SOME EVIDENCES ABOUT THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF THE WEEE TREATMENT REGULATION

Transcription

1 SOME EVIDENCES ABOUT THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF THE WEEE TREATMENT REGULATION [ ] Y. BARBA-GUTIÉRREZ, Escuela Politécnica Superior de Ingeniería, Universidad de Oviedo, Campus de Gijón, Gijón (Spain) M. HOPP, Technische Universität Clausthal, Adolph-Roemer-Strasse 2ª, Clausthal-Zellerfeld, Germany B. ADENSO-DÍAZ, Escuela Politécnica Superior de Ingeniería, Universidad de Oviedo, Campus de Gijón, Gijón (Spain) Abstract. The production of electrical and electronic equipment (EEE) is one of the fastest growing areas worldwide. This also means that the amount of waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE) will continue to increase in the coming years. For this reason, it is crucial to obtain more knowledge about the environmental consequences of the different WEEE treatment options, because political decision and legal adoption will influence development of the WEEE collection, recycling or/and disposal. This paper aims to show that under certain circumstances the environmental impact of collecting this type of waste could be even higher than the impact of noncollection. Depending on the distance travelled to pick up the appliances, it might be better if recycling was abandoned and landfill disposal were used again. The methodology of Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) was applied to different appliances (refrigerators and TV sets) in order to test this hypothesis. Keywords. Waste treatment; Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment; Life Cycle Assessment; End-of-Life policies; Environmental Impact; waste regulation 1 Introduction Until the 1970s, electronics manufacturing was considered, in the public eye, as a clean industry, however, increased societal awareness of environmental issues has made to review this idea (Ellis, 2000). According to Cui and Forssberg, (2003), the production of electrical and electronic equipment (EEE) is one of the fastest growing areas. In the former 15 European Union member countries (EU15) the amount of WEEE produced varied between kg per capita for the period and has been projected as kg per capita for the period (EEA, 2003). Electrical and electronic waste (WEEE) can be considered a danger to human and the environment (Streicher-Porte et al., 2005). As a response to this growing problem, there has been a concerted effort by the European Union to develop legislation grounded on three pillars: waste prevention, recycling and reuse, in order to improve final disposal (Hischier, 2005). 1

2 The first Directive (European Union 2002 (a)) is relative to the restriction of the use of certain hazardous substances in electrical and electronic equipment to contribute to the protection of human health and the environmentally sound recovery and disposal of waste electrical and electronic equipments by means of some restrictions. The second one (European Union, 2002 (b)) has been specifically developed to help reduce the levels of WEEE that are being consigned to landfill, and to encourage resource efficiency through recycling and reuse. This Directive sets out measures for the collection, treatment, recovery and recycling for all electrical and electronic products. In addition to this legislation, which directly addresses end-of-life issues, new legislation is also emerging that will extend the focus of environmental impact over the entire product life cycle from design to end-of-life (Goosey, 2004). Some authors have taken into account this future law for WEEE and have developed new techniques to design products and supply chains that are both economically and ecologically feasible (Krikke et al, 2003). 1.1 Objective A variety of tasks are performed within the treatment system for WEEE, such as acquisition and collection, transportation, sorting and disassembly of products, as well as storage and selling of material fractions (Walther, 2005). Due to the impact of these activities, and especially those related to transportation of WEEE, our objective to identify whether there exists a point beyond which the impact of recycling is actually worse than the criticized procedure of landfill. Up to now, only Hischier et al (2005) has analysed whether WEEE recycling makes sense from an environmental perspective, obtaining a positive answer and proposing different recycling alternatives in order to reduce its impact on the environment. Other authors such as Darby et al (2005) have analysed in more detail household recycling behaviour and attitudes towards the disposal of small EEE. The Life Cycle Assessment methodology is used to compare different waste scenarios in order to provide a new overview of WEEE regulations and the proper handling of this waste in the European Union. Two household appliances (refrigerators and TV sets) have been analysed in order to determine up to what distance it is convenient to cover to collect WEEE before recycling it. 2 Methodology Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) is an objective process to evaluate the environmental burdens associated with a product, process, or activity by identifying energy and materials used and wastes released to the environment, and to evaluate and implement opportunities to affect environmental improvements (SETAC, 1993). This methodology consists of four phases according to ISO standards (ISO, 1997 (a), (b)). Goal definition and scope determines the point of view and the guidelines that will be followed during the rest of the study; Inventory analysis involves gathering data relative to inputs and outputs at each stage of the product life cycle, while the aim of 2

3 impact assessment (we shall focus on this phase) is to interpret this data in terms of environmental impacts (ISO 14042). Assessment models sometimes also include normalisation, grouping and sorting or weighting procedures, in order to facilitate the interpretation phase, although none of these procedures are mandatory according to ISO standards. Finally, these results are interpreted according to goal definition and scope in the interpretation phase (Rebitzera et al, 2004). The computer software SimaPro 6.0 has been used to carry out this analysis. The chosen method of assessment has been the Eco-Indicator 99 because we have considered it as the most suitable method to analyse the obtained results. Previous authors, such as Tsilingiridis et al (2003), have used the same indicator, proving that this method is both comprehensive and provides indices for many data categories. The different impact categories of this method can be found on Table 1. This method was also applied because it considers one of the most important categories in relation to the environmental impact associated with road transportation, namely fossil fuel. Eco-Indicator 99 Carcinogens Respiratory organics (summer smog) Respiratory inorganics (winter smog) Climate change Radiation Ozone layer Human Health Ecotoxicity Acidification/Eutrophication Ecosystem Land use Minerals Fossil fuels Resources Table 1: Eco-Indicator 99 impact categories 3

4 3 LCA analysis to complement the new laws about WEEE treatments 3.1. Goal definition and scope This research is focused on analysing different waste scenarios for household appliances (refrigerators and TV sets). The reason why we have focused our analysis on the disposal phase is because the prior phases of the life cycle, such as the extracting and processing raw materials, manufacturing, transportation, distribution and use, generate the same environmental impact over the entire life cycle of each product, regardless of its considered final disposal (landfill or recycling). To carry out the collection of the recyclable goods, the considered means of transportation was a 40-tonne lorry. In addition, transport is quantified by the multiplication of the average product weight (kg) and the distance (km) that must be covered to collect these products before their recycling. Two different scenarios were considered for the final disposal stage. The first one is represented by the classical landfill scenario (SimaPro: Landfill / CH S) and the other one is represented by an environmentally friendly treatment of household waste (SimaPro: Household Waste NL B250 avoided). Initially, the idea was to consider the Recycling scenario provided by SimaPro as the environmentally friendly treatment. However, this alternative is not the most realistic scenario according to the explanation included in SimaPro 6.0 (Pré Consultants, 2004) Inventory analysis Waste electric and electronic equipment is non-homogeneous and complex in terms of materials and components. Consumers discard a wide variety of WEEE often in different ways depending on several factors. In this research, we are focused on two different products, refrigerators and TV-sets, which collection, reuse and recycling systems already exist and can be improved in accordance with our results. The most important components of the refrigerator and the TV set are summarised respectively in Tables 2 3. It should be noted that the composition of these products was obtained from manufacturers web pages as well as from data gathered from direct examinations. Components % Kg Iron Polyurethane Water with R Oil and CFC Aluminium Glass Copper Plastic Table 2: Inventory data for a refrigerator with an average weight of 40 kg 4

5 Components % Kg Iron Copper Aluminium Phosphorus Plastic Glass Other Materials Table 3: Inventory data for a TV set with an average weight of 15.6 kg 3.3. Impact Assessment and Interpretation of Results To present the final results, we shall use a graph showing the distances covered (from 0 to 500 km) to collect each particular type of product on the x-axis, whereas the y-axis shows the difference between the ecopoints corresponding to landfill disposal and the ecopoints corresponding to Household Waste. We considered normalized results in this analysis, working with ecopoints instead of percentages. These ecopoints make it possible to determine the difference between the two disposal scenarios (Landfill and Household Waste), depending on the distance covered. Only four out eleven different categories taken into account in the Eco-Indicator 99 show a significant change in the considered distance for the two analysed products: Fossils Fuels, Respiratory Inorganic (winter smog), Acidification/ Eutrophication, and Radiation. It must be highlighted that we limited the distance to 500 km, since the negative effect of most impact categories beyond that distance are more dangerous for the environment than all the positive aspects associated with recycling the considered products Refrigerator Figure 1 shows the results for the analysed refrigerator. Radiation and Acidification/Eutrophication indicate a difference, though their break-even points are at large distances so their gradient is barely noticeable (F R = 436 km, F AE = 475 km). It is interesting to note that the Respiratory Inorganics balance becomes negative after just a short distance (F RI = 262 km), whereas Fossil Fuels starts out with a rather large difference, but due to a very strong gradient, its break-even point (F FF ) is situated at km and it turns out to have the major influence on environmental pollution. 5

6 Diferences in ecopoints F AE =475km F FF =471.5km F R =436km F RI =262km Kilometres Respiratory Inorganics Acidificacion/ Eutrophication Radiation Fossil Fuels Figure 1: Differences in impact categories for a refrigerator (40 kg) (Landfill minus Household Waste) TV set For the TV set, Acidification/Eutrophication is the first category to reach the break-even point (T AE = 305 km). However, Fossil Fuels once again possesses the strongest gradient and extends its break-even point further (T FF = km); this will be the most influential and pollutant category. Fossil Fuels is followed by Respiratory Inorganics (T RI = 461 km). Radiation does not play such a decisive role. For this type of product, it appears that the mayor negative influence comes from transportation. Figure 3 shows the corresponding results. 4 Discussion of the results The previous figures show that four impact categories have shown that the recycling scenario is in fact not always the most suitable choice of disposal from an environmental point of view. The categories most affected were Respiratory Inorganic (winter smog), Fossil Fuels, Acidification/Eutrophication and Radiation. Table 4 provides a summary of the different impact categories for both products. The first two categories possess a strong gradient and the break-even point is always reached within the range distance for all considered products. A further increase in distance would exacerbate their negative effects, thus possibly cancelling out all the advantages of the recycling scenario. It should be noted that in the case of the TV set, Acidification/Eutrophication are the categories that need less distance to provide evidence of the negative aspects of this type of WEEE collection. 6

7 Diferences in ecopoints T R =461km T RI =363.5km T FF =338.5km T AE =305km Kilometres Respiratory Inorganics Acidificacion/ Eutrophication Radiation Fossil Fuels Figure 3: Differences in impact categories for a television-set (Landfill minus Household Waste) Product Category Respiratory Inorganics (winter smog) Radiation Acidification/ Eutrophication Fossil Fuels Refrigerator (40kg) Television set Table 4: Summary of the break-even points according to impact categories and products 5 Conclusions and practical consequences In this research, we have estimated the maximum distance per type of WEEE (refrigerators or TV-sets) in order for the most environmentally friendly alternative to date not to have negative aspects. These distances should be considered when designing new reverse logistics networks. Note that we are not stating that landfill is a better option than recycling of material, but that a blind application of the new Directive would have negative effects. Good decisions therefore need to be taken when designing recycling networks in the search for environmental efficiency. In the results of this research, we have shown that there are a four impact categories, Fossil Fuels, Acidification/Eutrophication, Radiation and Respiratory Inorganics, whose negative impacts depend on the distance covered to collect the considered WEEE. Collection was found to be more harmful during the collection process than the 7

8 environmental advantages associated with recycling process for distances even much shorter than 500 km. According to these results, perhaps less common end-of-life alternatives such as charitable donations or resale to second-hand dealers could play a more relevant role from both the social and environmental perspective, thus avoiding the need for recycling operations. 6 Acknowledgements This research was funded by the Spanish Ministry of Science, contract number SEJ C02-01/ECON. 7 References Cui, J., Forssberg, E. (2003): Mechanical recycling of waste electric and electronic equipment: a review. Journal of Hazardous Materials, B99, Darby, L., Obara, L. (2005): Household recycling behaviour and attitudes towards the disposal of small electrical and electronic equipment. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 44, EEA (2003): Waste from electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE). Copenhagen: European Environment Agency. Ellis, B. (2000): Environmental issues in electronic manufacturing: a review. Circuti World, 26 (2), European Union (a). Directive 2002/95/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 January 2003 on the restriction of the use of certain hazardous substances in electrical and electronic equipment. European Union (b). Directive 2002/96/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 January 2003 on waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE). Brussels: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Goosey, M. (2004): End-of-life electronics legislation an industry perspective. Circuit World, 30 (2), Hischier, R., Wäger, P., Gauglhofer, J. (2005): Does Recycling make sense from an environmental perspective? The environmental impacts of the Swiss take-back and recycling systems for waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE). Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 25, ISO International Standard Organization, ISO/DIS Environmental management. Life Cycle Assessment. Principles and Structure, 1997 (a). ISO International Standard Organization, ISO/DIS Environmental management Life Cycle Assessment Life Cycle Impact Assessment, 1997 (b). 8

9 Krikke, H., Bloemhof-Ruwaard, J., Van Wassenhove, L.N. (2003): Concurrent product and closed-loop supply chain design with an application to refrigerators. International Journal of Production Research, 41 (16), Pré Consultants: Introduction to LCA with SimaPro 6.0. September Rebitzera, G., Ekvallb, T., Frischknechtc, R., Hunkelerd D., Norrise G., Rydbergf, T., Schmidtg, W.-P., Suhh, S., Weidemai, B.P., Penningtonf, D.W. (2004): Life Cycle Assessment. Part 1: Framework, goal and scope definition, inventory analysis, and applications. Environment International, 30, SETAC (1993): Guidelines for Life-Cycle Assessment. A Code or Practice, SETAC Workshop, Sesimbra. Streicher-Porte, M., Widmer, R., Jain, A., Bader, H-P., Scheidegger, R., Kytzia, S. (2005): Key drivers of the e-waste recycling system: Assessing and modelling e-waste processing in the informal sector in Delhi. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 25, Tsilingiridis, G., Martinopoulos, G., Kyriakis, N. (2004): Life cycle environmental impact of a thermosyphonic domestic solar hot water system in comparison with electrical and gas water heating. Renewable Energy, 29, Walther, G., Spengler, T. (2005): Impact of WEEE- directive on reverse logistics in Germany. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 35 (5),