatment of e-waste.
The 1994
Substance Cycle and Waste Management Act
In the early nineties, the
Federal Government had to transpose the European Waste Framework Directive and
the European Directive on Hazardous Waste into German waste legislation. On
this opportunity, the waste management was further developed from linear substance
flows towards substance cycles. The 1994 “Act for Promoting Closed Substance
Cycle Waste Management and Ensuring Environmentally Compatible Waste Disposal”
(Substance Cycle Act 1994) targeted natural resource conservation and
environment-friendly treatment and disposal of wastes.
E-Waste Management until March 2006
Consumers could hand in
e-waste at the municipal collection points. Some PuWaMA also collected e-waste
from private consumers, either periodically or on demand. Themunicipalities
then were responsible for the environment-friendly treatment and disposal
according to the principles of the (Substance Cycle Act 1994). Depending on the
municipalities, they handed over part or all the e-waste to private treatment
operators, or conducted the treatment fully or partially themselves. Charity
and other non-profit and mostly small profit organizations were also active in
the field repairing and refurbishing used EEE such as washing machines,
refrigerators, TVs, later also computers. They received such equipment from the
PuWaMA, or sometimes collected it themselves attracting consumers to hand the
equipment over to them. The used equipment was donated to schools (computers),
and/or sold in second hand shops.
Private consumers
generally had to pay fees at the municipal collection point when handing in
e-waste, at least for those types of equipment where the sales of the recycled
materials could not cover the cost of treatment and disposal.
Cooling and freezing equipment
was exchanged old-for-new at the customer on delivery of a new refrigerator or
freezer. This service was free of extra charge for the customer.
The European WEEE Directive and the German
“ElektroG”
Reacting on the growing
amounts of e-waste from electrical and electronic equipment (EEE), and the
increasing integration of the European market, the European WEEE Directive was
enacted in 2003. The WEEE Directive and its implementation intoGerman national
legislation, the “ElektroG” in 2005 marked an important further milestone for
the management of e-waste in Germany.
Responsibilities for E-Waste in the European WEEE
Directive
The WEEE Directive’s scope
covers 10 categories of electrical and electronic equipment (EEE) as defined in
Annex IA of the (WEEE Directive 2003):
1. Large household
appliances
2. Small household
appliances
3. IT and
telecommunications equipment
4. Consumer equipment
5. Lighting equipment
6. Electrical and
electronic tools (with the exception of large-scale stationary industrial
tools)
7. Toys, leisure and
sports equipment
8. Medical devices (with
the exception of all implanted and infected products)
9. Monitoring and control
instruments
10. Automatic dispensers
Responsibilities of Member States
The member states of the
European Union (EU) shall make sure that the e-waste from the above ten
categories of EEE is collected and treated separately. As a minimum, each
member state must achieve an annual collection rate of 4 kg per inhabitant from
2006 on. Some member states, in particular the new Eastern European members,
had more time to match with this minimum rate.
Moreover, member states must ensure that collection facilities are
available and accessible for final users and distributors, where they can hand
in e-waste from private households free of charge.
Responsibilities of Distributors
When supplying a new
product, distributors shall ensure that
end users can return waste from such products to the distributor at least free
of charge on a one-to-one basis. This obligation applies as long as the waste equipment is of equivalent type and has
fulfilled the same functions as the
newly supplied equipment. Member
States, however, may depart from this provision if returning the WEEE is not
thereby made more difficult and remains free of charge for the final holder.
Responsibilities of Producers
The WEEE Directive is
based on the core principle of producer responsibility.
According to (WEEE
Directive 2003) “[…] producer responsibility is one of the means of encouraging
the design and production of electrical and electronic equipmentwhich take into
full account and facilitate their repair, possible upgrading, reuse,
disassembly and recycling.”
The core idea behind the
producer responsibility approach is that producers will try to minimize the
end-of-life (EoL) cost of their products, if they have to organize and finance
collection and treatment of the waste from the EEE they put on the market.
Producers can influence
the EoL-cost of their products by Design for End-of-Life. The producer
responsibility thus is assumed to make producers optimizing the product design
for the EoL of their products.
A measure of design for
EoL could be to make components and substances easily accessible that need to
be removed from e-waste prior to further treatment according to Annex II of the
(WEEE Directive 2003). Designing LCD flat panel displays that contain mercury backlights,
for example, so that they can be removed more easily and quickly, would save
expensive labor and thus reduce the EoL cost for this equipment. Such cost
incentives would hence drive producers to continuously improve the design for
EoL of their products, if the producers have to finance the EoL of their
products.
Producer responsibility
according to the (WEEE Directive 2003) comprises the following operational and
financial aspects:
Producers shall set up systems for the treatment of e-waste using bestavailable treatment techniques.
Producers shall at least finance the collection, treatment and environmentally sound disposal of e-waste from private households
disposed of at collection facilities.
Each producer shall finance the treatment of the waste from its own products put on the market after 13 August 2005.Producers
can choose to fulfill their above obligations either individually or by joining
a collective scheme.
Additionally to the above
obligations, producers have to comply with further requirements:
Each producer must provide a guarantee when placing a product on the market to ensure that the collection, treatment and
disposal of this product will be financed. The guarantee may take the form of
the producer’s participation in appropriate schemes for the financing of the
management of WEEE, a recycling insurance or a blocked bank account.
Producers must clearly mark the
products they put on the market after 13 August 2005 with the symbol shown in
Figure 5.
Producers must achieve certain minimum targets for recovery and recycling of the e-waste collected separately. These targets vary depending on the category
of EEE in Annex IA of the WEEE Directive. Figure 6 on page 31details the requirements
Recovery and recycling are
defined in the (Waste Directive 2008). Recovery means any operation the
principal result of which is waste serving a useful purpose. Waste may replace
other materials, which otherwise would have been used to fulfill
a particular function, or it may be prepared to fulfill that function,
in the plant or in the wider economy.
Recycling is any recovery
operation reprocessing waste into products, materials or substances whether for
the original or other purposes. Recycling does not include energy recovery and
the reprocessing into materials that are to be used as fuels or for backfilling
operations. (Waste Directive 2008)
Annex II of the (WEEE
Directive 2003) stipulates the selective treatment of specific materials and
components of e-waste. These provisions comprise
the removal of certain substances,
preparations and components from separately
collected e-waste, and
the specific treatment of certain e-waste components. These specific operations shall be conducted
without hindering the reuse of components or entire devices.
European directives like
the WEEE Directive do not apply directly to the member states. The member
states must transpose them into national legislation. The member states have
certain freedoms how they implement the provisions of the WEEE Directive
resulting in implementation differences between the EU member states.
Transposition of the WEEE Directive into German
Legislation – the ElektroG
The German e-waste
management is based on the Act Governing the Sale, Return and Environmentally
Sound Disposal of Electrical and Electronic Equipment (ElektroG 2005).
The ElektroG is the
transposition of both the European (WEEE Directive 2003) and of the European
(RoHS Directive 2003) into German national
legislation. The ElektroG entered into force on 13 August 2005. Some
e-waste-related stipulations, such as the operation of the takeback systems, however,
were delayed to 23 March 2006. The restriction of the hazardous substances
entered into force on 1 July 2006, as foreseen in the (RoHS Directive 2003).
Priorities for the Implementation of the WEEE
Directive in Germany
The implementation of the
(WEEE Directive 2003) into the German (ElektroG 2005) was influenced by the
experiences made with another producer responsibility scheme. The “Duales
System Deutschland” (DSD), the organization responsible for the collection,
treatment and disposal of packaging materials, from the time of its introduction
in 1990 until recently was a monopoly. Industry complained about high prices as
a consequence.
This experience resulted
in the following implementation priorities:
Promotion of
competition
The e-waste management
system shall avoid monopolies, and allow producers maximum freedom to decide how to comply with their extended
producer responsibility (EPR).
Prevention of
freeriders
The system shall ensure
that all producers contribute to the treatment and financing of the e-waste in
proportion to their market share in Germany.
Prevention of cherry
picking
Each producer must collect
from all over Germany thus avoiding that some producers focus on bigger cities,
while other producers have to collect from rural areas with high logistics
cost.
Increased minimum
collection target
The current collection
target of four kilograms per year and inhabitant in each member state will
probably be amended. A certain percentage of the average amounts of EEE put on
the market in each member state in the preceding years may have to be collected
in each member state. Alternatively, the ewaste arising in each member state is
proposed as a reference for thepercentages of collection. The collection
targets might also be differentiated depending on the environmental relevance
of the various types of equipment resulting in higher collection targets for
environmentally more relevant types of e-waste.
Increased minimum
targets for reuse, recovery and recycling
The minimum targets for
recovery and recycling will probably be increased. Possibly, an additional minimum target for
reuse of entire devices will be introduced.
Financing of
collection
Consumers, distributors
and producers together may have to finance a certain fee at the point of sale,
which the PuWaMA or other parties responsible for collection may then use for
the collection of e-waste, improving the collection infrastructure, and for
awareness raising campaigns. Alternatively, member states may oblige producers
to take over more financial responsibility for the e-waste collection directly
from private households.
Harmonization of
registration and reporting
The registration of producers in the member states may be
simplified. Via interoperable registers, registration in one member state may
be sufficient to be registered in all member states. Producers’ reporting
obligations to the member states may be harmonized in terms of reporting frequencies and formats.
Prevention of
Illegal Exports
Exporting e-waste from EU
member states to developing countries is illegal, but still ongoing. In the
face of the severe environmental and health impacts of e-waste treatment in the
developing countries, the European Commission, the Council and the Parliament
all promote provisions to stop illegal exports of e-waste in their recast
proposals for the WEEE Directive.
The following sections
will explain the key players’ responsibilities and the possibilities of
compliance the ElektroG provides.
Key Players and their Roles
The key players in the
operation of the German e-waste management system are:
the public waste management authorities (PuWaMA, public),
the producers of electrical and electronic equipment (private),
the clearing house EAR (private with governmental authorization).
Further important players
are the retailers and the consumers, even though the (ElektroG 2005) does not
assign them specific responsibilities.
The
Public Waste Management Authorities
According to the (ElektroG
2005), the public waste management authorities (PuWaMA) are responsible for the
collection of e-waste. They must set up collection points in their districts to
which final holders and distributors may return e-waste from private households
in the vicinity (bring back
system). The municipalities must
not levy any charges to the consumers for such e-waste returns to the
collection points.
The number of collection points depends on the population density and
the local conditions. The PuWaMA may
also collect WEEE directly from private households (collection system), but the
ElektroG does not make this obligatory.
The PuWaMA may refuse to
accept e-waste if it is contaminated in such a way as to pose a safety risk or
a hazard to human health. The same applies to the delivery of more than 20
pieces of equipment in EEE categories 1 to 3. Such deliveries must be coordinated
with the public waste management authorities. (ElektroG 2005)
Commercial collection by
private collectors is not allowed. The PuWaMA, however, may delegate the
collection to third parties, which may be private companies. The final
accountability, however, remains with the PuWaMA. The involvement of private
companies in the collection of e-waste thus is decided on the district and
municipal level and may therefore differ from district to district.
Collection Groups
The (ElektroG 2005)
differentiates the EEE into the same 10 categories with the same types of
equipment like the (WEEE Directive 2003). Like in the WEEE Directive, the
listing of equipment types under each of the categories is not exclusive, but
just gives examples of types of equipment.
The ElektroG requires the
PuWaMA to collect and store the e-waste arising from these 10 categories of EEE
in five collection groups as shown in Table 2.
Each of the five
collection groups is stored in a separate container at the municipal collection
points consuming space. The limitation to five collection groups hence is a
compromise allowing sufficient separation of e-waste with respect to efficient
treatment on the one hand, and taking into account the practicability at the
municipal collection points on the other hand.
Handover of E-waste to the Producers
The public waste
management authorities hand over the e-waste in
these five different containers to the producers of EEE free of charge.
The producers have to provide the containers free of charge to the PuWaMA.
Each PuWaMA may choose,
however, not to make the e-waste of a specific collection group available to
the producers. The PuWaMA must provide three months' notice to the clearing house
EAR and then enter into the producers’ obligations including the recovery and
recycling targets and the reporting obligations to the clearing house EAR.
Producers
The ElektroG adopted the
provisions on the extended producer responsibility of the (WEEE Directive
2003). In Germany, like in most other EU member states, the producer
responsibility starts with the handover of the e-waste to the producers at the
municipal collection points, or with the takeover from distributors such as
retailers.
The ElektroG leaves the
producers three principle possibilities to take back e-waste.
Producers may set up
individual brand-selective takeback schemes (IBTS), individual non-selective
takeback schemes (INTS) or join a collective takeback scheme (CTS),as depicted
in the following figure
Specific Stipulations for Historical E-waste and
E-waste from Other Sources than Private Households
Historical e-waste is
waste from EEE put on the market before 13 August 2005, the date when the
ElektroG was enacted in Germany. Producers are responsible for the financing
and treatment of this historical e-waste based on their market share like for
the other e-waste collected separately. This obligation applies even if a
producer had not put any EEE on the German market prior to 13 August 2005.
Besides e-waste from
private households, producers are also responsible for e-waste from other than
private households. This is e-waste from business-to-business (B2B) equipment.
Such EEE is not or normally not used in private households. Examples are gas chromatographs, professional kitchen and
laundry equipment, high end servers used in data centers, industrial tools,
etc. For such B2B e-waste from EEE put on the market after 13 August 2005, the
producer must offer a reasonable option for the return and disposal. The
producer thus has the same obligations for this B2B e-waste like for e-waste
from private households. The producer and the holder of EEE, however, may reach
an agreement, which departs from these provisions.
For e-waste from EEE put
on the market before 13 August 2005 – historical B2B ewaste - the holder is
responsible.
Distributors
and Consumers
Distributors such as
retailers may take back e-waste voluntarily. Unlike in some other EU member
states, they are not legally obliged to accept e-waste. Distributors offering
this takeback service in Germany practice it as trade-in. Consumers may hand in
their old equipment if they buy a new one of the same type.
The (ElektroG 2005)
obliges consumers like any other owner of e-waste to place it in a collection
separate from that for unsorted domestic waste. Disposal of e-waste into
household waste containers thus is illegal, but difficult to control. Consumer
awareness hence is a key to obtain access to e-waste. The PuWaMA shall
therefore notify private households of their obligations and about
options in their
district for the return or collection of e-waste,
their role in the
reuse, recycling and other forms of recovery of e-waste,
the possible impacts on
the environment and human health from the disposal of harmful substances
contained in electrical and electronic equipment.
The obligation for
separate disposal of e-waste applies to the distributors as well. They are,
however, not obligated to hand over the
e-waste to the PuWaMA or to producer takeback schemes, but may use other
possibilities like e-waste brokers. The same in principle applies to consumers,
but only is of relevance for corporate consumers. Corporate consumers may hold
large amounts of used EEE, which they want to sell as used equipment, where,
however, it is not always clear whether it is actually e-waste or functioning
second hand products.
The Clearing
House
The functioning of the
overall e-waste management system requires the coordination of the PuWaMA and
the producers on the one hand, and of the individual producers’ efforts on the
other hand. The producers hence set up and finance the clearing house, the
“Elektro-Altgeräteregister” (EAR), which is constituted as a foundation. It
assumes coordinative and superordinated tasks such as producer registration,
reporting and the calculation of the producers’ market shares.
As the clearing house
takes over sovereign powers, e.g. with the mandatory producer registration, it
is authorized by the competent governmental authority, the Federal Ministry for
the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety (BMU), and supervised
by the “Umweltbundesamt” (UBA, Federal Environment Agency). The EAR is
constituted as foundation and as such does
not make profits. It charges, however, the producers for the sovereign
power acts according to the (Cost Ordinance).
The EAR’s competences are
strictly limited to the tasks required to the coordination of the system. It
may not interfere with how the other key players comply with their obligations
within the legally foreseen leeway.
Monitoring and Controlling
Producers have
comprehensive reporting obligations to the clearing house EAR to enable the EAR
to monitor and control the producers’ compliance. Each producer informs the EAR
for each calendar year about:
1. the quantities per collection
group of e-waste collected from
public waste management authorities,
2. the types and
quantities of e-waste collected in an individual or a collective takeback
scheme,
3. the quantities per EEE
category of e-waste the producer has
o reused,
o recycled,
o recovered,
o exported.
4. Each producer submits
to the clearing house an annual report by 30 Aprileach year. This report
contains the data for the previous year for total quantities from primary
treatment facilities about the mass of e-waste, its components, materials or
substances when
o entering the treatment
facility (input),
o leaving the treatment facility
(output), and
o entering the recovery or
recycling facility (input).
Quantities are to be
stated by weight or, if this is not possible, by number of units. If quantities
cannot be reported, a well-founded estimate will suffice. The clearing houseEAR
may also request that an independent expert verifies the information provided.
Finally, the EAR certifies
that the producer has complied with his extended producer responsibilities
according to the ElektroG.
Interaction of Public Waste Management Authorities,
Clearing House and Producers
CONCLUSION
Of the countries
specified, U.S.A is considered to be the
major contributor of e-waste in developing countries. Such a process of dumping
though help the former countries in getting rid of waste from their land but
could adversely affects the developing countries when seen from point of
industrial as well as human development. Germany on the other hand truly shows
seriousness and political will of its Govt. in curtailing the problem.
Special guidelines in
order to curb the menace must be formed. Also, there is a need to ratify the
conventions and treaties signed amongst several countries so as the problem
could be dealt with firmly.
India, being at the brink of being called
“superpower” cannot afford to have an “electronic trash market” which would
severely impede its progess in the long run.
Development of I.T. sector
over the years by several leaps & bounds has proven that India has a
tremendous potential to make development in the formations and management of
computer peripherals, and software technology in a cost effective manner. There
is perhaps a need for 2nd I.T. revolution in the country so as to
develop technologies which would engulf the problem of disposal of e-waste in a
similar way.
A comprehensive policy regarding the
management of e-waste must be formed by the process of legislation. Precedent
can be taken from Europe which has upto a major extent been able to counter the
problem. Likewise amendments are required in the National Health Policy as well
so as to spread awareness amongst the masses.
BMU: Federal Ministry for the
Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety
No comments:
Post a Comment