Proposals for recycling old TVs and Computers

The Australian and New Zealand governments are considering how to recycle old televisions and computers. The Environment Protection and Heritage Council of has released a Consultation Regulatory Impact Statement: Televisions and Computers" (170 pages, 1.23 Mbyts of PDF, July 2009). Forums were held and written comments are invited by 13 August 2009. Of the nine options in the report, my preference is for option 1 (joint responsibility for collection) followed by option 2 (major computer brands responsible for their own products).

Available are:

1. Consultation Regulatory Impact Statement: Televisions and Computers - July 2009Code of Practice for Managing End-of-Life Televisions - July 2009
2. Willingness to pay for e-waste recycling - July 2009
3. Submission template - Television and Computer Product Stewardship Consultation Package
4. Statement on End of Life Televisions and Computers - Nov 2008

Executive summary

This document is a consultation regulatory impact statement for end of life televisions and computers put out by the Environment Protection and Heritage Council.

Introduction

Electrical and electronic products, in particular televisions and computers, constitute a significant element of Australia's material consumption, domestic environmental impact and waste to landfill. In 2007/08, 31.7 million new televisions, computers and computer products were sold in Australia, which is equivalent to 1.5 new units per person every year. In the same year 16.8 million units reached their end of life, which is close to one unit per Australian. Of these units, it is estimated that 88% were sent to landfill, with only 9% being recycled. Over the next 20 years, a significant volume of televisions, computers and computer products for disposal/recycling is expected to be generated, with expectations that the end of life volume will more than double. Waste volumes are increasing with shorter life spans of product and increasing ownership of electrical products, with the number of televisions, computers and computer products reaching their end of life expected to grow to 44.0 million by 2027/28.

Internationally, programs are being developed or implemented to reduce the environmental impact of electrical and electronic products. The European Union and Japan have already implemented legislation requiring the recovery and recycling of televisions and computers whilst other Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries are in the process of introducing a range of mechanisms to address this issue.

Australia’s consideration of an approach for managing e-waste has been ongoing since the 1990s when national electrical and electronic waste management was put forward as an emerging priority by industry to the Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council (ANZECC), the precursor to the current Environment Protection and
Heritage Council (EPHC).

In 2002 Environment Ministers agreed that national action was required in relation to waste electrical and electronic equipment. On behalf of the EPHC, a multi-jurisdictional working group, known as the Electrical Equipment Product Stewardship Sub-Group, examined the issue of waste electrical and electronic equipment and identified televisions and computers as first priorities for action as a result of their higher levels of hazardous
components relative to other types of electrical products, and the lost opportunities for conserving non-renewable resources due to products being sent to landfill. In 2008 EPHC committed to the development of a national solution to the problem of end of life televisions and computers.

In parallel with government consideration of the issues both the television and key players in the computer industries are keen to engage in large scale national action, with national regulatory support to ensure a level playing field in the market.

In this document computer and computer products are defined as including: computer displays, computer desktops and similar, computer mobile units (e.g. laptops), computer
peripherals (e.g. keyboards, mouse, hard drives, scanners, speakers, web cams, power cords, internal power supplies, external power supplies, fans, miscellaneous/other parts), personal or desktop laser and inkjet printers, and multi function devices.

While each jurisdiction has its own regulation setting out waste minimisation policies (refer to Appendix D), currently only the Australian Capital Territory (ACT) Government has a ban on disposing television screens and computers monitors in its landfill. Other jurisdictions are considering bans and a number of take-back schemes have been trialled. In addition, a number of local governments across Australia have implemented or are
considering bans or charges for disposing of e-waste in landfill. The number of responses to addressing television and computer waste, and more broadly e-waste, in Australia, demonstrates the significance of the issue to the community and the drive to take action

This document is a consultation regulatory impact statement. Its purpose is to examine the impacts of implementing consistent national arrangements for end-of-life televisions and computers. The regulatory impact statement assesses proposed options to address identified problems with end-of-life televisions and computers. This consultation regulatory impact statement does not propose to address the whole issue of end of life electrical and electronic products, but rather it is part of a proposed incremental approach. ...

The television and computer waste problem

Currently in Australia, each jurisdiction has its own waste minimisation legislation or policies. The broad powers provided to each jurisdiction by waste minimisation legislation means that there is a tangible risk that each jurisdiction will implement a different approach to the television and computer waste problem in the absence of a national approach. Due to this, Environment Protection and Heritage Council each jurisdiction has been working through the EPHC towards seeking a national solution. Specific television and computer waste responses have already begun to vary in different jurisdictions. For example the ACT has banned the disposal of computer monitors and television screens in landfill, and Victoria is trialling Byteback, a government-run computer collection and recycling scheme.

In addition, some private sector schemes have arisen to deal with the increasing volumes of waste television and computer products (e.g. Dell offers free recycling of any Dell branded equipment, and Apple offers free recycling for purchases from particular stores). However, these schemes are brand-specific so are not whole-of-waste solutions, and in addition it is not clear how easy it is for households to participate. While some television and computer waste is currently recycled, the financial value of the recycled
material resources (metals, glass, plastic, etc.) is not high enough to fund an
expansion of recycling beyond its current levels. In other words, recycling of
these products is financially unviable without government support.

Despite some government and private sector intervention, the recycling rate remains low at 9% of units reaching end of life (excluding export of used items), or 10% based on tonnage - with the remainder being landfilled and a minor proportion that are exported.

Considering whether there is a case for government intervention to improve recycling or reduce landfill of television and computers in Australia, it is important to identify the possible problems with the current situation. The following problems have been identified for stakeholder consideration:

* Conservation of non-renewable resources. ...
* Community expectations are not being met. ...
* Free-rider problem. ...
* Landfill externality costs. ...
* Landfill direct costs and opportunity cost of land. ...

In addition to the problems with the current disposal methods, there are a
number of policy factors that add to pressure for Australian governments to
address these problems. These policy pressures include:

* Australia is a signatory to the Basel Convention on the Control of the Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Waste and Their Disposal (the Basel Convention) and the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (the Stockholm Convention). ...
* international pressure from countries that have already implemented television and computer recycling schemes.

Policy objectives

The objectives of a regulatory impact statement when considering government intervention should include broad-ranging concepts that can be applied to a range of problems. More specifically relating to end of life televisions and computers should be to address the conservation of non-renewable resources; meet community expectations regarding resource
recovery and recycling; address market and regulatory failures; and avoid, where possible, any negative environmental impacts associated with waste going to landfill, while being consistent with broader government policy.

Consistent with the Council of Australian Governments’ Best Practice Regulation A Guide for Ministerial Councils and National Standard Setting Bodies (2007) (the COAG guidelines) the following specific objectives have been agreed.

Acknowledging that the above objectives will require implementation, administration and other costs, whilst generating a range of social and environmental benefits, an overriding objective in line with the COAG guidelines, will be to obtain a net benefit (benefits minus costs) for the community. This will be considered when alternative approaches to intervention are considered in a cost benefit analysis framework.

Policy options

Considering the problems identified and objectives established, a set of policy options have been identified that seek to address television and computer waste problems and wholly or partly achieve the stated objectives.

In order to identify the most feasible options, the following process was undertaken:

* identification of policy options ...
* identification of funding approaches ...
* assessment of policy and funding combinations ...
* most feasible options selected ...

Considering findings of the qualitative analysis of each policy option, the nine options for a change in government intervention and the base case that are considered worthy of further cost benefit analysis are:

* Base Case: business as usual ...

* Options 1 & 2: Co-regulatory state-based Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) scheme – implemented as a National Environmental Protection Measure (NEPM) with an exemption if the importer belongs to an industry scheme. This scheme is assumed to be administered by an industry-run Producer Responsibility Organisation (PRO), and makes use of a regulatory safety net to encourage participation that is administered by state and territory government. Two options for industry involvement were also considered:

- Option 1: television and computer industries are jointly responsible for the collection of all products under a common PRO (including historic and orphan products).

- Option 2: television industry responsible for the collection of all products (including historic and generic). Major computer brand owners responsible for historic waste from their own brand and importers of generic computer parts and equipment are responsible for all non-branded and historic products. There are two PROs.

* Options 3 & 4: Co-regulatory Commonwealth-based EPR – with an exemption if the importer belongs to an industry scheme. This scheme is assumed to be administered by a PRO, and makes use of a regulatory safety net to encourage participation that is administered by the Australian Government. Two options for industry involvement were also considered:

- Option 3: television and computer industries are jointly responsible for the collection of all products under a common PRO (including historic and orphan products).

- Option 4: television industry responsible for the collection of all products (including historic and generic). Major computer brand owners responsible for historic waste from their own brand and importers of generic computer parts and equipment are responsible for all non-branded and historic products. There are two PROs.

* Options 5 & 6: Co-regulatory Commonwealth excise (levy) – with an exemption if the importer belongs to an industry scheme. This scheme is assumed to be administered by a PRO, and makes use of a regulatory safety net to encourage participation that is administered by the Commonwealth Government. Two options for industry involvement were also considered:

- Option 5: television and computer industries are jointly responsible for the collection of all products under a common PRO (including historic and orphan products).

- Option 6: television industry responsible for collection of all products (including historic and generic). Major computer brand owners responsible for historic waste from their own brand and importers of generic computer parts/ equipment are responsible for all non-branded and historic products. There are two PROs.

* Option 7: Mandatory Commonwealth levy with a government-run subsidy scheme for collection/recycling – a Commonwealth administered scheme whereby regulations impose a fee to be paid on all imports, and subsidies are paid to recyclers for collection/recycling of televisions and computers;

* Option 8: Mandatory import license requirement – producers must hold a license to import televisions and computers, which involves membership of an industry scheme to collect and recycle waste items (involving an industry PRO administering the scheme on behalf of importers); and

* Option 9: Mandatory state-based EPR (NEPM) – involves an industry-run PRO administering a collection/recycling scheme on behalf of importers (who are required by regulation to take part in the scheme). Administration of required regulation could be undertaken by the Australian or state or territory governments.

Cost benefit analysis of options

Analysing the costs and benefits of the identified policy options using economic Cost Benefit Analysis (CBA), indicates that the nine television and computer recycling schemes assessed in this regulatory impact statement will result in net economic benefits to society. As the CBA is based on a range of estimates and assumptions, the appraisal results provide a general view about the likely expected economic outcomes that are subject to these assumptions. Despite this, the appraisal results in an overall conclusion that the options have positive economic outcomes, with relativities between options not expected to change with amendments to key assumptions.

In addition to establishing positive net economic benefits from implementing a scheme, the cost benefit analysis also compared nine possible policy options against the status quo.

The CBA and analysis of broader considerations indicates that:

* all nine recycling policy options assessed result in net benefits, with net present values (NPVs) ranging from $517-742 billion;
* there is little differentiation between the schemes in terms of the present value of costs and benefits; and
* any differentiation has been found to be due to differing ramp up of recycling rates, and varying administration costs.

Given the closeness of the options it is preferred that the community be given the opportunity to comment freely on which option might be the preferred, hence approach in the consultation regulatory impact statement is that no individual options are recommended and all will be considered through the consultation process. ...

From: Consultation Regulatory Impact Statement: Televisions and Computers", prepared by PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) in association with Hyder Consulting (Hyder) for the Environment Protection and Heritage Council (EPHC), July 2009).

Australian e-waste scheme by end of 2009

Australian Governments have agreed to have an electronic waste (e-waste) scheme by the end of 2009. Media reports suggest a $30 levy on new computers and TVs to cover the cost. This does not seem excessive, but there would be some interesting issues to consider (for example, should the levy be the same for a small $350 nettop, as for a desktop PC which uses five times as much material and costs five times as much ). Unfortunately the scheme will not be in place to cover the cost of disposal of the old CRT TVs displaced by new flat screens purchased with the government's $900 stimulus payments.

Work will begin immediately on the development options for a national scheme to deal with increasing amounts of computer and television waste.

“I have today obtained the agreement of my state and territory colleagues to look at the cost implications and the regulatory impact of taking national action on this matter,” said Minister for the Environment, Heritage and the Arts, Peter Garrett.

“Given increasing community and industry concern about electronic waste, and cognisant of the length of time it has taken previous governments to make progress on this front, I am pleased that my colleagues agreed to take this major step forward by looking at the
regulatory impacts of a recycling system.

“I expect to be able to make the results of this study available for public comment by July, before a final decision is made by the Council at its next meeting in November “The decision to explore regulatory options is supported by the results of a choice
modelling study for recycling of televisions and other electronic items that showed consumers are prepared to pay to have these goods disposed of in an environmentally sustainable manner
“Choice modelling has only rarely, and only very recently, been applied to gauge people’s receptiveness to environmental policies. It has never before been used in the context of waste or recycling.

“This study is assurance that, whatever approach is ultimately agreed upon as the best option from an environmental management point of view, Australians are prepared to support a scheme to deal with e-waste.”

Ministers also agreed on the development of a ‘fluoro-cycle’ scheme for the recycling of mercury-containing lamps, the finalisation of product stewardship arrangements for used tyres, renewed their support for the development of a national waste policy by the end of
2009 and welcomed a decision by the Council of Australian Governments (COAG) to close a significant gap in environmental protection by giving the EPHC a single decision making role on the environmental management of chemicals.

The full EPHC Communique can be found at: www.ephc.gov.au/sites/default/files/EPHC18__Communique_22May09.pdf

From: BREAKTHROUGH ON COMPUTER, TV WASTE, MEDIA RELEASE, The Hon Peter Garrett MP, Minister for the Environment, Heritage and the Arts, PG/276 22 May 2009

Australian e-waste policy

The Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts released a consultation paper on a National Waste Policy 7 April 2009. The paper is 62 pages long in a 397 Kbyte PDF or 1.3 Mb RTF file. The paper has 19 references to "e-waste" electronic waste as from computers and telecommunications equipment. Section 10 of the report asks: "What, if any, changes are needed to the way e-waste is managed?" and points out that some local governments have e-waste collections.

10. Electronic waste

This section explores the issue of electronic and electrical waste (e-waste) and its management as a growing part of the waste stream.

Electronic waste or e-waste is discarded electronic or electrical equipment. It typically includes televisions, video and DVD players, stereos, mobile phones, computers, photocopiers, fax machines, printers as well as cartridges, batteries and peripheral devices associated with the equipment. E-waste consists predominantly of metals and plastics with some components having an economic value if recycled and some containing hazardous substances (which may also be valuable) (see Table 5).There is some community concern with the practice of landfilling electrical and electronic waste (e-waste). This may be because such waste contains hazardous substances, but also because of the relatively short life of these products, the desire not to waste the resources embodied in the waste, and the increasing volume going to landfill.

Table 5: Key materials in electrical and electronic equipment

Component	Equipment	Substances of concern	Recyclable materials
Cathode ray tube	Personal computer monitor, television	Lead, antimony, mercury, phosphors	Mercury
Glass screens	Computer monitors, televisions, microwaves	Lead
Liquid crystal display	Notebook, laptop, mobile phone, some desktop computers	Mercury	Mercury
Circuit board	Telephone, personal computer, notebook, laptop, television, radio, audio amplifier, CD/DVD player, handheld games machines, mobile phones	Lead, beryllium, antimony, Brominated flame retardants, cadmium, arsenic	Gold Silver Palladium
Batteries	Telephone, personal computer, laptop, mobile phone, handheld games machines	Lead, lithium, cadmium, mercury	Cadmium Cobalt Nickel Mercury
Power or external cables	Most electronic and electrical equipment	Phthalates	Copper
Plastic housing	Most electronic and electrical equipment	Brominated flame retardants	PVC

(Based on WEEE and Hazardous Waste, A report for DEFRA, March 2004 by AEA Technology. The report defines WEEE as waste from electrical and electronic equipment. DEFRA is the United Kingdom Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.)

E-waste is a growing component of the waste stream. In 2005 an estimated 697,000 tonnes of electronic equipment was consumed with approximately 312,930 tonnes of electronic equipment disposed of to landfill.¹ It is estimated that approximately

570,900 computers are disposed of annually in Australia, with only a quarter being recycled. Current annual disposal of televisions is around 350,000 units.

Figure 7: TVs landfilled 2000–2005

(Hyder Consulting, 2008)

Data for the years 2004 and 2005 is only available in aggregated format.Figure omitted

Figure 8: Computers landfilled 1998–2008

(Hyder Consulting, 2008)

Figure omitted

In 2007–08 approximately 8.87 million mobile phone units were imported into Australia, an increase of 1.48 million from 2006–07 (7.39 million).² For televisions, Hyder Consulting reported an 18 per cent increase in sales from 2003 to 2004.³ An

estimated 3.5 million computers were purchased in Australia in 2005, including units that were assembled locally from imported parts.⁴

The rapid growth in e-waste is driven by factors including consumer demand to have the latest equipment, the need to upgrade systems to accommodate new software, the rate of technological change, the short lifespan and technical obsolescence of the equipment and increasing affordability.There are limited options for the public to recycle domestic e-waste. Most e-waste is disposed of to landfill, while the cost for recycling of e-waste is carried primarily by those consumers who take the initiative to recycle their computers through a recycling centre. The potential long-term costs arising from landfilled e-waste, including health and environmental costs from the possible leaching of contaminants from e-waste into the environment, are likely to be carried by the community.A number of computer recyclers operate in Australia, some offer pick-up services and the majority charge a fee for recycling. Some local councils hold collection days for end-of-life computer equipment and either stock pile the waste or send it to recyclers. There are a number of voluntary initiatives for recycling e-waste, including recycling mobile phones through Mobile Muster (www.mobilemuster.com.au), Cartridges for Planet Ark (www.cartridges.planetark.org) and the computer industry and Victorian Government partnership to run the Byteback computer recycling scheme (www.bytebackaustralia.com.au/).Currently the Australian Capital Territory is the only state or territory to have regulation governing the domestic management of e-waste, placing a levy on the disposal of televisions and computers at landfill sites. South Australia is in the process of consulting on legislation to ban computer monitors and televisions from landfills, with a ban on all other electrical or electronic equipment within three years. The New South Wales Government has also identified computers, televisions, mobile phones and “other electricals” as “wastes of concern” and is investigating product stewardship arrangements.The Environment Protection and Heritage Council is examining options to deal with end-of-life televisions and computers. Among the options are proposals from both the television and computer industries for product stewardship schemes. The industry-proposed product stewardship schemes would place a charge on eligible new product that would then be used to pay for recycling at the end of its life (an advance recycling fee).

Consultation question

7. What, if any, changes are needed to provide a national approach to the way e-waste is managed?

1 Hyder Consulting, Waste recycling in Australia, November 2008, p.68

2 Mobile Muster 2007–08 Annual Report, p.6

3 Hyder Consulting, Waste recycling in Australia, November 2008 p.53 and 54

4 Hyder Consulting, Waste recycling in Australia, November 2008, p.49

From: "A National Waste Policy: Managing Waste to 2020", Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts released the consultation paper, 7 April 2009

How many old computers are recycled?

The Australian Bureau of Statistics asked for data sources for measuring Electronic waste. There are mobile phone recycling schemes in Australia, with estimates of how many are recycled. Are there similar figures for recycling of computers and peripherals? Any suggestions would be welcome.

About all I could think of was the AIIA sponsored scheme might have some figures. ByteBack scheme (similar to the phone muster).