scycle operating unit e-waste management: from epr theory to collection & treatment practice...
TRANSCRIPT
SCYCLE
OPERATING UNIT
E-waste Management: from EPR theory to Collection & Treatment practice
Federico Magalini – email: magalini [at] unu.edu
Toxics Link - International Workshop on Designing Take Back Systems for E-waste
2
11 Dec 2012
UNU - ISP
Combining natural sciences, social sciences and the humanities, thus following a trans-disciplinary research approach
Hosting the Secretariat of the “Solving the E- waste Problem” Initiative
• Merge of UNU ESD (Environment & Sustainalbe Development) and and UNU Peace & Government Institute in 2009
• Located in Tokyo
• UNU-ISP SCYCLE: 1st Operating Unit outside Japan
Focus on 3 themes:
• Global Change & Sustainability • International Cooperation &
Development • Peace-building &security
Toxics Link - International Workshop on Designing Take Back Systems for E-waste
3
11 Dec 2012
StEP Initiative
Solving the E-waste Problem (StEP) Initiative was created to.. Initiate and facilitate environmentally, economically & socially sound approaches to
reduce e-waste flows and handle them in a sustainable way around the globe
Functions as a network of actors who share experiences and best practices
Carries out research and development projects
Disseminates experiences, best practices and recommendations
Toxics Link - International Workshop on Designing Take Back Systems for E-waste
4
11 Dec 2012
StEP Members
61 Members from:
Companies (from different Industries, OEM, Recyclers,…)
Governmental Organizations
NGOs
International Organizations
Academic Institutions
Toxics Link - International Workshop on Designing Take Back Systems for E-waste
5
11 Dec 2012
StEP: 5 complementary TFs Projects
Ö Completed ; @ working phase $ acquisition phase ; ? idea phase
√ White Paper Recast WEEE Directive√ White Paper ‘Take-Back Systems’√ Research Study ‘Best e-waste policies’
@ Project ‘EEE and Climate Change’@ Green Paper on E-waste Indicators@ White Paper on Transboundary Shipments
Policy
√ DfR Case Studies Library
√ Research study ‘Wearable Computers’
√ Closing the Loop
? Certification Technology for Recycling Plastic
ReDesign
√ 1st World ReUse Forum
√ White Paper ‘One Global Understanding of Re-use’
√ Best practices in ReUse
? Recommendations for ReUse certification/guidelines
ReUse
√ Research study ‘ Recycling – From E-waste to Resources’
@ Project ‘Best of 2 Worlds’
@ Green Paper on End-of-Life Standards
ReCycling
Capacity Building
@ ADDRESS Project√ 2009-2011 StEP Ewaste Summer School Series
√ E-waste Academy for Policymakers & SMEs? Online Recycling Trainer
Toxics Link - International Workshop on Designing Take Back Systems for E-waste
EWA: Goals and Aims
Offer a diverse, interdisciplinary curriculum Complemented by expert lectures, groupwork, site visit(s) – guided by industry
facilitators and rapporteurs Apparatus for scientific feedback and constructive advice enabling a more holistic
e-waste perspective
Establish platform for exchange of best practices
Snapshot into status of e-waste legislation development in participants‘ countries
Foster better-informed decision making
Paving the way for a sustaining network & continued interaction after the EWA!
6
11 Dec 2012
Toxics Link - International Workshop on Designing Take Back Systems for E-waste
7
11 Dec 2012
EWA: Programme at glance
Day1
Day2
Day3
Day4
Day5
Broader scenario of policy impacts on sustainabilityStimulate discussion on how policy enables changesSnapshot into current policy situation in target regionMapping of stakeholders/roles and actual gaps
Classification of waste/fractionsExample of import bans and functionality tests for refurbishable productsDismantling session: role of manual dismantling, classification of fractions/training & safety, basic toolsBasics for market for fractions & components
Complexity of recycling chain: steps, roles, waste streams & technologiesEnd-processing options & approaches for PWB & PlasticsPre-Processor Panel: approaches in developing countries: collection, recycling technologies, training & safety, downstream markets, Start-up & Operations, Condition for Success
Role of notifications for regional approaches in waste managementReturn shipments for un-wanted e-waste streamsRole of recycling standardsEffectiveness of policy and involvement of stakeholders
Presentation of Group-works outputs: Lessons learnt by individuals + personal backgrounds and experiences, elaborated in each group will be shared across all ParticipantsFeedbacks from other Participants, Experts and Facilitators in the room
Toxics Link - International Workshop on Designing Take Back Systems for E-waste
8EWA: Group Work Activities
4 Groups, 4-5 persons per group
Mixture of policymakers and SMEs
Clustering persons from different regions, context, backgrounds
Daily assigned tasks comprising the themes, activities and topics of the day
Stimulate ongoing collaboration and networking
Results-oriented!! Develop long-term roadmap to be implemented in participants‘ countries enhancing sustainable long-term solutions/approaches
11 Dec 2012
Toxics Link - International Workshop on Designing Take Back Systems for E-waste
9ADDRESS Project: Size does matter!
1990
26%
10%
5%
4%
30%
1990
US + Canada5.1
EU27+25.8
Japan1.9
Africa 0.7Australia + Pacific 0.3
India 0.7
Asia, excl. China, India Russia 2.2 China
+ HK, 0.9
South + Central America
2.1
EEE Put on Market Million tons
Total: 19.5 Mt
11 Dec 2012
Toxics Link - International Workshop on Designing Take Back Systems for E-waste
10ADDRESS Project: Size does matter!
1990
26%
10%
5%
4%
30%
2000
2000
24%
7%
8%
4%
25%
Japan2.5
Asia, excl China, India, Russia, 4.6
EU27+28.6
US + Canada8.0
China + Hong Kong 2.8
South + Central America
3.4
Africa 1.0
Russia 1.0
Australia + Pacific 0.5Europe, non EU27+2, 0.2
India 1.4
EEE Put on Market Million tons
Total: 34 Mt
11 Dec 2012
Toxics Link - International Workshop on Designing Take Back Systems for E-waste
11ADDRESS Project: Size does matter!
1990
26%
10%
5%
4%
30%
2010
2000
24%
7%
8%
4%
25%
2010
19%
6%
15%
6%
20%
Asia, excl China, India, Russia
8.7
China + Hong Kong8.7
US + Canada11.0
EU27+2 11.7
South + Central America
5.7
India3.4
Japan3.2
Africa 2.1
Russia 1.8Australia + Pacific 0.7
Europe, non EU27+2, 0.3
EEE Put on Market Million tons
Total: 57.4 Mt
11 Dec 2012
Toxics Link - International Workshop on Designing Take Back Systems for E-waste
12ADDRESS Project: Size does matter!
1990
26%
10%
5%
4%
30%
2015
2000
24%
7%
8%
4%
25%
2010
19%
6%
15%
6%
20%
2015
17%
5%
19%
7%
18%
EEE Put on Market globally 2015, 76.1 million tons
EU27+213.7
US + Canada12.8
China + Hong Kong14.6
Asia, excl ChinaIndia, Russia
11.8
India5.5
South and Central America
7.6 Japan3.6
Russia 2.4
Africa 3.0
Australia + Pacific 0.9Europe, non EU27+2, 0.4
EEE Put on Market Million tons
Total: 76.1 Mt
11 Dec 2012
Toxics Link - International Workshop on Designing Take Back Systems for E-waste
13ADDRESS Project: Changing Patterns
WEEE Arisings globally 1990, 14.8 Mtons
United States, 3,533
Japan, 1,439
India, 485 Total EU 27+2, 4,440
China, 611
WEEE Arisings globally 2015, 58.9 Mtons
Turkey, 770
China, 10,782
Total EU 27+2, 10,529
India, 4,123
Japan, 2,867
United States, 9,434
Brazil, 1,811
Russia, 1,813 Mexico, 1,309 Korea, 1,092
Canada, 904
= 63% = 39% Upcoming ?!?= 61%
11 Dec 2012
Toxics Link - International Workshop on Designing Take Back Systems for E-waste
14Key issue: the EPR loop
TREATMENT
SEPARATE COLLECTION
COLLECTION
RECYCLE
DISPOSAL
REUSE
System Design
OEM = Product Design + Manufacturing + EOL (EPR)
11 Dec 2012
Toxics Link - International Workshop on Designing Take Back Systems for E-waste
15EPR and DfR: how to close the loop?
Reasoning for EPR on EoL is (mainly) rewarding DfR.
Effectiveness of DfR over EoL hampered by: Life cycle assessment
-20%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
Raw material extraction
Production
Use (energy)
End-of-life (recycling)
End-of-life (MSW)
1 2
Average CE products
Source: Huisman
Sometimes Trade-off:
Hg:
IN for energy savings
OUT for EoL
11 Dec 2012
Toxics Link - International Workshop on Designing Take Back Systems for E-waste
16Eco-Design: how to play effective role?
Improving EoL performances of Electronic product: Decrease the “value” of materials in manufacturing stage Minimize worst case scenario (landfilling & toxicity control) Maximize environmental value of fractions recovered
Source: Huisman
-600
-400
-200
0
200
400
600
Production Value (ofmaterials consumed)
Worst-case End-of-Life
Best-case End-of-Life
Environmental burden (mPt)
Environmental gain (mPt)
1 2
3
Hard to be rewarded simply by means of DfR benefits over time
France: differentiated upfront tariffs for Producers
11 Dec 2012
Toxics Link - International Workshop on Designing Take Back Systems for E-waste
17Resource Perspective: Elements in Mobile Phone
11 Dec 2012
Toxics Link - International Workshop on Designing Take Back Systems for E-waste
18
11 Dec 2012
Products (&Metals): for Sustainable Life or making Life Sustainable? Printed Circuit Boards: PGM, Sb, Ta, La, Nd, Cu, Sn, Pb,…
LED: Ga, In, REs
Getters (lighting): W, Ta
Fluorescent powders: REs (LA, Tb, Eu, Y, Ce)
Flame Retardants: Sb
Batteries (HEV, EEE): Co, REs (Ce, La, Nd, Pr)
PV Modules: Ga, Te, Ge, In
LCD screens: In
Toxics Link - International Workshop on Designing Take Back Systems for E-waste
19Global Material Extraction 1900-2005
11 Dec 2012
Toxics Link - International Workshop on Designing Take Back Systems for E-waste
20
11 Dec 2012
Escalators, Criticality…
Ag: 250 mg
Au: 24 mg
Pd: 9 mg
Cu: 9 g
Co: 3.8 g
Nd+Pr: 1 kg
Dy: 0.15 kg
La: 2.3 kg
Ag: 325 t
Au: 31 t
Pd: 12 t
Cu: 12,000 t
Co: 4,900 t
1.3B sales 2008
X
0.4M sales 2009
XNd+Pr: 404 t
Dy: 60.6 t
La: 929.7 t
Ag: 20,000 t/y
(1.6%)
Au: 2,500 t/y
(1.2%)
Pd: 230 t/y
(5.2%)
Cu: 16 Mt/y
(0.1%)
Co: 60,000 t/y
(8.2%)
2008 World Mining
/
Nd+Pr: 25,200 t/y (1.6%)
Dy: 2,000 t/y
(6.5%)
La: 33,000 t/y
(2.9%)2009 World
Mining
/
Rounded from: Hagelüken et. al, Hatch, US Geological Survey
60 x gold mines
Toxics Link - International Workshop on Designing Take Back Systems for E-waste
21
11 Dec 2012
…and Choices
Increasing demand
Supply Chain restrictions
1 Tesla
6.831 NotebookOR
Economic
Environmental
Social
PROPER e-Waste RECYCLING
Toxics Link - International Workshop on Designing Take Back Systems for E-waste
22Policy Principles: Role Game
11 Dec 2012
Toxics Link - International Workshop on Designing Take Back Systems for E-waste
23
11 Dec 2012
A proper Recycling Chain: ending up with End-Processing
ONLY EFFICIENCY TROUGH ALL STEPS CAN ENSURE RECOVERY Separate collection
No MSW No cherry picking No wrong stream
Specific Targets
CollectionPre-
Processing
Man./Aut. Disass. De-pollution Fractions Removal
Channel to End-Processing
End-Processing
Efficient recovery to raw materials
High-Tech No informal recycling
Environmental Gain
Toxics Link - International Workshop on Designing Take Back Systems for E-waste
24
11 Dec 2012
Stakeholders, Recycling Chain, Responsibilities and Policy OptionsStakeholder Roles & Responsibilities Multiple Options
Producers Design to Avoid Recycling Accidents; reduce disassembly times
Municipalities Enable cheap collection
Retailers Any old for any new (same category)
Consumers Hand in old products
Recyclers Invest in eco-efficient treatment
Compliance Schemes
PR; Maximise collection amounts
Governments Provide clear framework; monitor; leave responsibility to chain
Toxics Link - International Workshop on Designing Take Back Systems for E-waste
25
11 Dec 2012
Focus on Policy Options: PRO vs CONS for Different Types of SchemesOptions Country PRO (examples) CONS (examples)
Monopoly BE, NO, LUX, SE, NL, CH
• Focus on effectiveness, PR
• Economies of scale
• Could have “inefficiencies”
• Less pressure on cost reduction
Multiple Schemes with NO Clearinghouse
IE • Split territory: economies scale
• Long term optimizationUK • “Evidences scheme”
incentivise collection• Market distortion/Access
to wasteMultiple Schemes with Clearinghouse
IT, FR • Level playing filed • Difficult optimization as collection point being assigned annually
Individual Producers/Schemes with Clearinghouse
DE • Freedom of choice how to fulfil responsibilities
• Pressure on cost reduction
• Optimization difficult
Toxics Link - International Workshop on Designing Take Back Systems for E-waste
26
11 Dec 2012
Example of Italy: Clearinghouse Role & Responsibilities
CollectiveScheme 1
CollectiveScheme 2
CollectiveScheme 3
Centro diCoordinamento
(ClearingHouse)
Producer X
Producer Y
Producer Z
Producer A
Producer B
Producer C
The Clearing House co-ordinatesfield operations
Producers createCollective Schemes
Minimum recycling Standards agreed with Recyclers Association List Certified Recyclers (IT + EU) Mandatory Pre-Processing by Schemes only in Certified Recyclers for B2C
2009 Data on Export:• 2,500 t B2C
exported (AT, DE)
• 110,000 t B2B exported (China, Pakistan)
Toxics Link - International Workshop on Designing Take Back Systems for E-waste
27
11 Dec 2012
Focus on Policy Options: PRO vs CONS for access to waste Municipal Collection PointsOptions Country PRO (examples) CONS (examples)
Ownership Municipalities
UK • Financial incentive to collect, due to recoup through evidence mechanisms
• Distortion for big schemes with no access to waste
Hand-Over to Scheme + charging cost
NL • Financial incentive to promote collection
• Leakages still occur
AT • Flat rates & minimum requirements for collection points
Hand-Over to Scheme at no cost
DK • Cost to be reimbursed by taxpayers: harmonize actions
DE • Step-out for all streams • Proper standards needed
Hand-Over to Scheme + efficiency reward
IT • Push for quality in collection
• Hard for small collection points
Toxics Link - International Workshop on Designing Take Back Systems for E-waste
28
11 Dec 2012
Example of Italy: promoting efficiency in Collection Points Starting (2009) with reward depending on:
Number of inhabitants (promote aggregation of collection points) Minimum weight for pick-up requests (improve logistics efficiency)
Changed to (2010): Tons collected (promote effectiveness of collection points) Minimum weight for pick-up requests (improve logistics efficiency)
Now (2012) based on: Access to collection points by retailers (promote retailer’s collection network) Minimum weight for pick-up requests (improve logistics efficiency)
Use of goal-oriented financial incentives
Toxics Link - International Workshop on Designing Take Back Systems for E-waste
29
11 Dec 2012
Focus on Policy Options: PRO vs CONS role RetailersOptions Country PRO (examples) CONS (examples)
Retailers accept old-for-new + VF share
IE • Helping Retailers to compensate part of costs incurred
• Discuss with local authorities alternative to shop-return
Retailers accept any-old (per Type of EEE)
CH, NO • Easier for consumers
DK • Only on voluntary basis • Could hamper total numbers
Retailers accept old-for-new + exemptions
HU • Only if selling area more than 35 sqm
• Smaller are usually closer to consumers
Toxics Link - International Workshop on Designing Take Back Systems for E-waste
30
11 Dec 2012
EEE & WEEE Streams (IT): Formal vs Complementary
PoM 2011 WEEE Generated 2011 Collected & Treated0
5
10
15
20
25
Complementary StremasExport + TreatmentLife ExtensionUncertaintyWarrantReuseBad-HabitB2BMixed WEEECRTLHHAC&F
Reporting Complementary streams
2011: formal System35.8% of 65% PoM Target31.1% of 85% WG Target
Role Reuse
Toxics Link - International Workshop on Designing Take Back Systems for E-waste
31
11 Dec 2012
Is there a Solution?
Stakeholder engagement since early stage
Adapt policy options to local context
Learn from existing experiences ..and errors!!
Toxics Link - International Workshop on Designing Take Back Systems for E-waste
32
11 Dec 2012
Find out more…
United Nations University: www.unu.edu
UNU – ISP: www.isp.unu.edu
StEP Initiative: www.step-initiative.org
E-Waste Academy: www.ewasteacademy.org
UNEP, Sustainable Innovation and Technology Transfer Industrial Sector Studies: Recycling from e-waste to Resources (2009)
EPR/IPR: http://www.bis.gov.uk/assets/biscore/business-sectors/docs/w/12-1007-waste-electrical-and-electronic-weee-regulations-individual-producer-ipr-responsibility.pdf
WEEE Flows: Future Flows Report (NL, 2012), Household WEEE Generated (IT, 2012)