- Email: [email protected]
Perspectives on reuse of WEEE in China: Lessons from the EU
Resources, Conservation & Recycling xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Resources, Conservation & Recycling journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/resconrec
Full length article
Perspectives on reuse of WEEE in China: Lessons from the EU ⁎
Bin Lua, Jianxin Yanga, , Winifred Ijomahb, Wenjie Wua,c, Gabriel Zlamparetd a State Key Laboratory of Urban and Regional Ecology, Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences,Shuangqing Road 18, Haidian District, Beijing 100085, China b Design Manufacture and Engineering Management, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, UK c Shanghai Collaborative Innovation Centre for WEEE Recycling, Shanghai Second Polytechnic University, Jinhai Road 2360, Pudong District, Shanghai 201209, China d State Key Joint Laboratory of Environment Simulation and Pollution Control, School of Environment, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China
A R T I C L E I N F O
A B S T R A C T
Keywords: Reuse Waste electrical and electronic equipment Sustainable management Stakeholder analysis
Reuse is always considered superior to materials and energy recovery in the waste hierarchy, a concept that also applies to Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE). In practice, however, reuse has not been a commonly used end-of-life option. We compared policies and practices of reuse of WEEE in China and in the EU. This comparison can help identify knowledge gaps and reuse policy requirements, as well as implementation methods We also discuss potential scientific solutions for reuse of WEEE via analysis of stakeholders’ concerns. We found that although there are already reuse-related guidelines and standards in China, the policies need to be made more systematic like those of the EU, and they need to be more suitable for the specific challenges of China. We propose$ policy recommendations for reuse in order to facilitate sustainable management of WEEE, including integration of a reuse strategy into current management policy as well as the promotion of components reuse. Further, we also found that more studies on drivers and barriers to reuse are required to support more effective and efficient management.
1. Introduction Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) is increasing rapidly globally (Zeng et al., 2016) and has become one of the most important types of solid waste. The proper treatment and disposal of WEEE are indispensable for the development of a circular economy. Since improper treatment of WEEE may cause severe pollution, environmentally friendly recycling has been heavily promoted by laws and regulations in recent years. In developed countries, Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) based laws or directives have been enacted, such as the WEEE directive in the EU, which is an important part of the circular economy policy package (EU, 2017). Besides materials recycling, reuse is also an important strategy in 3R (Reduce, Reuse, Recovery) principles for solid waste management, including for WEEE (Devoldere et al., 2009; Truttmann and Rechberger, 2006; Williams et al., 2008). In the waste hierarchy, reuse is preferred over materials recovery, energy recovery, and disposal (EU, 2008). Reuse can alleviate or moderate the potential environmental pollution from WEEE, although it is not a final solution to the problems WEEE causes (Ruediger et al., 2011). In theory, reuse of WEEE is more complicated than materials recovery, because reuse is not only affected by the physical condition of
⁎
the products and components themselves, but also by technological innovation of newer products with similar functions. The factors that influence reusability individually or in combination can be categorized as technological, economic, environmental, social and cultural, and legal (Borrman et al., 2009). Measures to promote reuse exist in most countries’ waste management laws or regulations. However, the implementation means are different between countries. In China, reuse is not even included in the major regulations of WEEE management, though reuse is common in the recycling process. In the EU WEEE Directive, the reuse rate has been listed as part of the WEEE recycling target for member states. Therefore, it is necessary to analyze and compare different WEEE management policies and legislative systems in different areas, as the lessons may be helpful globally. Because most WEEE in developed countries is recycled, previous studies on WEEE have mostly focused on recycling efficiency (Parajuly and Wenzel, 2017). In the literature concerned with reuse, assessments of reuse potential of different WEEE categories (Bovea et al., 2016; Lu et al., 2014; Parajuly and Wenzel, 2017) has found management policy and implementation to be the key factors in improving reuse (Hickey and Fitzpatrick, 2016). But there has been little discussion about policies to promote reuse.
Corresponding author. E-mail addresses: [email protected], [email protected] (J. Yang).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.07.012 Received 30 January 2017; Received in revised form 18 May 2017; Accepted 10 July 2017 0921-3449/ © 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Please cite this article as: Lu, B., Resources, Conservation & Recycling (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.07.012
Any operation by which products or components that are not waste are used again for the same purpose for which they were conceived The checking, cleaning, or repairing recovery operations, by which products or components of products that have become waste are prepared so that they can be re-used without any other pre-processing The practice of selling a product to a secondary consumer when it reaches the end of its useful life for the original purchaser Return a faulty or broken product or component back to a usable state; Restore defective products to their intended state Return a used product to a satisfactory working condition or a previously defined quality level, by rebuilding or repairing major components that are close to failure, even where there are no reported or apparent faults in those components Enhance the properties, including inter alia its function, performance, and safety, by replacement of certain components or by other means Return a used product to at least its original performance with a warranty that is equivalent or better than that of a newly manufactured product Utilize a product or its components in a role that it was not originally designed to perform Any operation, the principal result of which is the waste serving a useful purpose by replacing other materials that would otherwise have been used to fulfill a function, or used as fuel in energy recovery Any recovery operation by which waste materials are reprocessed into products, materials, or substances, whether for the original or other purposes
Re-use/Reuse
2
Recycling
Recovery
Repurpose
Remanufacturing
Upgrading
Recondition/Refurbish/ Rebuild/Reconstruct
Repair
Reselling
Preparing for re-use
Definitions
Terminology
Table 1 Terminology of reuse and related concepts.
Repairman, collectors, remanufacturers, resellers, other users, recyclers, producers, etc.
Checking, cleaning, repair, components replacement, upgrade, remanufacturing, recovery, etc.
(EU, 2008)
(BSI, 2009; EU, 2008)
No product level functions
No product level functions
(BSI, 2009)
Different functions
(BSI, 2009; Helms and Goldstein, 1999)
Better, equivalent Checking, cleaning, disassembly, components replacement, repairing, reassembly, etc. Checking, disassembly, components replacement, re-assembly, etc. Disassembly, shredding, sorting, refining, etc.
Recyclers, collectors, resellers, other users, etc. Recyclers, collectors, resellers, producers, etc.
(Ruediger and Eric, 2003; VDI, 2014)
(Anonymous, 2012; BSI, 2009; VDI, 2014)
(BSI, 2009; VDI, 2014)
Better, equivalent
Equivalent, lower
(Ruediger and Eric, 2003)
Checking, upgrading, components replacement, etc.
Checking, repairing, etc.
Repairman, resellers, original users, etc.
Equivalent, lower
(EU, 2008)
Repairman, renovators, collectors, resellers, original users, other users, etc. Collectors, Remanufacturers, resellers, other users, etc.
Checking
Resellers, other users, etc.
Better, equivalent, or lower
(Borrman et al., 2009; EU, 2008; Standardization, 2007)
Equivalent, lower
Checking, cleaning, repairing, etc.
Repairman, collectors, resellers, other users, etc.
Better, equivalent, or lower
Definition Sources
Checking, repairing, etc.
Checking, cleaning, repairing, etc.
Repairman, collectors, resellers, other users, etc.
Function/Warranty after processing compared to the original one
Repairman/Renovators, collectors, resellers, original users, etc.
Possible processes included
Stakeholders
B. Lu et al.
Resources, Conservation & Recycling xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
Resources, Conservation & Recycling xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
B. Lu et al.
3. WEEE reuse policies in the EU and China
directive (EU, 2012). It is clearly stated that “Where appropriate, priority should be given to preparing for re-use of WEEE and its components, subassemblies and consumables” (EU, 2012). Generally, reuse and preparation for reuse have been taken into consideration in the European standards. At the end of 2014, the first WEEE treatment standard, EN 50625-1: Collection, Logistics and Treatment Requirements for WEEE − Part 1: General Treatment Requirements, was ratified by the EU, which is the core of the European Standards for WEEE management. In EN 50625-1, the most significant point is that “the Mass of WEEE prepared for re-use” is used to calculate the recovery rate. There are other points where reuse is taken into consideration, such as that the handling of WEEE should “avoid damage where there is the potential for preparation for re-use”. Another EU standard focused on reuse, titled Requirements for the preparation for re-use of waste electrical and electronic equipment (EN 50614), is still in progress. This standard will complement the EN 50625 standard series and EN 50574 covering the collection, transport, and general and particular treatment of WEEE. There are no further statements on how to evaluate the potential for preparation for reuse as of now. According to the WEEE Directive, all EU member states should transfer the directive into the laws in their own countries. Several member states of the EU have developed further reuse-related standards. The UK is currently the leading member in this regard as it already has a national reuse standard. The standard, PAS 141:2011, sets out requirements for successful management of the process of preparing WEEE for reuse. The standard presents suggestions on proper handling, tracking, segregation, storage, and protection of electronic equipment and components for the preparation of equipment for reuse. Through the above processes, practitioners will assure the quality of reused EEE, while complying with environmental, health, and safety regulations. PAS 141:2011 is supported by sets of protocols for different products, including large appliances such as washing machines and small appliances such as mobile phones. The protocols list all test procedures and functions for different EEEs, e.g. visual inspection, safety, and functional tests. PAS 141:2011 does not go into depth on how to evaluate the advantages of reuse compared with materials recovery and other end-of-life strategies; most of the reuse goals are rather ambitious (Frota et al., 2014). In the Flanders region of Belgium, there is also a standard concerned with reuse of WEEE, titled Code of good practice for the re-use of (W)EEE, developed by the Public Waste Agency of Flanders (OVAM). In this standard, besides functional tests of different EEEs similar to PAS 141:2011, environmental and market factors are also included in the reuse criteria. Specifically, energy labeling is included in the reuse criteria to improve the environmental performance of reused equipment. In Germany, standard VDI 2343, Recycling of electrical and electronic equipment — Reuse, explores the definitions and potential benefits of reuse compared with recycling (VDI, 2014). In particular, how to link current German legislation to reuse and issues related to liability and warranty are also analyzed in VDI 2343. Moreover, recommendations for the pre-selection of reusable products are also provided in this standard, which is an important practical issue (Tecchio et al., 2016). In the EU, reuse and preparation for reuse have been recognized as indispensable for WEEE management, and there are already supporting standards at the EU level as well as at the member state level. However, as reuse and preparation for reuse are both combined with recycling targets, the option of preparing for reuse might be neglected by member states and consequently by stakeholders (e.g. collectors and recyclers) (Seyring et al., 2015). Furthermore, there are still not enough supplementary standards, specifications, or instructions following the Directive to make reuse a priority.
3.1. Policies in the EU
3.2. Policies in China
Therefore, in this study, reuse-related WEEE management policies in the EU and China were analyzed and compared. First, the terminology of reuse-related concepts is discussed as the basis for further discussion of reuse. Then, WEEE management policy and regulations related to reuse in the EU and China are analyzed and compared. Third, reuse practices in both systems are analyzed according to investigations and interviews with the main stakeholders in China and the EU. Finally, policy implications and research needs for reuse management are proposed. 2. Scope of reuse and related concepts It is necessary to define reuse clearly for further discussion. Reuse is a general concept in both theory and practice. There are different definitions of reuse and related concepts in the literature as shown in Table 1 (Borrman et al., 2009; BSI, 2009; EU, 2008; Ruediger and Eric, 2003; Standardization, 2007). General reuse related concepts include upgrading, reselling, repair, reconditioning, and remanufacturing. These end-of-life (EoL) strategies help limit materials recovery, landfill, incineration, and other options at the lower level of the waste hierarchy (EU, 2008). Repair, reconditioning, and remanufacturing (also known as component reuse, product recovery, or secondary market processes) are all the various production processes that use parts or components from used products. To define the scope of reuse more clearly for stakeholders, detailed processes and the function or warranty of processed products compared to the original ones are all listed in Table 1. The concepts in Table 1 can be divided into two groups based on the ownership transfer situation: waste prevention and reuse. In the “reuse” type group, the ownership of the product is changed to other users, while the product is still owned by the original users in the “waste prevention” group, e.g., repair, upgrading, and reconditioning, in which the ownership of products does not change, should be taken as a waste prevention strategy, but not the “prepare for reuse” or “reuse” activities. The function, quality, or warranty of reused products can be better (e.g. upgraded), equivalent (e.g. reconditions), or lower (e.g. repaired), or simply different (e.g. repurposed) compared to the original one. In theory, remanufacturing is also a type of prepare for reuse activity, with higher warranty and more treatment than other reuse options. However, in practice, remanufacturing belongs nestled between reuse and materials recovery because of the extra materials and energy input and standard industrial processes (Helms and Goldstein, 1999). Therefore, remanufacturing is not discussed in detail in this study even though it has been listed as a “prepare for reuse” process. In conclusion, the term “reuse” in this study covers preparation for reuse, components reuse, and reselling or donation (Fig. 1). Fig. 1 shows the scope of reuse and related concepts based on the product flows. The main stakeholders in this scheme include product/ materials producers, the original product users, and users of the secondhand components or parts. When the current function of a product cannot meet the requirements of the original user, there are three paths the product can take. One is to recycle it for materials recovery or final disposal, which is outside the scope of reuse. Another option is to resell or donate it directly without further treatment, which is within the scope of reuse. The most complicated option is to treat the product to make it reusable before it is resold or donated. As such, preparing a product for reuse is a critical part of reuse that encompasses repair, reconditioning, remanufacturing, and other complex options. Therefore, as shown in Fig. 1, preparation for reuse occupies a central role in the reuse concept.
Reuse is not included in the formal WEEE management policies in
Reuse is part of the minimum recovery target in the latest EU WEEE 3
Resources, Conservation & Recycling xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
B. Lu et al.
Fig. 1. Scope of reuse and related concepts.
cause more negative environmental impacts than the use of new components. Although there is no further definition or guideline on how to evaluate and compare the environmental performance of reused components to that of new ones, it is still an advanced standard even compared with the leading reuse standards in the EU. To summarize, reuse still is not an essential part of WEEE management in China, and only a few scattered regulations or standards concern the reuse of EEE.
China. The Regulation on management of WEEE recycling, commonly regarded as the WEEE directive of China, clearly states that reuse was not taken into consideration in the regulation. So there are very few reuse issues addressed in the current formal guidelines and standards, which are carried out by the Ministry of Environmental Protection of China (MEP), in cooperation with the National Development and Reform Committee (NDRC) and Ministry of Finance (MoF). Prior to the Regulation on management of WEEE recycling, reuse was once referred to as an important part of WEEE management in the Technical policy on waste home appliances and electronic products, which was enacted in 2006. It said that reuse should be encouraged prior to materials recovery in the dismantling process, with the necessary pollution prevention facilities. However, in practice this technical policy was always neglected, which is why it was not included in the framework of the Regulation on management of WEEE recycling. In principle, the collection and marketing of used products is within the purview of ministries beyond MEP (Tan et al., 2014). The Regulation on Circulation of Used Electrical and Electronic Equipment developed by the Ministry of Commerce in 2013 is a specific regulation focusing on the collection and sale activities of used EEE (UEEE). This regulation encourages an information system of UEEE to be set up by collectors, sellers, and administrative organizations. However, no environmental performance related issues are referred to in this regulation, and the regulation is independent from the WEEE management system. There are also some standards on the reuse of WEEE that are independent from the WEEE management system of MEP. There is only one national standard concerned with reuse of WEEE in China, GB/T 21474-2008, Guideline for the assessment on the reuse and recycling system of waste electrical and electronic equipment, and it is a recommended standard rather than a mandatory one. This standard introduces functional, safety, and environmental requirements for reused components and parts. The environmental requirement is worth mentioning here. The standard requires that reuse of reusable components should not
3.3. Differences and trends of reuse policy in the EU and China Based on the above analysis, there are differences between the EU and China concerning reuse policy. At the macro level, reuse is promoted in both the EU and China in the Directives or laws on solid waste management or resources recycling. But for WEEE, there are significant differences between the EU and China. In the EU, the idea of reuse has been integrated into the Directives and supporting standards, at both the EU and member state levels. In China, the idea of reuse is still beyond the current WEEE management system. However, as the standards at the EU level, including EN 50625-1, focus on the de-pollution of the recycling process, content related to reuse in these standards only concerns how to calculate the targets at the EU level. Further, the standards at the member state level mostly focus on functional tests like PAS 141:2011, and only a few of them such as the code of reuse in Belgium refer to environmental and energy requirements. More importantly, the standards in the EU concerned with reuse do not work efficiently with the EPR-based WEEE management system. In line with the above analysis, most WEEE related standards, guidelines, and manuals focus on how to dismantle and recover the materials and energy from WEEE in an environmentally friendly manner, with particular emphasis being placed on the de-pollution requirements in the above processes. It is the same case in China, as the only guideline for reuse will not be used in practice. In 4
Resources, Conservation & Recycling xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
B. Lu et al.
Fig. 2. Reused EEE in EU member countries from 2005 to 2014.
models show, reuse practices in the EU always exist at a formal organizational level no matter if it is for-profit or non-profit. In France, as social enterprises are allowed to carry out the collection and logistics of WEEE, reuse organizations can get easy access to the waste stream and then promote reuse activities (Len, 2013). For example, ENVIE, the largest French federation of reuse centers, refurbished 1640 tons of washing appliances in 2015, which is estimated to be 1% of waste washing appliances treated annually in France (Tecchio et al., 2016). This reuse center obtains the used products from French WEEE collection schemes, for example Eco-systems. In Flanders, Belgium, the WEEE collection and processing organization Recupel promotes reuse through proper collection requirements, which help various social enterprises to access potentially reusable equipment. As the initial collection of WEEE is paid for by Recupel, appliances that are put back onto the market are effectively free, so the operators are reimbursed for their efforts. Recupel also provides access to repair and service manuals for cooperating reuse partners (Len, 2013). When the WEEE Directive was implemented in Germany, the reuse rate decreased significantly compared to that before the WEEE Directive. This paradoxical outcome was because the newer transportation system decreased the reusability of EEE (Walther et al., 2010). To summarize, reuse is not well developed at the EU level, but there are some exceptions at the member state level (Seyring et al., 2015), although a statistics gathering system on the reuse of WEEE has been set up. Based on current statistics, reuse operates well only in four countries that are relatively large, and the product categories “IT and telecommunications equipment” and “large household appliances” are the major sources of reused WEEE.
conclusion, for both the EU and China, it is necessary to optimize reuserelated policy systems via their integration into the current WEEE management system. 4. Present practices on WEEE reuse in the EU and China 4.1. Reuse practices of WEEE in the EU A statistical system on reuse of WEEE has been set up in the EU, although in some countries, the reuse quantity is still unknown. In 2012, 72,133 tons of WEEE was reportedly reused in the EU according to Eurostat, which is about 2% of the WEEE collected in the EU28 countries over the same year. The major contributions to the reuse quantity by member state are indicated in Fig. 2. The UK, Germany, France, and Belgium, accounted for the 92.76% of all WEEE quantity reuse among EU member states from 2005 to 2014. The statistics also show that reuse quantities increased before the year 2011, but decreased after that as shown in Fig. 3. The decreasing trend of reuse quantity shows that the targets in the latest version of the WEEE directive have not been fully realized in practice. Concerning the types of reused products, “IT and telecommunications equipment” and “large household appliances” are the major sources of reused WEEE, which together account for 82.44% of the total quantity. Besides the reuse activities inside the EU, 1.5 million tons of WEEE in total were exported to Africa for reuse every year, much more than the reuse quantity in the EU (Huisman et al., 2015; Seyring et al., 2015). The reason for the large export quantity is that the magnitude of the reuse value is many times the material value of the contents, particularly without the much higher cost of the environmentally friendly recovery process (Huisman et al., 2015). At the EU member state level, reuse activities have been developed in several member countries. There are several basic operating models of reuse organization, including the Networking Equipment Recovery Model, the IT Asset Management Model, the Close the Digital Divide Model, and the Social Enterprise Model (Kissling et al., 2012). As these
4.2. Reuse practices of WEEE in China Reuse of WEEE is popular in China, although it is outside of the WEEE management policy scope. There are no statistics on reuse of WEEE in China. In general, reuse occurs at both the product and parts/ 5
Resources, Conservation & Recycling xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
B. Lu et al.
Fig. 3. Reused EEE of different categories in the EU from 2005 to 2014.
(Chi et al., 2011). In principle, product-level reused EEE should follow the Regulation on Circulation of Used Electrical and Electronic Equipment, but in practice this regulation is not effective due to a lack of detailed rules for implementation (Fangzhong Dong and Li, 2013). Consequently, the reuse of products is still uncontrolled because the black market for second-hand EEE is more profitable than the conventional market (Yang et al., 2008). Components reuse is also highly popular in China. Reusable components are mostly used for remanufacturing and not repair like in developed countries. There are two reasons for this. One is that there are many original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) and other types of producers in China, providing fertile ground for reusable components to be re-assembled to equivalent grade or lower quality requirement products. In other words, the components markets are large enough to accept disassembled EEE. The other reason is that the remaining economic value of the functioning components is usually higher than the inherent recoverable material value (Chi et al., 2011) because of the low disassembly labor cost (Wang et al., 2012) and proper disassembly technologies (Zhou et al., 2016). Components reuse is always an important EoL choice in the informal recycling sector. However, reusable components maybe also come from formal recycling companies in some areas according to field investigations, as there are no clear regulations to restrain the resale of non-hazardous components Table 2. In general, the reuse of WEEE, and especially the reuse of components, renders the value chain and material flows of WEEE or UEEE essentially different from those of developed countries, and thus a unique management system is required (Chi et al., 2011; Feng Wang et al., 2013). To identify which types of parts or components are actually reused, field investigations have been used in recycling plants, especially in informal ones that are very sensitive to the reusability of components. The online B2 B (business-to-business) shops are also included in field investigations, as reusable components are often traded online. Typical reused parts and components of WEEE in current Chinese WEEE practice are listed in Table 3. Components shown in Table 3 refer to small devices that can be employed universally and in the same types of structures. A product part is at a higher level than a component, and is usually an assembly of components. A part always has a specified function, especially as a piece of a complex product. The lack of proper control of reuse activities has caused many security and environmental issues in China. The most serious problem is safety due to uncontrolled quality, e.g. reused parts or components may leak electricity, which can cause burns or fires. Another security
Table 2 Characteristics of reuse policy in the EU and China. Similarities and Differences of reuse policy between EU and China
EU
China
Is the idea of reuse in the basic law or directive Is the reuse idea included in the mainstream WEEE management framework Are there any quantified reuse targets in the mainstream WEEE management regulation framework Are there any standards with reuse options Can these standards be integrated to support the implementation of reuse policy
Yes Yes
Yes No
Yes
No
Yes Yes
Yes No
Table 3 Typical reused parts and components of WEEE in China. No.
Products
Typical Reused Parts
Typical Reused Components
1
Television
Mainboard (LCD TV)
Transistor, Bridge Rectifiers
2 3 4
Refrigerator Washing Machine Air-conditioner
Compressor Motors Compressor
5 6 7 8 9
Memories, HDD, CPU Mainboard Screens, Vibrators, Camera – –
10 11
Computer Monitor Mobile Phone Extractor hood Electric water heater Gas water heater Printer
12
Copier
13
Fax machine
14
Telephone set
– Ink cartridge, Toner cartridges, Mainboard Ink cartridge, Toner cartridges, Mainboard Ink cartridge, Toner cartridges, Mainboard –
IGBT (for inverter air conditioner) Fans Bridge Rectifiers Transistors, Diodes, ICs – – – ICs ICs ICs ICs
components levels. The Gini coefficient in China was as high as 0.462 in 2015, indicating that the product level reuse rate should be also high given the significant wealth gap. Specifically, there are still large gaps in income, living standards, and living space between rural and urban areas, and between the eastern and western areas of China. Currently, reusable parts of WEEE can always find a user in rural or western areas 6
Resources, Conservation & Recycling xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
B. Lu et al.
Fig. 4. General materials flow of used EEE and potential policy implementation at various points.
management system (Ruediger et al., 2011). From the EU experience, it is necessary to use clearer definitions and awareness to enhance the understanding of component reuse and to enable proper development and adoption of reuse standards and policy. In China, in contrast to EU countries, reuse activities are still popular, especially at the components level, without effective reuse promoting policies, since manufacturers and dismantlers are usually in the same areas, e.g. Guangdong Province.
problem is information disclosure risk of ICT products. Personal information can be disclosed in the absence of related regulations. Apart from safety and information security problems, the variation in environmental impacts of reuse products and components are usually obscure. The larger electricity consumption of reused products may cause higher environmental impacts, but the extended lifespan is usually regarded as environmentally friendly. To summarize, reuse of WEEE is popular in China at both the product and components level. And for nearly all types of WEEE, there are parts or components available to be reused in practice. However, without specific and feasible regulations governing the reuse of WEEE, security and environmental issues continue to cause problems in the reuse process.
5.2. Policy requirements for reuse of WEEE The comparison between the EU and China shows that reuse does not completely rely on the development of promotional policies. So is it even necessary to create and implement reuse policy for WEEE? At the product level, as there are so many security, health, and environmental issues related to reuse activities, it is surely necessary to create and implement proper regulation. Generally speaking, the aim of reuse policy is to prevent environmental pollution and to enhance resource efficiency in the treatment stage of WEEE by operators of WEEE collection, treatment, recycling, and disposal. From this point of view, reuse should be incorporated into existing policies, as reuse is generally environmentally friendly and the resource efficiency is higher due to extended product lifespans. The second question is what kind of policy and supporting standards are needed to promote the reuse of WEEE. To answer this, we first tried to analyze the material flow of used EEE at the product level. General reuse materials flows of WEEE in China are shown in Fig. 4. The reuse flow always starts from EEE users, who replace old EEEs with newer ones. Then the used EEE is collected by collectors, who will send the products to renovators and dismantlers. Through treatment of renovators and recyclers, the used EEE will go to secondhand EEE users or to EEE manufacturers via the form of reused components or recovered materials.
5. Policy implications for reuse of WEEE 5.1. Comparison of reuse policies and practices There are key differences in reuse polices between China and the EU owing to their different economies and regulatory backgrounds. The EU is in a leading position for EEE reuse policy. However, most EU member states did not place emphasis on reuse when the WEEE Directive was implemented. One key reason that appears to have (particularly in the past) reduced the effectiveness of WEEE legislation in EU is ambiguity in the terminology used to describe EoL product processes, and the lack of proper understanding of their advantages and disadvantages. There is also a lack of appreciation of the advantages of product/component reclamation over recycling. Under these circumstances, EU recyclers have typically found it easier to opt for material recovery rather than component/product reuse. As a result, reuse is typically neglected since reuse and recycling targets are combined, and it is easier to achieve the combined target only with recycling. Therefore, in practice in the EU, it is difficult for reuse operators to get reusable EEE from the WEEE 7
Resources, Conservation & Recycling xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
Whether to reuse the components from the view of sustainability
It is imperative to identify the aims and potential users of potential reuse policies. As indicated in Fig. 4, it is apparent that EEE users, WEEE collectors, and recyclers are the most important stakeholders for reuse of WEEE. The first stakeholder is the EEE user, who directly affects the reusability of usable EEE (Sabbaghi et al., 2016). When EEE users make the decision to discard used EEE, its reusability has been partly determined, especially for the environmental part of reusability (Lu et al., 2014). The environmental part is usually fixed with the physical characteristics compared with the latest products. In reality, EEE users usually make a decision whether to discard WEEE based on functional or other issues without consideration for the environment. The second stakeholder is the used EEE collector, who determines the flow of used EEE. Faced with collected WEEE, collectors usually have three choices: to sell the WEEE to the second-hand EEE market directly, to EEE renovators for refurbishment or remanufacture, or to recyclers. In this decision-making process, economic profit is the only factor of importance to WEEE collectors in China. The third stakeholder is the recycler, who dismantles the WEEE for components reuse and materials recovery. The WEEE that is sent to recyclers is always useless as a whole product, but some parts or components are reusable. Based on economic cost-benefit analysis, recyclers make choices to reuse or recycle components. Following stakeholder analysis, the next question is to determine the key points required for reuse policy. For EEE users, when they would like to replace EEEs in use, it is necessary to know what they can obtain through replacement. For their personal requirements, EEE users can get more function from new products through replacement, while for sustainability, the replacement should not be environmentally harmful. From the first perspective, there are no policy implications as it is just normal personal consumption. But from the second perspective, the promotion of reuse can be effective when integrated with sustainable consumption policies in order to change users’ behavior. In this situation, it is necessary to provide scientific evidence that when users replace and discard the EEE already in use, there will be positive or negative impacts on sustainability. For collectors, the key process is when they make choices as to how to deal with WEEE. Logically, basic functionality and product safety should be tested first, and then the possibility of profit will be considered for subsequent decision making. Therefore, policies and standards are required to formalize the testing process, which is the key factor for the option of reuse. As referred to above, there are already regulations for this in China, but targets have not been realized due to lack of feasibility (Fangzhong Dong and Li, 2013). Therefore, the reusability assessment methodology should be studied and implementation of related policies should be scientifically improved. For recyclers, the main process related to reuse is how to make dismantling plans for sustainable recycling. Specifically, it is important to know which types of components are reusable and whether it is better for sustainability to reuse them than to recover the materials in them. In practice, this is still based on purely economic cost-benefit analyses in China. However, components reuse is usually neglected, even forbidden, in formal recycling plants in China due to the fact that the existing WEEE management policy framework does not support reuse. In this regard, more policies are required to promote components reuse for sustainability. The key scientific question is how to evaluate the reusability of components from a sustainability perspective. To summarize, the key processes, policy requirements, and corresponding questions for reuse of WEEE are shown in Table 4.
Components reuse is not referred to in the WEEE Directive To reuse the components or recycle the materials
No effective components regulations in the mainstream policy framework
1) Policies to encourage collectors to send reusable products to reuse operators; 2) Guidelines for collectors to know which type of products can be reused when sending the WEEE to the next stakeholder 1) Policies to encourage recyclers to prepare for components reuse; 2) Guidelines for recyclers to know which components can be reused and sustainable methods for reuse Products reuse target integrated in the WEEE Directive, but not in all specific guidelines of member States
5.3. Technical knowledge gaps and potential solutions of reuse policy WEEErecyclers
WEEE collectors
To send the WEEE to secondhand market, renovators/remanufacturers, or recyclers
No specific regulations on product replacement in sustainable consumption policy Products reuse policy is not in the mainstream WEEE policy framework Lifespan has been integrated into sustainable consumption policy To replace the EEE in use or not EEE users
EU
Current Policy Key processes for reuse of WEEE Stakeholders
Table 4 Key processes, policy requirements, and scientific questions for reuse of WEEE.
China
Policy and Standards Requirements
Guidelines for users to know how to replace EEE for sustainable consumption
Key scientific questions
Whether to replace the EEE in use from the view of sustainability Whether to reuse the collected EEE or not from the view of sustainability
B. Lu et al.
There are still knowledge gaps in regards how to implement reuse within the existing policy frameworks, in both theory and in practice. (1) Potential methodological solutions for reusability assessment. The core scientific question is how to determine whether reuse of 8
Resources, Conservation & Recycling xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
B. Lu et al.
Fig. 5. Factors impacting reuse activities.
other recycling processes. However, only information on hazardous materials is provided by producers as a mandatory measure by the RoHS directive in the EU, and other life cycle information is not required. Only if enough product information can be obtained quickly and economically, the reusability of WEEE and its components can be assessed for planning sustainable treatment in the following stages.
WEEE is the more sustainable choice. There are many factors that affect reuse activities, including technological, economic, environmental, social, cultural, and legal factors, as shown in Fig. 5. Through impact on users, collectors, and recyclers, different factors will directly or indirectly affect the reuse of EEE. Most case studies on reuse focus on one factor, like the physical aspects or technology (Babbitt et al., 2009; Mazhar et al., 2005, 2007; Murayama and Shu, 2001; Pandey, 2008). A few studies take two factors into consideration when assessing product reusability (Anityasari et al., 2005; Mangun and Thurston, 2002; Murayama et al., 2004; Rugrungruang et al., 2009). There are only a few cases of studies focusing on sustainability assessment for reuse (Tecchio et al., 2016). Findings from literature reviews and surveys of the existing market indicate that only appliances with an energy rating equivalent to those of the cheapest new appliances on the market should be considered for reuse (O’Connell et al., 2012; Ruediger et al., 2011). Using the Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment (LCSA) method at the product level, the reusability of used mobile phones was assessed as an example and compared with materials recovery (Lu et al., 2014). In theory, the LCSA method is recommended to determine the reusability of EEE. But in reality, there are still other practical factors that impact reuse outside the scope of LCSA, including access to good quality WEEE and control of WEEE quality (Kissling et al., 2013; Sabbaghi et al., 2015). There is still a relatively large knowledge gap for feasible and easy-to-use methods for stakeholders to make effective decisions on products’ potential for reuse. The LCSA method should include more practical factors to fully fulfill the needs of reusability assessment. (2) Potential solutions for product reuse information. In addition to methodological issues, the current information system for WEEE cannot support reuse assessment effectively and efficiently. For potential WEEE users, information on the product functionality status, including current energy efficiency of the WEEE, needs to be compared with that for new products. But functionality tests are always economically unfeasible in both the EU and China, as the literature (Huisman et al., 2015) and practice (Fangzhong Dong and Li, 2013) show. For WEEE collectors or even recyclers, information on the material composition, structure, and inner component types of WEEE are also preferred for comparing materials recovery for disassembly or
5.4. Specific policy implications for reuse Based on the above analyses, it is important to introduce reuse as a key EoL option in the WEEE management system in China. The current policy framework can be improved to integrate reuse options. From the experiences of EU WEEE directive implementation, reuse should be integrated into the Regulation on management of WEEE recycling. One reason is that a lack of reuse strategies will cause partial and ineffective management. As shown in Fig. 4, it is obvious that reuse and recycling are always mixed with each other in several key stages of WEEE. Components reuse can provide income for formal recycling companies as demonstrated by experiences of the informal sector. It will thus be beneficial to integrate components reuse into the WEEE management framework. Therefore, we suggest that WEEE policymakers take components reuse into consideration in future policy revisions. Another suggestion is to make supporting standards for the implementation of the Regulation on Circulation of Used Electrical and Electronic Equipment. The lack of economically feasible functionality testing and labeling standards is the basic reason for the failure of this regulation. From lessons learned from the implementation of PAS 141 in the UK, it is clear that the perceived added value needs to outweigh the cost of certification, otherwise the standards will be useless (Frota et al., 2014). Therefore, there is a real need for policymakers to design economically feasible standards to support the regulation. In practice, how to incorporate reuse into existing standards is also complicated. The market is a major driver of WEEE treatment, and resource efficiency is always a way for recycling companies to pursue profit. Thus, it is also advised that improvements of environmental performance should be emphasized in the standards.
9
Resources, Conservation & Recycling xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
B. Lu et al.
Huisman, J., Botezatu, I., Herreras, L., Liddane, M., Hintsa, J., Luda di Cortemiglia, V., Leroy, P., Vermeersch, E., Mohanty, S., van den Brink, S., Ghenciu, B., Dimitrova, D., Nash, E., Shryane, T., Wieting, M., Kehoe, J., Baldé, C.P., Magalini, F., Zanasi, A., Ruini, F., Bonzio, A., et al., 2015. Countering WEEE Illegal Trade (CWIT) Summary Report, Market Assessment, Legal Analysis, Crime Analysis and Recommendations Roadmap. (Lyon, France, p. 61). Kissling, R., Fitzpatrick, C., Boeni, H., Luepschen, C., Andrew, S., Dickenson, J., 2012. Definition of generic re-use operating models for electrical and electronic equipment. Resources. Conservation and Recycling 65, 85–99. Kissling, R., Coughlan, D., Fitzpatrick, C., Boeni, H., Luepschen, C., Andrew, S., Dickenson, J., 2013. Success factors and barriers in re-use of electrical and electronic equipment. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 80, 21–31. Len, M., 2013. EPR and the role of reuse activities: opportunities for a resource efficient socially inclusive waste management system. In: Environment, A.E.C.a.B. (Ed.), EPR Revolution in the European Context, (Brussels, Belgium). Lu, B., Li, B., Wang, L., Yang, J., Liu, J., Wang, X.V., 2014. Reusability based on life cycle sustainability assessment: case study on WEEE. Procedia CIRP 15, 473–478. Mangun, D., Thurston, D.J., 2002. Incorporating component reuse, remanufacture, and recycle into product portfolio design. Engineering Management. IEEE Transact. 49, 479–490. Mazhar, M.I., Kara, S., Kaebernick, H., 2005. Reusability Assessment of components in consumer products A statistical and condition monitoring data analysis strategy. In: 4th Australian LCA Conference. Sydney, Australia. pp. 1–8. Mazhar, M.I., Kara, S., Kaebernick, H., 2007. Remaining life estimation of used components in consumer products: life cycle data analysis by weibull and artificial neural networks. J. Oper. Manage. 25, 1184–1193. Murayama, T., Shu, L.H., 2001. Treatment of reliability for reuse and remanufacture. In: Proceedings of Second International Symposium on Environmentally Conscious Design and Inverse Manufacturing. Tokyo, Japan. pp. 287–292. Murayama, T., Yamamoto, S., Oba, F., 2004. Mathematical Model of Reusability. Ieee Int Symp Electr, pp. 183–188. O’Connell, M., Hickey, S., Fitzpatrick, C., 2012. Evaluating the sustainability potential of a white goods refurbishment program. Sustain. Sci. 1–13. Pandey, V., 2008. Component Level Reuse by Incorporating Entropy Metrics into a Multiattribute Design Decision Model. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, United States − Illinois (p. 162). Parajuly, K., Wenzel, H., 2017. Potential for circular economy in household WEEE management. J. Clean. Prod. 151, 272–285. Ruediger, K., Fitzpatrick, C., Claudia, L., 2011. E-waste Challenges: Re-use Practices Principles and Standards. Ruediger, K., Eric, W., 2003. Computers and the environment: understanding and managing their impacts. In: Tukker, A. (Ed.), Eco-efficiency in Industry and Science. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, Netherlands (p. 285). Rugrungruang, F., Kara, S., Kaebernick, H., 2009. An integrated methodology for assessing physical and technological life of products for reuse. International Journal of Sustainable Manufacturing 1, 463–490. Sabbaghi, M., Esmaeilian, B., Raihanian Mashhadi, A., Behdad, S., Cade, W., 2015. An investigation of used electronics return flows: a data-driven approach to capture and predict consumers storage and utilization behavior. Waste Manage. 36, 305–315. Sabbaghi, M., Esmaeilian, B., Cade, W., Wiens, K., Behdad, S., 2016. Business outcomes of product repairability: a survey-based study of consumer repair experiences. Resources. Conserv. Recyc. 109, 114–122. Seyring, Nicole, Jakob Weißenbacher, M.K., Hestin, Mathieu, Lecerf, Louise, Magalini, Federico, Sinha Khetriwal, Deepali, Kuehr, Ruediger, 2015. Study on WEEE Recovery Targets, Preparation for Re-use Targets and on the Method for Calculation of the Recovery Targets. European Commission. Standardization, C.N.I.o., 2007. Terminology of Waste Product Recovery. China Standards Publisher, Beijing. Tan, Q., Zeng, X., Ijomah, W.L., Zheng, L., Li, J., 2014. Status of end-of-life electronic product remanufacturing in China. J. Ind. Ecol. 18, 577–587. Tecchio, P., Ardente, F., Mathieux, F., 2016. Analysis of Durability, Reusability and Reparability — Application to Dishwashers and Washing Machines. JRC. Truttmann, N., Rechberger, H., 2006. Contribution to resource conservation by reuse of electrical and electronic household appliances. Resources Conservation and Recycling 48, 249–262. VDI, 2014. Recycling of Electrical and Electronical Equipment − Re-use. VDIFachbereich Ressourcenmanagement (p. 67). Walther, G., Steinborn, J., Spengler, T.S., Luger, T., Herrmann, C., 2010. Implementation of the WEEE-directive −aEuro parts per thousand economic effects and improvement potentials for reuse and recycling in Germany. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Tech. 47, 461–474. Wang, F., Huisman, J., Meskers, C.E.M., Schluep, M., Stevels, A., Hagelüken, C., 2012. The Best-of-2-Worlds philosophy: developing local dismantling and global infrastructure network for sustainable e-waste treatment in emerging economies. Waste Manage. 32, 2134–2146. Williams, E., Kahhat, R., Allenby, B., Kavazanjian, E., Kim, J., Xu, M., 2008. Environmental, social, and economic implications of global reuse and recycling of personal computers. Environ. Sci. Technol. 42, 6446–6454. Yang, J.X., Lu, B., Xu, C., 2008. WEEE flow and mitigating measures in China. Waste Manage. 28, 1589–1597. Zeng, X., Gong, R., Chen, W.-Q., Li, J., 2016. Uncovering the recycling potential of new WEEE in China. Environ. Sci. Technol. 50, 1347–1358. Zhou, Y., Zhang, X., Guan, J., Wang, J., Bing, N., Zhu, L., 2016. Research on reusing technology for disassembling waste printed circuit boards. Procedia Environ. Sci. 31, 941–946.
6. Conclusions In this paper, we compared policies concerning the reuse of WEEE and present reuse practices in both the EU and China. We found that there are already guidelines and standards in the EU and China, but reuse as a key EoL option for WEEE has not been integrated into the mainstream WEEE recycling options. Based on the comparisons, policy requirements, corresponding knowledge gaps, and potential scientific solutions regarding the entire life cycle of WEEE, issues for key stakeholders were discussed. As a result, suggestions for reuse policy in China are provided to improve sustainable management of WEEE, including integration of the reuse concept into the current management framework as well as the promotion of component reuse. Although we recommend that reuse should be applied in WEEE recycling, there is still a lack of solid scientific evidence to support more detailed reuse standards. The LCSA method could be a powerful tool to assess the reusability of EEEs and their components, but its goal is always national or even global sustainable development, which may be in conflict with stakeholders’ needs. Moreover, since market fluctuations are another strong driver for the reuse of materials flows, it is also worthy of further discussion as to which standards should be promoted. Therefore, much future research is needed for more effective and efficient reuse management. Acknowledgement We acknowledge the support of the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos. 71303231, 71533005). This research was also supported financially by the 7th European Commission Framework Programme (GREENet − PIRSES-GA-2011-294931). References Anityasari, M., Bao, H., Kaebernick, H., 2005. Evaluation of product reusability based on a technical and economic model. In: A Case Study of Televisions, Proceedings of the 2005 IEEE International Symposium on Electronics and the Environment. New Orleans, LA USA,. pp. 199–204. Anonymous, 2012. Remanufacturing Terminology-Remanufacturing Term Guideline. APRA, Europe. BSI, 2009. Design for Manufacture, Assembly, Disassembly and End-of-life Processing (MADE) Part 2: Terms and Definitions. British Standard Institution, London (p.10). Babbitt, C.W., Kahhat, R., Williams, E., Babbitt, G.A., 2009. Evolution of product lifespan and implications for environmental assessment and management: a case study of personal computers in higher education. Environ. Sci. Technol. 43, 5106–5112. Borrman, J., Costa, E., Cox-Kearns, J., Crock, W., 2009. One global understanding of ReUse— common definitions. UNU StEP Initiat. Bovea, M.D., Ibáñez-Forés, V., Pérez-Belis, V., Quemades-Beltrán, P., 2016. Potential reuse of small household waste electrical and electronic equipment: methodology and case study. Waste Manage. 53, 204–217. Chi, X., Streicher-Porte, M., Wang, M.Y.L., Reuter, M.A., 2011. Informal electronic waste recycling: a sector review with special focus on China. Waste Manage. 31, 731–742. Devoldere, T., Willems, B., Duflou, J.R., Dewulf, W., 2009. The eco-efficiency of reuse centres critically explored − the washing machine case. Int. J. Sustain. Manuf. 1, 265–285. EU, 2008. In: E. Parliament (Ed.), Directive 2008/98/EC the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 November 2008 on Waste and Repealing Certain Directives. EU, 2012. In: E. Parliament (Ed.), Directive 2012/19/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 July 2012 on Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE). EU, 2017. Report from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on the Implementation of the Circular Economy Action Plan. European Commission, Brussels, Belgium (p.14). Dongi, Fangzhong, Li, Y., 2013. Why It Is Difficult to Implement the Second-hand Home Appliances Regulation. Wang, Feng, Kuehr, Ruediger, Ahlquist, Daniel, Li, J., 2013. E-waste in China: A Country Report. United Nations University, Tsinghua University, Bonn. Frota, Quariguasi, Neto, J., Dindarian, A., Reade, A., Gibson, A., 2014. The newly created Publicly Available Specification (PAS 141) for reusable electrical/electronic products: goals and research needs for successful uptake. J. Manuf. Technol. Manag. 25, 1135–1147. Helms, S., Goldstein, J., 1999. Books. J. Ind. Ecol. 3, 189–192. Hickey, S., Fitzpatrick, C., 2016. Reuse potential −evaluation of reuse opportunities within WEEE compliance schemes. In: Kuehr, Ruediger (Ed.), The Step Green Paper Series. United Nations University, Bonn Germany.
10
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Resources, Conservation & Recycling journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/resconrec
Full length article
Perspectives on reuse of WEEE in China: Lessons from the EU ⁎
Bin Lua, Jianxin Yanga, , Winifred Ijomahb, Wenjie Wua,c, Gabriel Zlamparetd a State Key Laboratory of Urban and Regional Ecology, Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences,Shuangqing Road 18, Haidian District, Beijing 100085, China b Design Manufacture and Engineering Management, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, UK c Shanghai Collaborative Innovation Centre for WEEE Recycling, Shanghai Second Polytechnic University, Jinhai Road 2360, Pudong District, Shanghai 201209, China d State Key Joint Laboratory of Environment Simulation and Pollution Control, School of Environment, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China
A R T I C L E I N F O
A B S T R A C T
Keywords: Reuse Waste electrical and electronic equipment Sustainable management Stakeholder analysis
Reuse is always considered superior to materials and energy recovery in the waste hierarchy, a concept that also applies to Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE). In practice, however, reuse has not been a commonly used end-of-life option. We compared policies and practices of reuse of WEEE in China and in the EU. This comparison can help identify knowledge gaps and reuse policy requirements, as well as implementation methods We also discuss potential scientific solutions for reuse of WEEE via analysis of stakeholders’ concerns. We found that although there are already reuse-related guidelines and standards in China, the policies need to be made more systematic like those of the EU, and they need to be more suitable for the specific challenges of China. We propose$ policy recommendations for reuse in order to facilitate sustainable management of WEEE, including integration of a reuse strategy into current management policy as well as the promotion of components reuse. Further, we also found that more studies on drivers and barriers to reuse are required to support more effective and efficient management.
1. Introduction Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) is increasing rapidly globally (Zeng et al., 2016) and has become one of the most important types of solid waste. The proper treatment and disposal of WEEE are indispensable for the development of a circular economy. Since improper treatment of WEEE may cause severe pollution, environmentally friendly recycling has been heavily promoted by laws and regulations in recent years. In developed countries, Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) based laws or directives have been enacted, such as the WEEE directive in the EU, which is an important part of the circular economy policy package (EU, 2017). Besides materials recycling, reuse is also an important strategy in 3R (Reduce, Reuse, Recovery) principles for solid waste management, including for WEEE (Devoldere et al., 2009; Truttmann and Rechberger, 2006; Williams et al., 2008). In the waste hierarchy, reuse is preferred over materials recovery, energy recovery, and disposal (EU, 2008). Reuse can alleviate or moderate the potential environmental pollution from WEEE, although it is not a final solution to the problems WEEE causes (Ruediger et al., 2011). In theory, reuse of WEEE is more complicated than materials recovery, because reuse is not only affected by the physical condition of
⁎
the products and components themselves, but also by technological innovation of newer products with similar functions. The factors that influence reusability individually or in combination can be categorized as technological, economic, environmental, social and cultural, and legal (Borrman et al., 2009). Measures to promote reuse exist in most countries’ waste management laws or regulations. However, the implementation means are different between countries. In China, reuse is not even included in the major regulations of WEEE management, though reuse is common in the recycling process. In the EU WEEE Directive, the reuse rate has been listed as part of the WEEE recycling target for member states. Therefore, it is necessary to analyze and compare different WEEE management policies and legislative systems in different areas, as the lessons may be helpful globally. Because most WEEE in developed countries is recycled, previous studies on WEEE have mostly focused on recycling efficiency (Parajuly and Wenzel, 2017). In the literature concerned with reuse, assessments of reuse potential of different WEEE categories (Bovea et al., 2016; Lu et al., 2014; Parajuly and Wenzel, 2017) has found management policy and implementation to be the key factors in improving reuse (Hickey and Fitzpatrick, 2016). But there has been little discussion about policies to promote reuse.
Corresponding author. E-mail addresses: [email protected], [email protected] (J. Yang).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.07.012 Received 30 January 2017; Received in revised form 18 May 2017; Accepted 10 July 2017 0921-3449/ © 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Please cite this article as: Lu, B., Resources, Conservation & Recycling (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.07.012
Any operation by which products or components that are not waste are used again for the same purpose for which they were conceived The checking, cleaning, or repairing recovery operations, by which products or components of products that have become waste are prepared so that they can be re-used without any other pre-processing The practice of selling a product to a secondary consumer when it reaches the end of its useful life for the original purchaser Return a faulty or broken product or component back to a usable state; Restore defective products to their intended state Return a used product to a satisfactory working condition or a previously defined quality level, by rebuilding or repairing major components that are close to failure, even where there are no reported or apparent faults in those components Enhance the properties, including inter alia its function, performance, and safety, by replacement of certain components or by other means Return a used product to at least its original performance with a warranty that is equivalent or better than that of a newly manufactured product Utilize a product or its components in a role that it was not originally designed to perform Any operation, the principal result of which is the waste serving a useful purpose by replacing other materials that would otherwise have been used to fulfill a function, or used as fuel in energy recovery Any recovery operation by which waste materials are reprocessed into products, materials, or substances, whether for the original or other purposes
Re-use/Reuse
2
Recycling
Recovery
Repurpose
Remanufacturing
Upgrading
Recondition/Refurbish/ Rebuild/Reconstruct
Repair
Reselling
Preparing for re-use
Definitions
Terminology
Table 1 Terminology of reuse and related concepts.
Repairman, collectors, remanufacturers, resellers, other users, recyclers, producers, etc.
Checking, cleaning, repair, components replacement, upgrade, remanufacturing, recovery, etc.
(EU, 2008)
(BSI, 2009; EU, 2008)
No product level functions
No product level functions
(BSI, 2009)
Different functions
(BSI, 2009; Helms and Goldstein, 1999)
Better, equivalent Checking, cleaning, disassembly, components replacement, repairing, reassembly, etc. Checking, disassembly, components replacement, re-assembly, etc. Disassembly, shredding, sorting, refining, etc.
Recyclers, collectors, resellers, other users, etc. Recyclers, collectors, resellers, producers, etc.
(Ruediger and Eric, 2003; VDI, 2014)
(Anonymous, 2012; BSI, 2009; VDI, 2014)
(BSI, 2009; VDI, 2014)
Better, equivalent
Equivalent, lower
(Ruediger and Eric, 2003)
Checking, upgrading, components replacement, etc.
Checking, repairing, etc.
Repairman, resellers, original users, etc.
Equivalent, lower
(EU, 2008)
Repairman, renovators, collectors, resellers, original users, other users, etc. Collectors, Remanufacturers, resellers, other users, etc.
Checking
Resellers, other users, etc.
Better, equivalent, or lower
(Borrman et al., 2009; EU, 2008; Standardization, 2007)
Equivalent, lower
Checking, cleaning, repairing, etc.
Repairman, collectors, resellers, other users, etc.
Better, equivalent, or lower
Definition Sources
Checking, repairing, etc.
Checking, cleaning, repairing, etc.
Repairman, collectors, resellers, other users, etc.
Function/Warranty after processing compared to the original one
Repairman/Renovators, collectors, resellers, original users, etc.
Possible processes included
Stakeholders
B. Lu et al.
Resources, Conservation & Recycling xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
Resources, Conservation & Recycling xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
B. Lu et al.
3. WEEE reuse policies in the EU and China
directive (EU, 2012). It is clearly stated that “Where appropriate, priority should be given to preparing for re-use of WEEE and its components, subassemblies and consumables” (EU, 2012). Generally, reuse and preparation for reuse have been taken into consideration in the European standards. At the end of 2014, the first WEEE treatment standard, EN 50625-1: Collection, Logistics and Treatment Requirements for WEEE − Part 1: General Treatment Requirements, was ratified by the EU, which is the core of the European Standards for WEEE management. In EN 50625-1, the most significant point is that “the Mass of WEEE prepared for re-use” is used to calculate the recovery rate. There are other points where reuse is taken into consideration, such as that the handling of WEEE should “avoid damage where there is the potential for preparation for re-use”. Another EU standard focused on reuse, titled Requirements for the preparation for re-use of waste electrical and electronic equipment (EN 50614), is still in progress. This standard will complement the EN 50625 standard series and EN 50574 covering the collection, transport, and general and particular treatment of WEEE. There are no further statements on how to evaluate the potential for preparation for reuse as of now. According to the WEEE Directive, all EU member states should transfer the directive into the laws in their own countries. Several member states of the EU have developed further reuse-related standards. The UK is currently the leading member in this regard as it already has a national reuse standard. The standard, PAS 141:2011, sets out requirements for successful management of the process of preparing WEEE for reuse. The standard presents suggestions on proper handling, tracking, segregation, storage, and protection of electronic equipment and components for the preparation of equipment for reuse. Through the above processes, practitioners will assure the quality of reused EEE, while complying with environmental, health, and safety regulations. PAS 141:2011 is supported by sets of protocols for different products, including large appliances such as washing machines and small appliances such as mobile phones. The protocols list all test procedures and functions for different EEEs, e.g. visual inspection, safety, and functional tests. PAS 141:2011 does not go into depth on how to evaluate the advantages of reuse compared with materials recovery and other end-of-life strategies; most of the reuse goals are rather ambitious (Frota et al., 2014). In the Flanders region of Belgium, there is also a standard concerned with reuse of WEEE, titled Code of good practice for the re-use of (W)EEE, developed by the Public Waste Agency of Flanders (OVAM). In this standard, besides functional tests of different EEEs similar to PAS 141:2011, environmental and market factors are also included in the reuse criteria. Specifically, energy labeling is included in the reuse criteria to improve the environmental performance of reused equipment. In Germany, standard VDI 2343, Recycling of electrical and electronic equipment — Reuse, explores the definitions and potential benefits of reuse compared with recycling (VDI, 2014). In particular, how to link current German legislation to reuse and issues related to liability and warranty are also analyzed in VDI 2343. Moreover, recommendations for the pre-selection of reusable products are also provided in this standard, which is an important practical issue (Tecchio et al., 2016). In the EU, reuse and preparation for reuse have been recognized as indispensable for WEEE management, and there are already supporting standards at the EU level as well as at the member state level. However, as reuse and preparation for reuse are both combined with recycling targets, the option of preparing for reuse might be neglected by member states and consequently by stakeholders (e.g. collectors and recyclers) (Seyring et al., 2015). Furthermore, there are still not enough supplementary standards, specifications, or instructions following the Directive to make reuse a priority.
3.1. Policies in the EU
3.2. Policies in China
Therefore, in this study, reuse-related WEEE management policies in the EU and China were analyzed and compared. First, the terminology of reuse-related concepts is discussed as the basis for further discussion of reuse. Then, WEEE management policy and regulations related to reuse in the EU and China are analyzed and compared. Third, reuse practices in both systems are analyzed according to investigations and interviews with the main stakeholders in China and the EU. Finally, policy implications and research needs for reuse management are proposed. 2. Scope of reuse and related concepts It is necessary to define reuse clearly for further discussion. Reuse is a general concept in both theory and practice. There are different definitions of reuse and related concepts in the literature as shown in Table 1 (Borrman et al., 2009; BSI, 2009; EU, 2008; Ruediger and Eric, 2003; Standardization, 2007). General reuse related concepts include upgrading, reselling, repair, reconditioning, and remanufacturing. These end-of-life (EoL) strategies help limit materials recovery, landfill, incineration, and other options at the lower level of the waste hierarchy (EU, 2008). Repair, reconditioning, and remanufacturing (also known as component reuse, product recovery, or secondary market processes) are all the various production processes that use parts or components from used products. To define the scope of reuse more clearly for stakeholders, detailed processes and the function or warranty of processed products compared to the original ones are all listed in Table 1. The concepts in Table 1 can be divided into two groups based on the ownership transfer situation: waste prevention and reuse. In the “reuse” type group, the ownership of the product is changed to other users, while the product is still owned by the original users in the “waste prevention” group, e.g., repair, upgrading, and reconditioning, in which the ownership of products does not change, should be taken as a waste prevention strategy, but not the “prepare for reuse” or “reuse” activities. The function, quality, or warranty of reused products can be better (e.g. upgraded), equivalent (e.g. reconditions), or lower (e.g. repaired), or simply different (e.g. repurposed) compared to the original one. In theory, remanufacturing is also a type of prepare for reuse activity, with higher warranty and more treatment than other reuse options. However, in practice, remanufacturing belongs nestled between reuse and materials recovery because of the extra materials and energy input and standard industrial processes (Helms and Goldstein, 1999). Therefore, remanufacturing is not discussed in detail in this study even though it has been listed as a “prepare for reuse” process. In conclusion, the term “reuse” in this study covers preparation for reuse, components reuse, and reselling or donation (Fig. 1). Fig. 1 shows the scope of reuse and related concepts based on the product flows. The main stakeholders in this scheme include product/ materials producers, the original product users, and users of the secondhand components or parts. When the current function of a product cannot meet the requirements of the original user, there are three paths the product can take. One is to recycle it for materials recovery or final disposal, which is outside the scope of reuse. Another option is to resell or donate it directly without further treatment, which is within the scope of reuse. The most complicated option is to treat the product to make it reusable before it is resold or donated. As such, preparing a product for reuse is a critical part of reuse that encompasses repair, reconditioning, remanufacturing, and other complex options. Therefore, as shown in Fig. 1, preparation for reuse occupies a central role in the reuse concept.
Reuse is not included in the formal WEEE management policies in
Reuse is part of the minimum recovery target in the latest EU WEEE 3
Resources, Conservation & Recycling xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
B. Lu et al.
Fig. 1. Scope of reuse and related concepts.
cause more negative environmental impacts than the use of new components. Although there is no further definition or guideline on how to evaluate and compare the environmental performance of reused components to that of new ones, it is still an advanced standard even compared with the leading reuse standards in the EU. To summarize, reuse still is not an essential part of WEEE management in China, and only a few scattered regulations or standards concern the reuse of EEE.
China. The Regulation on management of WEEE recycling, commonly regarded as the WEEE directive of China, clearly states that reuse was not taken into consideration in the regulation. So there are very few reuse issues addressed in the current formal guidelines and standards, which are carried out by the Ministry of Environmental Protection of China (MEP), in cooperation with the National Development and Reform Committee (NDRC) and Ministry of Finance (MoF). Prior to the Regulation on management of WEEE recycling, reuse was once referred to as an important part of WEEE management in the Technical policy on waste home appliances and electronic products, which was enacted in 2006. It said that reuse should be encouraged prior to materials recovery in the dismantling process, with the necessary pollution prevention facilities. However, in practice this technical policy was always neglected, which is why it was not included in the framework of the Regulation on management of WEEE recycling. In principle, the collection and marketing of used products is within the purview of ministries beyond MEP (Tan et al., 2014). The Regulation on Circulation of Used Electrical and Electronic Equipment developed by the Ministry of Commerce in 2013 is a specific regulation focusing on the collection and sale activities of used EEE (UEEE). This regulation encourages an information system of UEEE to be set up by collectors, sellers, and administrative organizations. However, no environmental performance related issues are referred to in this regulation, and the regulation is independent from the WEEE management system. There are also some standards on the reuse of WEEE that are independent from the WEEE management system of MEP. There is only one national standard concerned with reuse of WEEE in China, GB/T 21474-2008, Guideline for the assessment on the reuse and recycling system of waste electrical and electronic equipment, and it is a recommended standard rather than a mandatory one. This standard introduces functional, safety, and environmental requirements for reused components and parts. The environmental requirement is worth mentioning here. The standard requires that reuse of reusable components should not
3.3. Differences and trends of reuse policy in the EU and China Based on the above analysis, there are differences between the EU and China concerning reuse policy. At the macro level, reuse is promoted in both the EU and China in the Directives or laws on solid waste management or resources recycling. But for WEEE, there are significant differences between the EU and China. In the EU, the idea of reuse has been integrated into the Directives and supporting standards, at both the EU and member state levels. In China, the idea of reuse is still beyond the current WEEE management system. However, as the standards at the EU level, including EN 50625-1, focus on the de-pollution of the recycling process, content related to reuse in these standards only concerns how to calculate the targets at the EU level. Further, the standards at the member state level mostly focus on functional tests like PAS 141:2011, and only a few of them such as the code of reuse in Belgium refer to environmental and energy requirements. More importantly, the standards in the EU concerned with reuse do not work efficiently with the EPR-based WEEE management system. In line with the above analysis, most WEEE related standards, guidelines, and manuals focus on how to dismantle and recover the materials and energy from WEEE in an environmentally friendly manner, with particular emphasis being placed on the de-pollution requirements in the above processes. It is the same case in China, as the only guideline for reuse will not be used in practice. In 4
Resources, Conservation & Recycling xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
B. Lu et al.
Fig. 2. Reused EEE in EU member countries from 2005 to 2014.
models show, reuse practices in the EU always exist at a formal organizational level no matter if it is for-profit or non-profit. In France, as social enterprises are allowed to carry out the collection and logistics of WEEE, reuse organizations can get easy access to the waste stream and then promote reuse activities (Len, 2013). For example, ENVIE, the largest French federation of reuse centers, refurbished 1640 tons of washing appliances in 2015, which is estimated to be 1% of waste washing appliances treated annually in France (Tecchio et al., 2016). This reuse center obtains the used products from French WEEE collection schemes, for example Eco-systems. In Flanders, Belgium, the WEEE collection and processing organization Recupel promotes reuse through proper collection requirements, which help various social enterprises to access potentially reusable equipment. As the initial collection of WEEE is paid for by Recupel, appliances that are put back onto the market are effectively free, so the operators are reimbursed for their efforts. Recupel also provides access to repair and service manuals for cooperating reuse partners (Len, 2013). When the WEEE Directive was implemented in Germany, the reuse rate decreased significantly compared to that before the WEEE Directive. This paradoxical outcome was because the newer transportation system decreased the reusability of EEE (Walther et al., 2010). To summarize, reuse is not well developed at the EU level, but there are some exceptions at the member state level (Seyring et al., 2015), although a statistics gathering system on the reuse of WEEE has been set up. Based on current statistics, reuse operates well only in four countries that are relatively large, and the product categories “IT and telecommunications equipment” and “large household appliances” are the major sources of reused WEEE.
conclusion, for both the EU and China, it is necessary to optimize reuserelated policy systems via their integration into the current WEEE management system. 4. Present practices on WEEE reuse in the EU and China 4.1. Reuse practices of WEEE in the EU A statistical system on reuse of WEEE has been set up in the EU, although in some countries, the reuse quantity is still unknown. In 2012, 72,133 tons of WEEE was reportedly reused in the EU according to Eurostat, which is about 2% of the WEEE collected in the EU28 countries over the same year. The major contributions to the reuse quantity by member state are indicated in Fig. 2. The UK, Germany, France, and Belgium, accounted for the 92.76% of all WEEE quantity reuse among EU member states from 2005 to 2014. The statistics also show that reuse quantities increased before the year 2011, but decreased after that as shown in Fig. 3. The decreasing trend of reuse quantity shows that the targets in the latest version of the WEEE directive have not been fully realized in practice. Concerning the types of reused products, “IT and telecommunications equipment” and “large household appliances” are the major sources of reused WEEE, which together account for 82.44% of the total quantity. Besides the reuse activities inside the EU, 1.5 million tons of WEEE in total were exported to Africa for reuse every year, much more than the reuse quantity in the EU (Huisman et al., 2015; Seyring et al., 2015). The reason for the large export quantity is that the magnitude of the reuse value is many times the material value of the contents, particularly without the much higher cost of the environmentally friendly recovery process (Huisman et al., 2015). At the EU member state level, reuse activities have been developed in several member countries. There are several basic operating models of reuse organization, including the Networking Equipment Recovery Model, the IT Asset Management Model, the Close the Digital Divide Model, and the Social Enterprise Model (Kissling et al., 2012). As these
4.2. Reuse practices of WEEE in China Reuse of WEEE is popular in China, although it is outside of the WEEE management policy scope. There are no statistics on reuse of WEEE in China. In general, reuse occurs at both the product and parts/ 5
Resources, Conservation & Recycling xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
B. Lu et al.
Fig. 3. Reused EEE of different categories in the EU from 2005 to 2014.
(Chi et al., 2011). In principle, product-level reused EEE should follow the Regulation on Circulation of Used Electrical and Electronic Equipment, but in practice this regulation is not effective due to a lack of detailed rules for implementation (Fangzhong Dong and Li, 2013). Consequently, the reuse of products is still uncontrolled because the black market for second-hand EEE is more profitable than the conventional market (Yang et al., 2008). Components reuse is also highly popular in China. Reusable components are mostly used for remanufacturing and not repair like in developed countries. There are two reasons for this. One is that there are many original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) and other types of producers in China, providing fertile ground for reusable components to be re-assembled to equivalent grade or lower quality requirement products. In other words, the components markets are large enough to accept disassembled EEE. The other reason is that the remaining economic value of the functioning components is usually higher than the inherent recoverable material value (Chi et al., 2011) because of the low disassembly labor cost (Wang et al., 2012) and proper disassembly technologies (Zhou et al., 2016). Components reuse is always an important EoL choice in the informal recycling sector. However, reusable components maybe also come from formal recycling companies in some areas according to field investigations, as there are no clear regulations to restrain the resale of non-hazardous components Table 2. In general, the reuse of WEEE, and especially the reuse of components, renders the value chain and material flows of WEEE or UEEE essentially different from those of developed countries, and thus a unique management system is required (Chi et al., 2011; Feng Wang et al., 2013). To identify which types of parts or components are actually reused, field investigations have been used in recycling plants, especially in informal ones that are very sensitive to the reusability of components. The online B2 B (business-to-business) shops are also included in field investigations, as reusable components are often traded online. Typical reused parts and components of WEEE in current Chinese WEEE practice are listed in Table 3. Components shown in Table 3 refer to small devices that can be employed universally and in the same types of structures. A product part is at a higher level than a component, and is usually an assembly of components. A part always has a specified function, especially as a piece of a complex product. The lack of proper control of reuse activities has caused many security and environmental issues in China. The most serious problem is safety due to uncontrolled quality, e.g. reused parts or components may leak electricity, which can cause burns or fires. Another security
Table 2 Characteristics of reuse policy in the EU and China. Similarities and Differences of reuse policy between EU and China
EU
China
Is the idea of reuse in the basic law or directive Is the reuse idea included in the mainstream WEEE management framework Are there any quantified reuse targets in the mainstream WEEE management regulation framework Are there any standards with reuse options Can these standards be integrated to support the implementation of reuse policy
Yes Yes
Yes No
Yes
No
Yes Yes
Yes No
Table 3 Typical reused parts and components of WEEE in China. No.
Products
Typical Reused Parts
Typical Reused Components
1
Television
Mainboard (LCD TV)
Transistor, Bridge Rectifiers
2 3 4
Refrigerator Washing Machine Air-conditioner
Compressor Motors Compressor
5 6 7 8 9
Memories, HDD, CPU Mainboard Screens, Vibrators, Camera – –
10 11
Computer Monitor Mobile Phone Extractor hood Electric water heater Gas water heater Printer
12
Copier
13
Fax machine
14
Telephone set
– Ink cartridge, Toner cartridges, Mainboard Ink cartridge, Toner cartridges, Mainboard Ink cartridge, Toner cartridges, Mainboard –
IGBT (for inverter air conditioner) Fans Bridge Rectifiers Transistors, Diodes, ICs – – – ICs ICs ICs ICs
components levels. The Gini coefficient in China was as high as 0.462 in 2015, indicating that the product level reuse rate should be also high given the significant wealth gap. Specifically, there are still large gaps in income, living standards, and living space between rural and urban areas, and between the eastern and western areas of China. Currently, reusable parts of WEEE can always find a user in rural or western areas 6
Resources, Conservation & Recycling xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
B. Lu et al.
Fig. 4. General materials flow of used EEE and potential policy implementation at various points.
management system (Ruediger et al., 2011). From the EU experience, it is necessary to use clearer definitions and awareness to enhance the understanding of component reuse and to enable proper development and adoption of reuse standards and policy. In China, in contrast to EU countries, reuse activities are still popular, especially at the components level, without effective reuse promoting policies, since manufacturers and dismantlers are usually in the same areas, e.g. Guangdong Province.
problem is information disclosure risk of ICT products. Personal information can be disclosed in the absence of related regulations. Apart from safety and information security problems, the variation in environmental impacts of reuse products and components are usually obscure. The larger electricity consumption of reused products may cause higher environmental impacts, but the extended lifespan is usually regarded as environmentally friendly. To summarize, reuse of WEEE is popular in China at both the product and components level. And for nearly all types of WEEE, there are parts or components available to be reused in practice. However, without specific and feasible regulations governing the reuse of WEEE, security and environmental issues continue to cause problems in the reuse process.
5.2. Policy requirements for reuse of WEEE The comparison between the EU and China shows that reuse does not completely rely on the development of promotional policies. So is it even necessary to create and implement reuse policy for WEEE? At the product level, as there are so many security, health, and environmental issues related to reuse activities, it is surely necessary to create and implement proper regulation. Generally speaking, the aim of reuse policy is to prevent environmental pollution and to enhance resource efficiency in the treatment stage of WEEE by operators of WEEE collection, treatment, recycling, and disposal. From this point of view, reuse should be incorporated into existing policies, as reuse is generally environmentally friendly and the resource efficiency is higher due to extended product lifespans. The second question is what kind of policy and supporting standards are needed to promote the reuse of WEEE. To answer this, we first tried to analyze the material flow of used EEE at the product level. General reuse materials flows of WEEE in China are shown in Fig. 4. The reuse flow always starts from EEE users, who replace old EEEs with newer ones. Then the used EEE is collected by collectors, who will send the products to renovators and dismantlers. Through treatment of renovators and recyclers, the used EEE will go to secondhand EEE users or to EEE manufacturers via the form of reused components or recovered materials.
5. Policy implications for reuse of WEEE 5.1. Comparison of reuse policies and practices There are key differences in reuse polices between China and the EU owing to their different economies and regulatory backgrounds. The EU is in a leading position for EEE reuse policy. However, most EU member states did not place emphasis on reuse when the WEEE Directive was implemented. One key reason that appears to have (particularly in the past) reduced the effectiveness of WEEE legislation in EU is ambiguity in the terminology used to describe EoL product processes, and the lack of proper understanding of their advantages and disadvantages. There is also a lack of appreciation of the advantages of product/component reclamation over recycling. Under these circumstances, EU recyclers have typically found it easier to opt for material recovery rather than component/product reuse. As a result, reuse is typically neglected since reuse and recycling targets are combined, and it is easier to achieve the combined target only with recycling. Therefore, in practice in the EU, it is difficult for reuse operators to get reusable EEE from the WEEE 7
Resources, Conservation & Recycling xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
Whether to reuse the components from the view of sustainability
It is imperative to identify the aims and potential users of potential reuse policies. As indicated in Fig. 4, it is apparent that EEE users, WEEE collectors, and recyclers are the most important stakeholders for reuse of WEEE. The first stakeholder is the EEE user, who directly affects the reusability of usable EEE (Sabbaghi et al., 2016). When EEE users make the decision to discard used EEE, its reusability has been partly determined, especially for the environmental part of reusability (Lu et al., 2014). The environmental part is usually fixed with the physical characteristics compared with the latest products. In reality, EEE users usually make a decision whether to discard WEEE based on functional or other issues without consideration for the environment. The second stakeholder is the used EEE collector, who determines the flow of used EEE. Faced with collected WEEE, collectors usually have three choices: to sell the WEEE to the second-hand EEE market directly, to EEE renovators for refurbishment or remanufacture, or to recyclers. In this decision-making process, economic profit is the only factor of importance to WEEE collectors in China. The third stakeholder is the recycler, who dismantles the WEEE for components reuse and materials recovery. The WEEE that is sent to recyclers is always useless as a whole product, but some parts or components are reusable. Based on economic cost-benefit analysis, recyclers make choices to reuse or recycle components. Following stakeholder analysis, the next question is to determine the key points required for reuse policy. For EEE users, when they would like to replace EEEs in use, it is necessary to know what they can obtain through replacement. For their personal requirements, EEE users can get more function from new products through replacement, while for sustainability, the replacement should not be environmentally harmful. From the first perspective, there are no policy implications as it is just normal personal consumption. But from the second perspective, the promotion of reuse can be effective when integrated with sustainable consumption policies in order to change users’ behavior. In this situation, it is necessary to provide scientific evidence that when users replace and discard the EEE already in use, there will be positive or negative impacts on sustainability. For collectors, the key process is when they make choices as to how to deal with WEEE. Logically, basic functionality and product safety should be tested first, and then the possibility of profit will be considered for subsequent decision making. Therefore, policies and standards are required to formalize the testing process, which is the key factor for the option of reuse. As referred to above, there are already regulations for this in China, but targets have not been realized due to lack of feasibility (Fangzhong Dong and Li, 2013). Therefore, the reusability assessment methodology should be studied and implementation of related policies should be scientifically improved. For recyclers, the main process related to reuse is how to make dismantling plans for sustainable recycling. Specifically, it is important to know which types of components are reusable and whether it is better for sustainability to reuse them than to recover the materials in them. In practice, this is still based on purely economic cost-benefit analyses in China. However, components reuse is usually neglected, even forbidden, in formal recycling plants in China due to the fact that the existing WEEE management policy framework does not support reuse. In this regard, more policies are required to promote components reuse for sustainability. The key scientific question is how to evaluate the reusability of components from a sustainability perspective. To summarize, the key processes, policy requirements, and corresponding questions for reuse of WEEE are shown in Table 4.
Components reuse is not referred to in the WEEE Directive To reuse the components or recycle the materials
No effective components regulations in the mainstream policy framework
1) Policies to encourage collectors to send reusable products to reuse operators; 2) Guidelines for collectors to know which type of products can be reused when sending the WEEE to the next stakeholder 1) Policies to encourage recyclers to prepare for components reuse; 2) Guidelines for recyclers to know which components can be reused and sustainable methods for reuse Products reuse target integrated in the WEEE Directive, but not in all specific guidelines of member States
5.3. Technical knowledge gaps and potential solutions of reuse policy WEEErecyclers
WEEE collectors
To send the WEEE to secondhand market, renovators/remanufacturers, or recyclers
No specific regulations on product replacement in sustainable consumption policy Products reuse policy is not in the mainstream WEEE policy framework Lifespan has been integrated into sustainable consumption policy To replace the EEE in use or not EEE users
EU
Current Policy Key processes for reuse of WEEE Stakeholders
Table 4 Key processes, policy requirements, and scientific questions for reuse of WEEE.
China
Policy and Standards Requirements
Guidelines for users to know how to replace EEE for sustainable consumption
Key scientific questions
Whether to replace the EEE in use from the view of sustainability Whether to reuse the collected EEE or not from the view of sustainability
B. Lu et al.
There are still knowledge gaps in regards how to implement reuse within the existing policy frameworks, in both theory and in practice. (1) Potential methodological solutions for reusability assessment. The core scientific question is how to determine whether reuse of 8
Resources, Conservation & Recycling xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
B. Lu et al.
Fig. 5. Factors impacting reuse activities.
other recycling processes. However, only information on hazardous materials is provided by producers as a mandatory measure by the RoHS directive in the EU, and other life cycle information is not required. Only if enough product information can be obtained quickly and economically, the reusability of WEEE and its components can be assessed for planning sustainable treatment in the following stages.
WEEE is the more sustainable choice. There are many factors that affect reuse activities, including technological, economic, environmental, social, cultural, and legal factors, as shown in Fig. 5. Through impact on users, collectors, and recyclers, different factors will directly or indirectly affect the reuse of EEE. Most case studies on reuse focus on one factor, like the physical aspects or technology (Babbitt et al., 2009; Mazhar et al., 2005, 2007; Murayama and Shu, 2001; Pandey, 2008). A few studies take two factors into consideration when assessing product reusability (Anityasari et al., 2005; Mangun and Thurston, 2002; Murayama et al., 2004; Rugrungruang et al., 2009). There are only a few cases of studies focusing on sustainability assessment for reuse (Tecchio et al., 2016). Findings from literature reviews and surveys of the existing market indicate that only appliances with an energy rating equivalent to those of the cheapest new appliances on the market should be considered for reuse (O’Connell et al., 2012; Ruediger et al., 2011). Using the Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment (LCSA) method at the product level, the reusability of used mobile phones was assessed as an example and compared with materials recovery (Lu et al., 2014). In theory, the LCSA method is recommended to determine the reusability of EEE. But in reality, there are still other practical factors that impact reuse outside the scope of LCSA, including access to good quality WEEE and control of WEEE quality (Kissling et al., 2013; Sabbaghi et al., 2015). There is still a relatively large knowledge gap for feasible and easy-to-use methods for stakeholders to make effective decisions on products’ potential for reuse. The LCSA method should include more practical factors to fully fulfill the needs of reusability assessment. (2) Potential solutions for product reuse information. In addition to methodological issues, the current information system for WEEE cannot support reuse assessment effectively and efficiently. For potential WEEE users, information on the product functionality status, including current energy efficiency of the WEEE, needs to be compared with that for new products. But functionality tests are always economically unfeasible in both the EU and China, as the literature (Huisman et al., 2015) and practice (Fangzhong Dong and Li, 2013) show. For WEEE collectors or even recyclers, information on the material composition, structure, and inner component types of WEEE are also preferred for comparing materials recovery for disassembly or
5.4. Specific policy implications for reuse Based on the above analyses, it is important to introduce reuse as a key EoL option in the WEEE management system in China. The current policy framework can be improved to integrate reuse options. From the experiences of EU WEEE directive implementation, reuse should be integrated into the Regulation on management of WEEE recycling. One reason is that a lack of reuse strategies will cause partial and ineffective management. As shown in Fig. 4, it is obvious that reuse and recycling are always mixed with each other in several key stages of WEEE. Components reuse can provide income for formal recycling companies as demonstrated by experiences of the informal sector. It will thus be beneficial to integrate components reuse into the WEEE management framework. Therefore, we suggest that WEEE policymakers take components reuse into consideration in future policy revisions. Another suggestion is to make supporting standards for the implementation of the Regulation on Circulation of Used Electrical and Electronic Equipment. The lack of economically feasible functionality testing and labeling standards is the basic reason for the failure of this regulation. From lessons learned from the implementation of PAS 141 in the UK, it is clear that the perceived added value needs to outweigh the cost of certification, otherwise the standards will be useless (Frota et al., 2014). Therefore, there is a real need for policymakers to design economically feasible standards to support the regulation. In practice, how to incorporate reuse into existing standards is also complicated. The market is a major driver of WEEE treatment, and resource efficiency is always a way for recycling companies to pursue profit. Thus, it is also advised that improvements of environmental performance should be emphasized in the standards.
9
Resources, Conservation & Recycling xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
B. Lu et al.
Huisman, J., Botezatu, I., Herreras, L., Liddane, M., Hintsa, J., Luda di Cortemiglia, V., Leroy, P., Vermeersch, E., Mohanty, S., van den Brink, S., Ghenciu, B., Dimitrova, D., Nash, E., Shryane, T., Wieting, M., Kehoe, J., Baldé, C.P., Magalini, F., Zanasi, A., Ruini, F., Bonzio, A., et al., 2015. Countering WEEE Illegal Trade (CWIT) Summary Report, Market Assessment, Legal Analysis, Crime Analysis and Recommendations Roadmap. (Lyon, France, p. 61). Kissling, R., Fitzpatrick, C., Boeni, H., Luepschen, C., Andrew, S., Dickenson, J., 2012. Definition of generic re-use operating models for electrical and electronic equipment. Resources. Conservation and Recycling 65, 85–99. Kissling, R., Coughlan, D., Fitzpatrick, C., Boeni, H., Luepschen, C., Andrew, S., Dickenson, J., 2013. Success factors and barriers in re-use of electrical and electronic equipment. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 80, 21–31. Len, M., 2013. EPR and the role of reuse activities: opportunities for a resource efficient socially inclusive waste management system. In: Environment, A.E.C.a.B. (Ed.), EPR Revolution in the European Context, (Brussels, Belgium). Lu, B., Li, B., Wang, L., Yang, J., Liu, J., Wang, X.V., 2014. Reusability based on life cycle sustainability assessment: case study on WEEE. Procedia CIRP 15, 473–478. Mangun, D., Thurston, D.J., 2002. Incorporating component reuse, remanufacture, and recycle into product portfolio design. Engineering Management. IEEE Transact. 49, 479–490. Mazhar, M.I., Kara, S., Kaebernick, H., 2005. Reusability Assessment of components in consumer products A statistical and condition monitoring data analysis strategy. In: 4th Australian LCA Conference. Sydney, Australia. pp. 1–8. Mazhar, M.I., Kara, S., Kaebernick, H., 2007. Remaining life estimation of used components in consumer products: life cycle data analysis by weibull and artificial neural networks. J. Oper. Manage. 25, 1184–1193. Murayama, T., Shu, L.H., 2001. Treatment of reliability for reuse and remanufacture. In: Proceedings of Second International Symposium on Environmentally Conscious Design and Inverse Manufacturing. Tokyo, Japan. pp. 287–292. Murayama, T., Yamamoto, S., Oba, F., 2004. Mathematical Model of Reusability. Ieee Int Symp Electr, pp. 183–188. O’Connell, M., Hickey, S., Fitzpatrick, C., 2012. Evaluating the sustainability potential of a white goods refurbishment program. Sustain. Sci. 1–13. Pandey, V., 2008. Component Level Reuse by Incorporating Entropy Metrics into a Multiattribute Design Decision Model. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, United States − Illinois (p. 162). Parajuly, K., Wenzel, H., 2017. Potential for circular economy in household WEEE management. J. Clean. Prod. 151, 272–285. Ruediger, K., Fitzpatrick, C., Claudia, L., 2011. E-waste Challenges: Re-use Practices Principles and Standards. Ruediger, K., Eric, W., 2003. Computers and the environment: understanding and managing their impacts. In: Tukker, A. (Ed.), Eco-efficiency in Industry and Science. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, Netherlands (p. 285). Rugrungruang, F., Kara, S., Kaebernick, H., 2009. An integrated methodology for assessing physical and technological life of products for reuse. International Journal of Sustainable Manufacturing 1, 463–490. Sabbaghi, M., Esmaeilian, B., Raihanian Mashhadi, A., Behdad, S., Cade, W., 2015. An investigation of used electronics return flows: a data-driven approach to capture and predict consumers storage and utilization behavior. Waste Manage. 36, 305–315. Sabbaghi, M., Esmaeilian, B., Cade, W., Wiens, K., Behdad, S., 2016. Business outcomes of product repairability: a survey-based study of consumer repair experiences. Resources. Conserv. Recyc. 109, 114–122. Seyring, Nicole, Jakob Weißenbacher, M.K., Hestin, Mathieu, Lecerf, Louise, Magalini, Federico, Sinha Khetriwal, Deepali, Kuehr, Ruediger, 2015. Study on WEEE Recovery Targets, Preparation for Re-use Targets and on the Method for Calculation of the Recovery Targets. European Commission. Standardization, C.N.I.o., 2007. Terminology of Waste Product Recovery. China Standards Publisher, Beijing. Tan, Q., Zeng, X., Ijomah, W.L., Zheng, L., Li, J., 2014. Status of end-of-life electronic product remanufacturing in China. J. Ind. Ecol. 18, 577–587. Tecchio, P., Ardente, F., Mathieux, F., 2016. Analysis of Durability, Reusability and Reparability — Application to Dishwashers and Washing Machines. JRC. Truttmann, N., Rechberger, H., 2006. Contribution to resource conservation by reuse of electrical and electronic household appliances. Resources Conservation and Recycling 48, 249–262. VDI, 2014. Recycling of Electrical and Electronical Equipment − Re-use. VDIFachbereich Ressourcenmanagement (p. 67). Walther, G., Steinborn, J., Spengler, T.S., Luger, T., Herrmann, C., 2010. Implementation of the WEEE-directive −aEuro parts per thousand economic effects and improvement potentials for reuse and recycling in Germany. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Tech. 47, 461–474. Wang, F., Huisman, J., Meskers, C.E.M., Schluep, M., Stevels, A., Hagelüken, C., 2012. The Best-of-2-Worlds philosophy: developing local dismantling and global infrastructure network for sustainable e-waste treatment in emerging economies. Waste Manage. 32, 2134–2146. Williams, E., Kahhat, R., Allenby, B., Kavazanjian, E., Kim, J., Xu, M., 2008. Environmental, social, and economic implications of global reuse and recycling of personal computers. Environ. Sci. Technol. 42, 6446–6454. Yang, J.X., Lu, B., Xu, C., 2008. WEEE flow and mitigating measures in China. Waste Manage. 28, 1589–1597. Zeng, X., Gong, R., Chen, W.-Q., Li, J., 2016. Uncovering the recycling potential of new WEEE in China. Environ. Sci. Technol. 50, 1347–1358. Zhou, Y., Zhang, X., Guan, J., Wang, J., Bing, N., Zhu, L., 2016. Research on reusing technology for disassembling waste printed circuit boards. Procedia Environ. Sci. 31, 941–946.
6. Conclusions In this paper, we compared policies concerning the reuse of WEEE and present reuse practices in both the EU and China. We found that there are already guidelines and standards in the EU and China, but reuse as a key EoL option for WEEE has not been integrated into the mainstream WEEE recycling options. Based on the comparisons, policy requirements, corresponding knowledge gaps, and potential scientific solutions regarding the entire life cycle of WEEE, issues for key stakeholders were discussed. As a result, suggestions for reuse policy in China are provided to improve sustainable management of WEEE, including integration of the reuse concept into the current management framework as well as the promotion of component reuse. Although we recommend that reuse should be applied in WEEE recycling, there is still a lack of solid scientific evidence to support more detailed reuse standards. The LCSA method could be a powerful tool to assess the reusability of EEEs and their components, but its goal is always national or even global sustainable development, which may be in conflict with stakeholders’ needs. Moreover, since market fluctuations are another strong driver for the reuse of materials flows, it is also worthy of further discussion as to which standards should be promoted. Therefore, much future research is needed for more effective and efficient reuse management. Acknowledgement We acknowledge the support of the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos. 71303231, 71533005). This research was also supported financially by the 7th European Commission Framework Programme (GREENet − PIRSES-GA-2011-294931). References Anityasari, M., Bao, H., Kaebernick, H., 2005. Evaluation of product reusability based on a technical and economic model. In: A Case Study of Televisions, Proceedings of the 2005 IEEE International Symposium on Electronics and the Environment. New Orleans, LA USA,. pp. 199–204. Anonymous, 2012. Remanufacturing Terminology-Remanufacturing Term Guideline. APRA, Europe. BSI, 2009. Design for Manufacture, Assembly, Disassembly and End-of-life Processing (MADE) Part 2: Terms and Definitions. British Standard Institution, London (p.10). Babbitt, C.W., Kahhat, R., Williams, E., Babbitt, G.A., 2009. Evolution of product lifespan and implications for environmental assessment and management: a case study of personal computers in higher education. Environ. Sci. Technol. 43, 5106–5112. Borrman, J., Costa, E., Cox-Kearns, J., Crock, W., 2009. One global understanding of ReUse— common definitions. UNU StEP Initiat. Bovea, M.D., Ibáñez-Forés, V., Pérez-Belis, V., Quemades-Beltrán, P., 2016. Potential reuse of small household waste electrical and electronic equipment: methodology and case study. Waste Manage. 53, 204–217. Chi, X., Streicher-Porte, M., Wang, M.Y.L., Reuter, M.A., 2011. Informal electronic waste recycling: a sector review with special focus on China. Waste Manage. 31, 731–742. Devoldere, T., Willems, B., Duflou, J.R., Dewulf, W., 2009. The eco-efficiency of reuse centres critically explored − the washing machine case. Int. J. Sustain. Manuf. 1, 265–285. EU, 2008. In: E. Parliament (Ed.), Directive 2008/98/EC the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 November 2008 on Waste and Repealing Certain Directives. EU, 2012. In: E. Parliament (Ed.), Directive 2012/19/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 July 2012 on Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE). EU, 2017. Report from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on the Implementation of the Circular Economy Action Plan. European Commission, Brussels, Belgium (p.14). Dongi, Fangzhong, Li, Y., 2013. Why It Is Difficult to Implement the Second-hand Home Appliances Regulation. Wang, Feng, Kuehr, Ruediger, Ahlquist, Daniel, Li, J., 2013. E-waste in China: A Country Report. United Nations University, Tsinghua University, Bonn. Frota, Quariguasi, Neto, J., Dindarian, A., Reade, A., Gibson, A., 2014. The newly created Publicly Available Specification (PAS 141) for reusable electrical/electronic products: goals and research needs for successful uptake. J. Manuf. Technol. Manag. 25, 1135–1147. Helms, S., Goldstein, J., 1999. Books. J. Ind. Ecol. 3, 189–192. Hickey, S., Fitzpatrick, C., 2016. Reuse potential −evaluation of reuse opportunities within WEEE compliance schemes. In: Kuehr, Ruediger (Ed.), The Step Green Paper Series. United Nations University, Bonn Germany.
10