environment magazine

WEEE Have the Recast

By Dr Philip Morton, CEO of Repic

Nine years on from the introduction of the original WEEE Directive in January 2003, Dr Philip Morton, CEO at Repic, takes a look at how the system has evolved and what has changed in this time.

The Directive has been going through a Recast process. The review was kicked off by EU officials in December 2008, an agreement reached in principle on December 20th 2011, and expected to be formally approved at a vote in the European Parliament between January 16th – 20th 2012. The WEEE Recast is finally here.

Assuming it is approved, the Recast will then undergo a process of legal scrutiny and translation into Member State (MS) languages, and it will be published in the Official Journal (OJ) by mid-2012, when it will become effective. MSs will then have a maximum of 18 months to transpose the Recast into law, so for the UK we expect the new WEEE Regulations to come into effect from the beginning of 2014.

So, there will be a period of discussion, debate and consultation in each MS with the first UK consultation expected around Q4 2012, and a possible second - if deemed necessary - during 2013. It is doubtful that anyone will claim the current UK system is perfect, so, armed with experience from the last few years, the Recast provides an ideal chance for a full review.

So what does all of this mean? What has changed and is it good or bad? In brief, a few key changes incorporated into the Recast concern:

• Scope
• Separate collection / increased WEEE collection target / retailer take back of very small WEEE in-store
• Shipment of WEEE abroad / reuse targets
• Financing of WEEE / extension of producer responsibility

Scope
This is a key area addressed by the Recast as it defines the Electrical and Electronic Equipment (EEE), and hence Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) that is covered by the Directive.

The Recast details a move to ‘open’ scope – meaning that all electrical and electronic equipment will be covered unless specifically excluded (and there is a list of exclusions given in Article two of the Recast) - six years and one day after entry into force (so if this is mid-2012 then it will come into force mid-2018). This should greatly improve clarity and consistency of application of scope.

Collection and Targets
This is the area of the Recast that refers to separate collection, an increased target and retailer take back of small WEEE in store. This is a critical feature of the Directive. The aim remains the same: avoid creating WEEE where possible and minimise environmental impact, but where WEEE is unavoidable, increase collection to maximise reuse, recycling and recovery (of secondary materials).

The current target for MSs is a minimum of 4kg per head of population; a one size fits all target that is easy for some and impossible for others. The UK currently collects around 8kg per person, however some Scandinavian countries collect 15kg, whilst others fall below 4kgs. Why is this?

It is because the amount of WEEE discarded depends on many factors, such as life- cycle of product, market saturation, consumer behaviour, state of the economy etc. In less mature markets, for example, more people buy new electrical and electronic goods because they don’t have an item, rather than buying something to replace an old item. So, in these markets very little WEEE is generated when new purchases are made. Over time, these markets will saturate too, so a new target which recognises where each country is now, and where it needs to get to, is required.

In terms of improving collection rates, the Recast addresses the issue of targets and the key points to note are as follows:

• “…. from 4 years after the year of entry into force of the directive (so from 2016), the minimum collection rate shall be 45% calculated on the basis of the total weight of WEEE collected…expressed as a percentage of the average weight of EEE placed on the market in the three preceding years in that Member State.”

• “Member states shall ensure that the volume of WEEE collected evolves gradually during the period from 4 years after entry into force (2016) to 7 years after entry into force (2019) unless the final collection rate (65% EEE or 85% WEEE generated) is already achieved”.

• “7 years after entry into force of this directive the minimum collection rate to be achieved annually shall be 65% of EEE placed on the market in the three preceding years or alternatively 85% of WEEE generated on its territory.”

And Importantly:

• “Until 1st January of the year 4 years after entry into force of this directive (from now until January 1st 2016) a rate of separate collection of at least 4 kilograms per inhabitant per year of WEEE from private households is collected or the same amount of average weight of WEEE that was collected in that Member State in the three preceding years, whichever is greater.”

The UK already collects more than 4kgs, so presumably the new target (from 2012) will be the average kgs collected over the three preceding years until the end of 2015 – so, for example, the 2013 target will be the average of collections in 2010, 2011 and 2012. Then in 2016 it will become a minimum of 45 per cent (by weight) of EEE sold in the preceding three years (2013, 2014, 2015), ramping up at the end of 2018 when it becomes either 65 per cent of the average EEE sold in the three preceding years, or 85 per cent of WEEE generated. This latter target, based on WEEE generated, is a much better one which reflects the individual nature of WEEE arising in each Member State and is favoured by many stakeholders.

Everyone agrees that we must capture as much WEEE as possible, but common sense dictates that you can only capture what is there. In order to improve the efficiency of WEEE captured and treated within the system, the Recast includes the points below in addition to the current requirements:

• “Member states shall prohibit the disposal of separately collected WEEE which has not yet undergone the treatment specified in article 8”. This should mean that WEEE from all sources is properly treated and counted, and should help to prevent illegal exports and improve the amount counted towards the target.

• “Member states shall ensure that distributors provide for the collection at retail shops with sales areas relating to EEE of minimum 400 square metres, or in their immediate proximity, of very small WEEE … free of charge to end-users and with no obligation to buy an EEE of equivalent type, unless an assessment shows existing collection schemes are likely to be at least as effective...”. The UK may not need this and might be able to demonstrate that the existing collection schemes are adequate.

• “Member states may designate the operators that are allowed to collect WEEE from private households…”. This does not mean collecting WEEE from the home, the term actually means to collect WEEE that originated from private households but has been deposited at collection points (often called Business to Consumer, B2C) - as opposed to WEEE from sources other than private households (often called Business to Business, B2B).

• Member States may require that WEEE deposited at collection facilities…is handed over to producers or third parties acting on their behalf or is handed over, for the purposes of preparing for reuse, to designated establishments or undertakings”. Again this is aimed at ensuring WEEE is properly captured, treated and counted and will be essential if the UK is to hit the higher targets.
Shipment of WEEE Abroad and Reuse Targets
Everyone agrees that illegal export is unacceptable. It causes terrible environmental impact (usually in developing countries), loss of critical rare earth materials because the recovery process is basic and focuses only on easily recoverable secondary materials, and it causes negative health and social impacts.

Part of the problem is that the current system only records the WEEE that goes through ‘official channels’, but in reality, large quantities of WEEE (50 per cent or more, according to the Commission) remains outside these channels. Much of this is undoubtedly collected, and in the UK, it is probably properly treated by economic operators - such as scrap dealers, but simply not reported. Some, however, escapes to illegal export or other unacceptable treatment routes. So we need to be counting everything that we are collecting in order to close the loopholes, recognise the gaps and minimise illegal export and poor treatment.

The Recast addresses this in a number of ways. Firstly by increasing the target for WEEE as described above and recording it in the system. Logically, if more is captured then less can escape. Secondly, by increasing the recovery and recycling targets by five per cent this should improve the quality of recycling and rule out treatment in countries where standards fall short. And finally, it also tightens the criteria on exports of EEE - often WEEE is sent abroad under the guise of working EEE that can still be used, when in fact, it has no value as a working piece of equipment, so ends up in landfill abroad.

All of these updates are positive, but the key remains at national level on transposition. In the UK, for example, to prove that WEEE has been recycled responsibly at an approved treatment plant, the regulations work on a system of certificates called evidence notes. Collectively, evidence notes represent the total amount of WEEE collected in any year. One of the main issues in the UK system is that there is the potential for several parties (intermediaries) to become involved in the recycling chain and where this happens, and WEEE evidence is transferred or traded, its origin becomes untraceable and the audit trail becomes longer and less clear – which means the risk of leakage and the illegal export of WEEE increases.

In theory, the act of trading or transfer of evidence is intended to be a year-end balancing activity, as every note must be owned by schemes in the correct proportion. However, in reality, if a Producer Compliance Scheme (PCS) has evidence that it doesn’t directly need to meet its own members’ obligations, then there will be another PCS scheme which does need it, and therefore, will be forced to buy it from them regardless of cost or origin.

The risk of leakage from the system can significantly decrease where there is a direct relationship between those collecting WEEE and a PCS that actually needs and directly finances the WEEE for its members’ obligations. This is because the audit trail is far shorter, making it easier to know where WEEE comes from, where it goes to and who pays for its treatment. So how the UK addresses this through the transposition will be crucial.

Financing of WEEE and Extension of Producer Responsibilities
During the Recast process, some stakeholders pressed for producers of EEE to become responsible for financing the cost of collection from the home. Many more, however, saw this as an unnecessary measure which was both environmentally and economically unsound.

The Commissions own work shows that currently around 37 per cent of WEEE is captured in official systems, only 13 per cent is discarded in wheelie bins as unsorted municipal waste, and 54 per cent is the ‘known unknown’, which is made up of WEEE that is collected (and much of it may be properly treated and recovered) but nobody knows what happens to it for certain as it is not recorded. So inevitably, some of it will be illegally exported or poorly treated.

It would seem perverse, therefore, to introduce a system of collection from the home with all the associated environmental impacts of additional vehicle journeys and accompanying costs, when these collections already take place and are already profitable for economic operators.

What we need to be doing in reality, is concentrating on the massive 54 per cent that is ‘known unknown’. In many cases, it might not be necessary to change anything from an operational perspective – so still allowing, indeed encouraging, economic operators who already make money from scrap to capture more, but ensuring that what they do collect, is recorded and counts towards the target.

Addressing the 13 per cent in consumer wheelie bins is of course important but it is probably best addressed by consumer awareness campaigns. Fortunately, the Recast supports this and leaves it as a Member State option, stating in Article 12:

• “Member states shall ensure that producers provide for at least the financing of the collection, treatment recovery and environmentally sound disposal of WEEE from private households that has been deposited at collection facilities...”

• “Member states may, where appropriate, encourage producers to finance also the costs occurring for collection of WEEE from private households to collection facilities.”

In Summary
So, it is fair to say that the system has come a long way since the original introduction of the WEEE Directive in 2007. The Recast is now done and is expected to be formally approved by the European Parliament between January 16th and 20th 2012. At this point, it will be legally checked and translated, and then published in the OJ by mid-2012. The absolutely critical next phase is the transposition of the Recast into each MS national law. The Directive says what must be achieved; the transposition is the ‘how we achieve it’. The clock is ticking and we have just less than two years to get it right.

For more information about Repic, visit www.repic.co.uk

REPIC is a not-for-profit company established in January 2004 by leading companies in AMDEA, SEAMA and Intellect - three of the main trade associations in the electrical and electronics industry - to meet their producer obligations under the WEEE Directive.

For further information, please contact Cerys Wason at Tangerine PR on 0161 817 6600, or email: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.