SUbstance flow analysis of the recycling of small waste electrical ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

38 Substance flow analysis of the recycling of small WEEE 2. Pick-up systems, where the WEEE is collected at the homes or offices of the last users, optionally together with other kinds of waste like packaging waste, as in the project ‘Gelbe Tonne Plus’ described by SenGUV (2007); 3. Distance collection, where the user sends the WEEE by post to the collector. The responsibility to finance and/or to organise the collection can be in the hands of the following stakeholders: 1. Public authorities like municipalities and governments; 2. Private commercial organisations like EEE manufacturers, EEE retailers or WEEE recyclers. Besides registered companies, the collection of WEEE by individuals or non-registered commercial organisations belonging to the ‘informal sector’ was observed in Germany (Janz et al. 2009a) and in many other countries (Terazono et al. 2006); 3. Private non-commercial organisations like non-governmental organisations or citizen initiatives. Benefits and barriers to various collection channels were presented by CIWMB (2004a). Seddigh et al. (1996) compared different collection options regarding the willingness of the citizens to use them. Nagel et al. (1998) analysed the collection systems used in Germany, the Netherlands and Sweden. The strengths of temporary collection events, especially the careful handling of the EEE and, therefore, the preservation of the reuse value, were presented by Legler (2009). Various authors reported that only a small fraction of the generated WEEE is collected (Huisman et al. 2007; US EPA 2008) and that the majority of WEEE still finds its way to landfill (Barba-Gutiérrez et al. 2008). Also in Germany, WEEE is often disposed of together with residual waste, even though the ElektroG requires the separate collection of WEEE (Janz & Bilitewski 2007; 2009). Rotter (2002) estimated that 47% of the lead, over 50% of the cadmium and 31% of the mercury in residual household waste is from WEEE. Musson et al. (2006) investigated the leaching of heavy metals, especially lead, due to WEEE disposal on landfills and found lead concentrations in the leachates above the legal limit. Townsend et al. (1999; 2003; 2008) provided data on the environmental impacts of WEEE disposal on landfills and waste-to-energy facilities in Florida, regarding especially the concentrations of heavy metals and brominated flame retardants in the leachates. Especially cathode ray tubes can cause environmental problems when disposed to landfill, in particular due to the leaching of lead and other heavy metals into ground water (Greenpeace 2005; ICER 2003). Janz & Bilitewski (2009) investigated the transmission of heavy metals contained in WEEE and in batteries to other material fractions and to the leachates during mechanical-biological
2. Background and definitions 39 treatment and landfilling. They concluded that 65% of the WEEE and the batteries contained in the waste treated with mechanical-biological processes should be removed before treatment for the produced residue-derived fuel to fulfil the quality requirements. Moreover, the valuable materials and substances contained in WEEE cannot be recycled if WEEE is disposed of. 2.4.3. Reuse of WEEE The term reuse has several definitions in international legislations, standards, academia and re-use practice, all embracing different contexts (Scheidt et al. 2008). According to the WEEE Directive , ‘Reuse’ means any operation by which WEEE or components thereof are used for the same purpose for which they were conceived, including the continued use of the equipment or components thereof which are returned to collection facilities, distributors, recyclers or manufacturers. Reuse brings economic and environmental advantages, because a large fraction of the economic value of the EEE is preserved, the waste generation is reduced and virgin materials and energy are conserved (Prelle 2008; Rifer et al. 2009; Scheidt et al. 2008). Truttmann & Rechberger (2006) and Tasaki et al. (2008) compared the waste reduction and the resource conservation created by re-use to the additional energy consumption during the use phase due to the use of older reused devices in a life-cycle perspective. According to Lynch (2004), reselling or upgrading computers saves 5 to 20 times more energy over the life cycle than recycling. Broehl-Kerner (2008) and Williams et al. (2008) describe the advantages of reuse from a social point of view. However, reuse can also have environmental disadvantages. Thus, the re-use of devices from countries with a large recycling infrastructure in countries with a weak recycling infrastructure raises questions about resource conservation, since the shifting of the devices for re-use probably prevents the resources from being recycled after the use phase (Chancerel & Rotter 2009). Re-use is sometimes used as pretence for illegal waste export (Brohl-Kerner 2008). Moreover, new EEE usually consumes less energy in the use phase than reused WEEE (Prelle 2008). In this thesis, reuse refers to reuse of WEEE, which implies that EEE has first become waste. Prelle (2008) discussed the difficulty to draw a distinct line between reuse of EEE and reuse of WEEE. According to the European legislation, EEE becomes WEEE if its holder discards it, or intends or is required to discard it. The characteristics listed in Revised Correspondents' Guidelines N°1 on Shipments of Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment can be used to distinguish EEE from WEEE. Anyway, it is necessary to examine the history of an item on a case-by-case basis to determine if it is EEE or WEEE.
Page 1: ITU-Schriftenreihe, 2010 Institut f
Page 4 and 5: Bibliografische Information Der Deu
Page 7 and 8: Acknowledgements Here I would like
Page 9 and 10: Kurzfassung Die Nachfrage nach Edel
Page 11 and 12: Composition of the doctoral thesis
Page 13 and 14: 4.1.1. Generation .................
Page 15 and 16: Figure 25 Flows of gold and palladi
Page 17 and 18: Table 26 Quantity of sWEEE (includi
Page 19 and 20: List of abbreviations Ag Au BAT CE
Page 21 and 22: 1. Introduction and objectives of t
Page 23 and 24: 2. Background and definitions 23 Du
Page 25 and 26: 2. Background and definitions 25 an
Page 27 and 28: 2. Background and definitions 27 2.
Page 29 and 30: 2. Background and definitions 29 pu
Page 31 and 32: 2. Background and definitions 31 Ta
Page 33 and 34: 2. Background and definitions 33 Fi
Page 35 and 36: 2. Background and definitions 35 2.
Page 37: 2. Background and definitions 37 Th
Page 41 and 42: 2. Background and definitions 41 ha
Page 43 and 44: 2. Background and definitions 43 co
Page 45 and 46: 2. Background and definitions 45 th
Page 47 and 48: 2. Background and definitions 47 Re
Page 49 and 50: 2. Background and definitions 49 So
Page 51 and 52: 3. Method 51 Table 8 Groups of equi
Page 53 and 54: 3. Method 53 Because many data on c
Page 55 and 56: 3. Method 55 Equipment group Equipm
Page 57 and 58: 3. Method 57 3.3.2. Data on materia
Page 59 and 60: 3. Method 59 1. The visible hazardo
Page 61 and 62: 3. Method 61 uncertainties were ent
Page 63 and 64: 4. Data inventory 63 4. Data invent
Page 65 and 66: 4. Data inventory 65 Table 11 shows
Page 67 and 68: 4. Data inventory 67 The following
Page 69 and 70: 4. Data inventory 69 average weight
Page 71 and 72: 4. Data inventory 71 Collection cha
Page 73 and 74: 4. Data inventory 73 Table 20 Repar
Page 75 and 76: 4. Data inventory 75 was applied to
Page 77 and 78: 4. Data inventory 77 Table 26 Quant
Page 79 and 80: 4. Data inventory 79 The variation
Page 81 and 82: 4. Data inventory 81 Due to the lim
Page 83 and 84: 4. Data inventory 83 apparent gold.
Page 85 and 86: 4. Data inventory 85 Table 33 Avera
Page 87 and 88: 5. Quantification of the flows of g
Page 89 and 90:
5. Quantification of the flows of g
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
6. Discussion of the results of the
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
7. Recommendations 109 7. Recommend
Page 111 and 112:
7. Recommendations 111 WEEE contai
Page 113 and 114:
7. Recommendations 113 After collec
Page 115 and 116:
7. Recommendations 115 in the case
Page 117 and 118:
7. Recommendations 117 In many case
Page 119 and 120:
7. Recommendations 119 manufacturer
Page 121 and 122:
7. Recommendations 121 the manufact
Page 123 and 124:
7. Recommendations 123 Reuter et al
Page 125 and 126:
8. Conclusion 125 All the equipment
Page 127 and 128:
References 127 Binder 2007 BITKOM 2
Page 129 and 130:
References 129 CIWMB 2004b Clift &
Page 131 and 132:
References 131 Greenpeace 2005 Gree
Page 133 and 134:
References 133 Janz & Bilitewski 20
Page 135 and 136:
References 135 Melissen 2006 Mesker
Page 137 and 138:
References 137 Rhein et al. 2008 Rh
Page 139 and 140:
References 139 StEP 2009 Stevels 20
Page 141 and 142:
References 141 Veldhuizen & Sippel
Page 143 and 144:
References 143 Legislative texts Ba
Page 145 and 146:
Appendices 145 Appendix 1 Equipment
Page 147 and 148:
Appendices 147 Appendix 2 Average c
Page 149 and 150:
Appendices 149 Appendix 4 Past and
Page 151 and 152:
Appendices 151 Eq. group Equipment
Page 153 and 154:
Appendices 153 2 Assumptions based
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Appendices 159 Appendix 8 Flows of
Page 161 and 162:
Appendices 161 Appendix 10 Flows of
show all

SUbstance flow analysis of the recycling of small waste electrical ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?