EU-Parlament stimmt neuem Sammel- und Recyclingsystem für Batterien zu[en] 

The draft batteries directive was tabled by the Commission in 2003. It proposed to establish minimum levels of collection and recycling targets for spent batteries and to place the responsibility on producers to finance the costs of collection, treatment and recycling.

The EU market for batteries amounts to about 800,000 tonnes of automotive batteries, 190,000 tonnes of industrial batteries and 160,000 tonnes of portable consumer batteries every year. These batteries contain metals, which might pollute the environment at the end of their life-cycle. Mercury, lead and cadmium are seen as the most dangerous substances.

The European Parliament gave its green light on 4 July to a compromise  on a directive laying down minimum standards for the collection, treatment and recycling of spent batteries and accumulators.

Collection rates vary widely at present across the EU, ranging from 16% in France to 59% in Belgium. Only six countries currently have a national collection and recycling scheme in place (Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, the Netherlands and Sweden).

The new directive seeks to lay down basic principles and objectives in order to prevent batteries from ending up in incinerators or landfills where the heavy metals they contain (lead, cadmium, mercury) contaminate the environment. Almost half of all portable batteries sold in the EU-15 member states in 2002 were eventually incinerated or disposed of in landfills, says the report.

The text had previously been agreed by a special conciliation committee of lawmakers from the EU Parliament and Council to smooth out remaining unresolved issues. Here are the main points of the text:

• Collection targets: 25% by 2012 and 45 % by 2016. Easily accessible collection points must be made available to consumers by distributors such as supermarkets.
• Recycling targets: 65% by average weight for lead-acid batteries and 75% for nickel-cadmium and 50% for others. The suggestion to introduce a so-called closed loop for those hazardous substances was rejected by the Council which argued the 50% recycling target was already ambitious enough.
• Landfill: Parliament requests at imposing strict restrictions on the disposal of waste batteries in landfills were only partially met. The compromise states that landfilling is acceptable but only if no end market is available for the hazardous substances cadmium, mercury or lead.
• Polluter pays: The costs of consumer information campaigns will be borne by the producers who must register themselves in order to meet this requirement. Distributors will have to take back spent batteries at no cost to the consumer and regardless of when they were placed on the market. They must also inform consumers that they offer a take back service.
• Bans: batteries containing more than 0.0005% of mercury and 0.002% of cadmium are prohibited, except for emergency and alarm systems, medical equipment and cordless power tools
• Capacity labelling: As of 2009, all batteries must show their real capacity or average life duration. The stated aim is to provide better information to consumers so that they can choose batteries with longer life duration to reduce the amount of waste generated
• Exemptions: Very small producers were granted exemptions from the obligation to finance any net costs arising from collection, treatment and recycling.

The compromise drew mixed reactions from the Greens in Parliament. In the view of Swedish MEP Carl Schlyter "the agreement on a general phase-out of cadmium in batteries is to be welcomed". But he says "the inclusion of a derogation from the phase-out for the use of cadmium in accumulators for power tools, which accounts for over two-thirds cadmium battery-use, adds a sour note. Thankfully there will be an opportunity to scrap the derogation when it is reviewed in four years time".

"I am very glad that the Green proposal for better consumer information found its way into the final text. With the new capacity labelling, consumers will finally be able to compare different batteries on the basis of objective information. This will allow them to make an informed choice and, as such, hopefully put an end to the wild advertising claims of the industry about the performance their batteries."

Some manufacturers are strongly opposed to the compulsory capacity labelling for batteries used in cars. Eurobat, the association of industrial and automotive battery manufacturers, said it would have favoured labelling on the performance of batteries rather than their capacity. Eurobat believes that performance is a better indicator to consumers as it takes into account the capacity in combination with the discharge rate of batteries - the ability to perform tasks such as starting an engine. "Each type and model of automotive battery has different capacities at different discharge rates," Eurobat said. "The setting of an arbitrary discharge rate used for all batteries would therefore not enable the provision of objective and accurate information to consumers," it added.