EICTA, the voice of EU information and communications technology and consumer electronics industries, said it was concerned by the proposed revision of the WEEE Directive as it sets "unrealistic and unachievable collection targets" for recycling.
EICTA argues that it puts a disproportionate financial burden on electrical and electronic equipment producers by encouraging producers to be made financially responsible for household collection. Although the proposal remains unclear on this, stating that producers should be encouraged to finance collection costs, EICTA believes the revision would "massively increase the costs of compliance with no environmental benefit".
The success of meeting collection targets depends on factors outside the control of producers, ranging from availability of collection points to the volume of waste being generated by the end user, EICTA argues. Instead, it suggests that municipalities should retain primary responsibility for collection, and says the directive should better define the responsibilities of all stakeholders involved in the collection of waste. All recycled waste should be reported to the central waste authorities in each country, EICTA adds.
European Committee of Domestic Equipment Manufacturers (CECED) Secretary General Luigi Meli expressed strong disappointment regarding the proposed shift of financial responsibility for recycling from municipalitites to appliance producers. "Such a proposal has no economic, environmental or political logic," he argued, predicting that the cost of recycling would double if the proposal was adopted. Meli said the plans had come from nowhere, accusing the Commission of failing to assess the impact of such measures.
The EU executive "seems to consider WEEE as a simple cost, whereas the metal scraps recovered through recycling have a value and municipalities are selling them," Meli added. Considering the fact that equipment producers do not control recycling management by municipalities, "why should we pay for the recycling?," he asked.
The European association of electrical and elctronic waste take-back systems (WEEE Forum) drew attention to the current economic turmoil and falling prices of leading base materials such as copper, steel aluminium and zinc. When the review proposals were drafted, it was thought that electronic waste would easily find a market due to the high value of raw materials, whereas now this parallel market "has almost completely dried up," stated the forum.
Meanhwile, the take-back organisations of the WEEE Forum "have proven to be a beacon of stability" offering basic environmental services. "The future directive should acknowledge the fact that they are the only sustainable and stable solution to WEEE management. They are increasingly seen as part of the infrastructure, partly because they collect e-waste irrespective of brand," underlined WEEE Forum President Andreas Röthlisberger.
Therefore, "the future directive should acknowledge the fact that they are the only sustainable and stable solution to WEEE management. They are increasingly seen as part of the infrastructure, partly because they collect e-waste irrespective of brand". The WEEE Forum hopes that policymakers will take this issue into account when discussing the Commission's proposal.
Environmental and health NGOs said the Commission proposals regarding the RoHS Directive were not strong enough, because they do not set targets for phasing out additional hazardous chemicals used in electronics. NGOs also called on European regulators to keep the REACH process separate from the RoHS review.
"REACH will be a very slow roll out of chemicals policy for all sectors not just the electronics industry. It is not a matter of double regulation: REACH regulation for these particular applications is not yet in place, while RoHS is," they stated.
The REACH process is still in its infancy and it is "highly uncertain if and how REACH will address these hazardous chemicals in their electronics uses," while RoHS has to a large degree helped set a global standard for the electronics industry and is well understood by the relevant supply-chains," argued Lisette van Vliet, toxics policy advisor at the Health & Environment Alliance.
