MEPs want to cut out waste

Committee to vote for more recycling but divisions over plans to penalise firms.

Europe’s unwanted toasters, televisions and tumble dryers are in MEPs’ sights, as the European Parliament’s environment committee prepares to vote next week (22 June) for more recycling of waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE). 

Most MEPs are converging behind a target that 85% of this type of waste should be recycled from 2016 – a goal that also finds favour with manufacturers of domestic appliances and electronic goods, as well as with Green MEPs.

The Parliament’s approach differs from the European Commission’s proposal, which many national governments fear is too ambitious. The Commission wants countries to recycle waste equivalent to 65% of the average weight of new goods put on the market over the preceding two years.

Industry and environmentalists have both argued that the Commission’s target is flawed. They say it is based on the mistaken assumption that consumers always throw out old equipment when they buy a new product. In many countries, especially in central and eastern Europe, they point out, consumers keep their old television or give a used fridge to a relative – making the 65% target difficult to reach. Karl-Heinz Florenz, a German centre-right (EPP) MEP who is drafting the Parliament’s position, said he had proposed an alternative target to help the new member states with “a fairer goal” based on “WEEE arising in the real world”.

Treatment concerns

The domestic appliance industry hopes that the planned revision of the 2004 WEEE directive will strengthen governments’ efforts to reduce the amount of waste that is sent to landfill or illegally shipped outside Europe. “The big issue is to ensure that 100% of waste is properly treated,” said Luigi Meli, the director-general of the European Committee of Domestic Equipment Manufacturers (CECED). Currently, he contends, “two-thirds of it is escaping or is beyond the scope of the legislation”.

Most national governments have a poor record of implementing the original WEEE directive. The Commission found in 2008 that only one-third of electronic waste was being treated in line with the law, with the rest going to landfill or being inadequately treated outside the EU.

MEPs are likely to support amendments calling for tougher action to tackle illegal waste shipments, including an obligation on the waste exporter to prove to customs that their cargo is legal. For Florenz, these provisions are important to ensure that “our valuable raw materials” are not lost, with consequent long-term disadvantages for European industry. Meli emphasised that the problem needed to be tackled as a matter of principle: “Illegal shipments of waste mean that someone else is having to treat a problem that was created in Europe.”

Click Here: New Zealand rugby store

Paying the penalty?

There are some divisions about whether manufacturers should be penalised for using raw materials that are hard to recycle. Socialist, Liberal and Green MEPs’ draft amendments seek penalties for companies that use ‘hard-to–recycle’ materials, for example complex plastic coverings or mercury. Florenz opposes such penalties; he believes that a 2008 eco-design directive addresses this issue.

This view is in turn contested by Stéphane Arditi of the European Environmental Bureau, who claims that extra demands in WEEE could complement rather than replicate the eco-design law. “If we give the market incentives, we can create a real dynamic for the redesign of electrical and electronic equipment,” he said.

But on most big issues, MEPs on the environment committee are united, auguring a quick agreement on the draft legislation. The WEEE legislators are under pressure to make progress, as a companion directive on restricting hazardous substances (RoHS) is heading for an early (‘first reading’) agreement in the autumn. Florenz has indicated that he is prepared to aim for a first-reading agreement, on condition that quality is not sacrificed to speed.