The first European waste from electric and electronic equipment directive obliged the Member States to collect 4 kg of used devices per inhabitant and year. The target of the amended directive focuses on the ratio between the amount of waste from electric and electronic equipment collected and the mass of electric and electronic devices put on the market in the three foregoing years. The minimum collection target is 45% starting in 2016, being increased to 65% in 2019 or alternatively 85% of waste from electric and electronic equipment generated. Being aware of the new target, the question arises how Member States with 'best practice' organise their collection systems and how they enforce the parties in this playing field. Therefore the waste from electric and electronic equipment schemes of Sweden, Denmark, Switzerland, Germany and the Flemish region of Belgium were investigated focusing on the categories IT and telecommunications equipment, consumer equipment like audio systems and discharge lamps containing hazardous substances, e.g. mercury. The systems for waste from electric and electronic equipment collection in these countries vary considerably. Recycling yards turned out to be the backbone of waste from electric and electronic equipment collection in most countries studied. For discharge lamps, take-back by retailers seems to be more important. Sampling points like special containers in shopping centres, lidded waste bins and complementary return of used devices in all retail shops for electric equipment may serve as supplements. High transparency of collection and recycling efforts can encourage ambition among the concerned parties. Though the results from the study cannot be transferred in a simplistic manner, they serve as an indication for best practice methods for waste from electric and electronic equipment collection.

To enforce material recycling of household waste at high levels, separate collection schemes often under a producer's responsibility regime were implemented in Germany since the 1970s and 1990s, respectively. The separate collection of recyclables (Sorting-Transportation-Sorting-Recovery' system) is assumed, guaranteeing higher purities of the collected material streams but also causing higher costs for logistics and the processing of the waste fractions. Several authors argue that since the rapid development of automatic sorting systems in recent years, a mixed collection of recyclables and residual household waste with a downstream sorting strategy (Transportation-Sorting-Recovery system) is cheaper than the currents system while keeping the product quality constant. This paper evaluates the economic saving potentials in logistics and the extra costs for separation technologies when implementing a mixed collection system for light packagings together with residual household waste in an East German city. The results show that costs for process technologies in a mixed collection system can overcompensate cost-saving potentials in logistics.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract