by Philip Morton
Since the introduction of the UK WEEE Regulations in 2007, there have naturally been some teething problems. Intentional over-collection by compliance schemes, low public awareness of WEEE recycling, illegal exporting and excessive evidence trading threatened to blight the progress of the WEEE Regulations. However, these growing pains have actually proved valuable lessons that only served to improve the UK system.
In July 2009, the long-waited outcome of a judicial review confirmed that a practice fairly common in the UK WEEE system, the intentional over-collection of WEEE by compliance schemes, was unlawful. Over-collection does not mean more WEEE is collected (there is only ever the same amount of WEEE), it simply means that if a compliance scheme collects more than its percentage share (i.e. what it needs to cover its members’ obligations), other schemes are forced to buy evidence of collection from it.
As a result of a judicial review’s findings, the UK system is experiencing tangible benefits as all compliance schemes are now required to agree mutually acceptable collection and balancing arrangements in advance. Schemes deliberately collecting more (or less) WEEE than detailed in their plans, without a prior arrangement, will be in breach of their ongoing conditions of approval and guilty of a criminal offence. The practice of over-collection has undermined the UK WEEE system since its inception, so REPIC (a compliance scheme) welcomes the clarity and positive changes that more proactive enforcement of the legislation will bring.
Proposed changes to WEEE Directive
Benefits are also anticipated from the recast of the WEEE Directive announced by the European Commission in December 2008. REPIC is pleased that the report on the recast proposals from the European Parliament’s environment committee published in February this year takes into consideration input from stakeholder groups and deals with a number of issues which will definitely help to make the recycling of WEEE more efficient and more secure. If the key proposals outlined in the recast are adopted, it will give the UK Government real scope to improve the current system.
For REPIC, the most important outcomes of the recast are the proposed revisions to the directive which clarify producer responsibility and give consumers positive involvement in ensuring that end-of-life electronic or electrical equipment (EEE) is taken to collection facilities, thereby engaging the public and improving collection rates. It’s clear that, combined with the outcome of the judicial review, the wheels are already in motion to make the UK WEEE system more robust.
In addition, the recast’s proposal to count WEEE from all stakeholders, rather than just the WEEE handed to producer schemes, should plug more gaps and impede the illegal export of WEEE. Properly implemented, this will help the environment, reduce the cost burden and raise the amount of reported WEEE. The increased focus on procedures to protect the environment during this process by harmonizing standards for the collection, treatment and recycling of WEEE is a significant move towards a level playing field in all EU member states.
The proposal to tighten export requirements is sensible too, as it will encourage more direct relationships between those collecting WEEE and funding producer compliance schemes, thereby shortening the audit trail and enhancing the security of the recycling process. A short chain from collection to treatment and a direct relationship with the funding producer compliance scheme makes it easier to know where WEEE comes from, where it goes to and who pays for it.
These changes all help reinforce REPIC’s operational goal. REPIC has always sought to nurture direct relationships with its partner designated collection facilities (DCFs) rather than deal through intermediate third parties in order to:
- maximize the separate, efficient collection and treatment ofWEEE
- minimize the opportunities for the illegal export of WEEE or the need to engage in evidence trading.
Change is afoot
Three years on since the introduction of the WEEE Regulations, more and more local authorities and those operating their sites are reaping the benefits of nurturing direct relationships with producer compliance schemes. Evidence trading is on the decline, and visibility of where WEEE comes from and goes to is increasing as middlemen are cut out from the chain, giving much greater comfort to those collecting WEEE. A short chain means the payment process is speeded up and the available money doesn’t leak from the system.
 |
| WEEE after collection |
The lessons learned are particularly evident in the younger, more streamlined UK Battery Regulations. This system is developing a robust infrastructure for battery collection, has a definitive collection target that is directly proportional to production (and so eliminates over- or under-collection and the subsequent necessity for evidence trading), and which requires producers to finance the net costs of collection, treatment and recovery. The inclusion of this simple word ‘net’ gives a world of clarity.
The Battery Regulations bring the UK into line with a number of other EU countries that already legislate to minimize the proportion of batteries being sent to landfill by increasing the level of recycling in this market. In February 2010, additional legislation was brought in which requires all retailers that sell more than 32 kg of batteries a year to provide in-store take-back facilities for consumers to return their waste batteries.
The UK recycling targets call for stepwise increases in the proportion of batteries that need to be recycled from around 3% cent in 2009 to 45% by 2016. The figures may look steep, but they are achievable. Belgium, for example, claims to recycle over half of its batteries. How quickly the UK can reach this level of activity remains to be seen, however, and as with the WEEE system, it is likely to be a challenging journey.
In many ways, the UK’s experience of the WEEE Regulations has helped shape a more workable set of Battery Regulations. There are many obvious similarities between the two systems, but it is their differences that demonstrate the progress that has been made. The first difference between the WEEE and Battery Regulations is that the latter have a definitive collection target, with each producer responsible for recycling a finite tonnage of batteries directly proportional to the weight of batteries it has released onto the market in any given year. This means that, in the UK battery recycling industry, the concept of over-collection does not exist and forced evidence trading is not necessary.
Another difference comes in the form of batteries being routinely recycled without any additional cost burden. This is because some items, such as car batteries, have a value that is high enough to cover the cost of recovering them. So for batteries, economic operators just carry on pretty much as before, with producers there to provide a safety net if the process ever becomes a cost. Perhaps this approach ought to be adopted by the UK WEEE system too?
Safety nets
The UK Battery Regulations also state that producers are required to finance the net costs of collection, treatment and recovery. The word ‘net’ is a crucial inclusion; it means that any value created from collection, treatment and recycling should be deducted from the costs paid and thereby minimize the speculative element of the market. This was certainly intended for the WEEE Regulations too, but the key word ‘net’ is unfortunately absent.
 |
| Dumped computer monitors |
The lack of an opt-out clause for battery retailers is another interesting differentiator. Within the WEEE system, retailers wishing to opt out of in-store take-back have a second option, i.e. to join the UK’s WEEE distributor take-back scheme (DTS), which allows retailers to direct their customers to one of a number of DCFs where they can take their WEEE for recycling.
When this was introduced in 2007, a number of retailers opted out of the in-store take-back scheme and instead were required to contribute to a central fund, which allowed a country-wide network of civic amenity sites (Household Waste Recycling Centres) to be upgraded to DCFs. With batteries, consumers will still be able to take their batteries to their local civic amenity site, but retailers do not have the option specifically to request this.
The Battery Regulations are generally viewed in the UK as a solid piece of legislation, but their introduction has not passed without some concerns. The responsibility for meeting battery collection and recycling targets lies with battery manufacturers but they, in turn, rely on the retailers and consumers to deliver the results and actually take action to recycle their waste batteries.
Spread the word
The subject of creating a national WEEE awareness campaign has been raised regularly since the Regulations were introduced and I hope the same will be considered for batteries because a number of organizations have shown that education campaigns can have a significant effect on recycling levels.
A recent survey found that 72% of industry experts believe low public awareness of recycling of waste electrical goods is one of the biggest challenges faced by the sector. The same will undoubtedly be true for batteries, so cohesive and consistent awareness campaigns are important to encourage households to think more carefully about how they dispose of their WEEE and their waste batteries.
We know that awareness campaigns work on a regional scale, so it makes sense to engage the public on a national level.
When REPIC set up a regional recycling fund, Leicestershire County Council was one of the first local authorities to apply for a grant to support its county-wide publicity campaign to boost small WEEE recycling. Part of this initiative included a simple competition whereby every Leicestershire resident taking a small electrical item to one of the County Council’s 14 recycling and household waste sites was given a scratchcard with a 1-in-16 chance of winning a range of prizes, including holiday vouchers worth £200.
By the end of the campaign, Leicestershire County Council had generated a 45% increase in the level of small WEEE items collected for recycling – a phenomenal result which demonstrates the power of public awareness in encouraging households to recycle.
As well as collecting a larger proportion of the county’s WEEE, the project demonstrated unequivocally that engaging the public is a really effective way of enhancing the proportion of WEEE and batteries collected by councils. REPIC is now keen to hear from other councils planning to run their own recycling campaigns so that we can replicate these results across the country.
Final thoughts
It is absolutely vital that all stakeholders work together in making a concerted effort to raise awareness among the public, ensuring that WEEE and battery recycling becomes second nature in our households. An essential part of the success of meeting WEEE and battery recycling targets is a well-run, robust national network of DCFs and battery collection points.
For batteries this would ideally include retailers providing in-store take back as well as a number of other high-traffic locations such as schools, libraries and shopping centres offering collection facilities.
In some ways, some of the problems encountered with the UK WEEE system could have been avoided if it had come after the Battery Regulations, which for some reason feel more manageable. In any case, both sets of regulations are likely to undergo further amendments as technology and market influences change or the respective directives are revisited. Let’s hope that any adjustments serve only to enhance the systems and make them more effective in achieving the initial aims of reducing waste sent to landfill.
Philip Morton is chief executive of REPIC Limited, Bury, UK.
e-mail: info@repic.co.uk
