SCYCLE OPERATING UNIT E-waste Management: from EPR theory to Collection & Treatment practice Federico Magalini – email: magalini [at] unu.edu

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


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


4

11 Dec 2012

StEP Members

61 Members from:

Companies (from different Industries, OEM, Recyclers,…)

Governmental Organizations

NGOs

International Organizations

Academic Institutions


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


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


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


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


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



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


3.4

Africa 1.0

Russia 1.0

Australia + Pacific 0.5Europe, non EU27+2, 0.2

India 1.4


Total: 34 Mt

11 Dec 2012



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


5.7

India3.4

Japan3.2

Africa 2.1

Russia 1.8Australia + Pacific 0.7

Europe, non EU27+2, 0.3


Total: 57.4 Mt

11 Dec 2012



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


Total: 76.1 Mt

11 Dec 2012


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


14Key issue: the EPR loop

TREATMENT

SEPARATE COLLECTION

COLLECTION

RECYCLE

DISPOSAL

REUSE

System Design

OEM = Product Design + Manufacturing + EOL (EPR)

11 Dec 2012


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


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


17Resource Perspective: Elements in Mobile Phone

11 Dec 2012


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


19Global Material Extraction 1900-2005

11 Dec 2012


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


21

11 Dec 2012

…and Choices

Increasing demand

Supply Chain restrictions

1 Tesla

6.831 NotebookOR

Economic

Environmental

Social

PROPER e-Waste RECYCLING


22Policy Principles: Role Game

11 Dec 2012


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


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


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


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)


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


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


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


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


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!!


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)

http://www.unu.edu/

http://www.isp.unu.edu/

http://www.step-initiative.org/

http://www.ewasteacademy.org/

http://www.bis.gov.uk/assets/biscore/business-sectors/docs/w/12-1007-waste-electrical-and-electronic-weee-regulations-individual-producer-ipr-responsibility.pdf



Documents

SCYCLE OPERATING UNIT E-waste Management: from EPR theory to Collection & Treatment practice Federico Magalini – email: magalini [at] unu.edu