You bin some, you lose some
The recycling of IT equipment has so far been a half-hearted affair.
But recent European legislation to ensure that businesses live up to strict environmentally friendly standards is in the pipeline. Alana Juman Blincoe looks at the implications.
Articles about recycling PCs, or any type of IT equipment, are usually on the humorous side. They sometimes suggest making jewellery out of old keyboard digits or using the PC as the basis of some form of sculpture, and maybe even hanging on to the machine until it becomes an antique and fetches a great deal of money at some future auction at Sotheby's.
There are also the articles that actually encourage sensible ways of dealing with an old PC. For example, using it to teach friends or family to become computer literate and to give them fresh skills.
Then there are the suggestions to contact various businesses that would welcome any old PCs, printers or faxes, recycle them and pass them on to cash-strapped areas of the community such as schools, small businesses and charities. Finally, there are those articles which state that if kit can't be reused in any way, then under no circumstances should it be thrown into a skip, but taken to specialist recycling plants.
But how many businesses in the industry actively search out the most environmentally sound way of disposing of their old equipment? How many read those articles and think they contain good ideas, but then forget all about their fleeting moment of going green?
The annual Engagement Survey carried out by Business in the Environment (BIE) - a division of the industry body Business in the Community, which encourages environmental awareness within the enterprise community - found that the services sector, in which it included IT and communications organisations, fared the worst. The majority of companies within that sector lacked any strong or focused external or internal environmental practices.
Sarah Kline, spokeswoman for BIE, says: "People are becoming more aware of environmental policies and see green management as a competitive issue.
But the services sector is doing relatively poorly in comparison with the utilities sector, for example, because it thinks it doesn't have an impact on the environment."
David Nunn, managing director of IT consultancy and services company Data Assist, admits: "Resellers are too busy trying to run a business to think about green issues. A dozen items from this office alone have gone to the local tip in the past 12 months. It's very rare that a customer will ask us to dispose of items for them."
There's no doubt that Nunn is not alone in handling old equipment in this way - there is, after all, no legal requirement for anyone to do anything at all with redundant kit. But such a scenario is bound for change.
The European Union, acutely aware of the environmental damage done by plastics, circuitry, ferrous materials and cathode ray tubes (CRTs) when they are dumped in landfills, is defining legislation to ensure that end-of-life IT kit is dealt with responsibly.
In July, the Council Directive on Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) underwent its third review in the European Parliament. This means that after taking into account the delays which occur in passing a directive into national legislation, by 2001, recycling IT equipment will become a legal requirement for all businesses rather than just a goodwill option as is the case at present.
The directive, based more on precautionary and preventative measures, will set challenging targets when it comes into effect. But in some ways, the UK will not necessarily be starting from scratch when it comes to meeting those targets.
Joy Boyce, head of corporate environmental affairs at ICL and chairwoman of the Industry Council for Electronic Equipment Recycling (ICER), confirms that although the directive states a minimum of 4kg of electrical and electronic waste per person, per year must be recovered, the UK is already hitting a massive figure of between 12kg and 16kg. Boyce points out that this is even better than the figures being put forward by countries such as Sweden.
The directive also calls for some kind of reuse of 90 per cent of IT equipment - in the previous draft last July, it called for just 70 per cent - and Boyce says 90 per cent of a PC can be refurbished. Recycling company Shield Environmental Sustainable Technologies claims that last year the firm received 20,982 tonnes of waste electronic equipment and recycled 98.7 per cent of it.
But before the industry is lulled into thinking that no further effort has to be made in those areas, it must be remembered that the problem of electronic waste grows daily. Of the 12kg to 16kg mentioned by Boyce, the majority of that figure comes from equipment such as recycled washing machines. Also, the most recent figures, published in 1996 by ICER, show that out of 125,000 tonnes of IT kit discarded annually, less than 25 per cent is recycled.
But the weight of waste equipment recovered from individuals and the percentage of a piece of kit that can be re-used, reflect only a small part of the WEEE directive. It's main emphasis is to make manufacturers and suppliers of equipment responsible for ensuring a proportion of their computers and other types of product are collected and recycled once the machines come to the end of their lives.
To make sure that product is returned, vendors and suppliers will have to provide facilities, which could entail the establishment of public collection points. The environment will inevitably benefit as such a development will create among producers - as manufacturers and suppliers of equipment are referred to in the directive - a strong incentive to design durable machines that can be upgraded, disassembled and recycled more easily.
To make sure that it works, the directive states: "Each country in the EU should have a policy and action programme that ensures significant changes in the present patterns of development and production of electrical and electronic equipment."
The directive also demands that plastic parts weighing more than 50g (the directive previously stipulated 25g) are marked with the various generic standards of ISO 11469, 1043-1 and 1043-2, and that the content of hazardous components in the latest equipment, such as lead, mercury and chrom-ium, are eventually phased out by 1 January 2004.
More significant is the fact that products containing these substances will be banned after that date. But it's not difficult to see that the directive puts the onus on the manufacturers and suppliers. A number of vendors already feel that they are in a strong position to meet the stiff requirements of the WEEE directive.
ICL is known for its comprehensive environmental practices. The ICER programme gives third-party recycling companies a form of ICL accreditation, meaning they have to refurbish or recycle kit to a certain standard, as there is no legal prescription for this.
In all its contracts the vendor also offers to take back end-of-life equipment, while its Second Time Around (STA) scheme takes back PCs and laptops, refurbishes them and sells them on to the channel.
Steve Bushnell, UK environmental programmes manager at IBM, says: "The days of simply making a gesture that is environmentally friendly have long gone. People want to scratch below the surface, so companies have to get their act together.
"IBM has had an environmental policy - internal and external - since the 80s. Globally, we recycle 95 per cent of our products and our landfill is five per cent."
He adds: "Some customers ask us to dispose of product and we happily do so. If this becomes a criteria of the WEEE directive, as it looks set to do, then we are in a good position to fulfil it."
Compaq also pursues an environmental policy. It has a system in which customers can return used material. The vendor refurbishes and remarkets product, from which customers can share in any profit. The company also disposes of waste kit through partnerships it has with recycling and refurbishing organisations. Compaq has Return Sites in the US and Europe and claims its recycling programme handles up to 1,000 tonnes of IT equipment each year.
All this is comforting to know, but what isn't so reassuring is the fact that the channel may also eventually be held responsible for certain parts of the EU directive's implementation as it stands.
Boyce says: "The directive refers to distributors as any company that provides a product on a commercial basis to the party that is going to use that product.
"Retailers and resellers come under that definition. And the directive states that distributors, when supplying recent product, will have to offer to take back, free of charge, similar waste products."
Boyce also points out that the directive does not clarify how business-to-business transactions will comply with this element of the directive. "If a reseller sells 5,000 PCs to a small company, it is unclear if the onus is on the manufacturer or the reseller in actually collecting the old kit," she says.
And if the reseller or retailer has to become involved directly with taking back old kit, there remains the issue of storage space and the attached costs.
But the real problem for the channel may be in the way the government decides to implement the WEEE directive, says Boyce. "I have a fear that the government will take the present packaging law and rewrite it for the directive. If that were to happen, the onus would be on retailers and resellers to collect waste products. It would be a burden on the channel because it would have to report on what was sold, where it was sold and be responsible for taking it back. That is how the packaging law is set up.
"There may also be the problem of the channel having to pay for a packaging recovery note (PRN). This means if a reseller has to prove it has taken back and sent off a certain amount of kit for recycling, it would have to prove it through a PRN."
She adds: "If such legislation comes into effect it will be horrendous because it will lay more responsibility at the door of the channel and at extra cost."
Boyce believes that the WEEE directive has not made a proper assessment of the financial and environmental costs involved. Such scenarios may be just ifs and buts at the moment, but the implications are that if they do become legally binding policies for the channel, then life could become very difficult for some resellers.
Tony Cox, sales director at Compel, says: "We have a duty to comply with the directive. We outsource and the mainstay of our business is managed services, so this aspect of disposal falls on us and we have to be responsible for it. Fortunately, we are aware of the directive so we have a system for our customers which is carried out through partnerships with vendors and third parties.
"But the directive will greatly affect services organisations. The smaller operations that are caught unprepared will find it very difficult to operate in the services sector," he warns.
Yet despite thorough environmental policies from leading suppliers and manufacturers, and the fact that the WEEE directive could have a detrimental impact on the channel, a straw poll among the reseller community shows that most businesses are totally unaware of the existence of the directive.
A spokesman for Compaq re-seller WPB Computer Supplies says: "We have our own internal recycling policy, where we hand end-of-life products over to the council to dispose of in an environmentally sound way.
"Occasionally we receive product to be recycled from customers and we put it through an agent. But the directive is news to me. There are no upfront policies that I'm aware of and we would know if something like that had been passed on to us."
Barry Dodhia, sales director at Compaq reseller Hemini, also proves to be oblivious to the directive. He says: "I know that in the US, Compaq's channel is becoming involved in sites meeting certain environmental standards, but I'm not aware of anything happening in the UK. Maybe Compaq has got something under wraps and will announce it later, but we have not been told about anything.
"The directive is good because we need to ask ourselves what type of legacy we are leaving behind for future generations. I think in general, suppliers have not been very good at taking the green initiative. Printer companies, for example, get away with many things.
Dodhia adds: "I suspect there will be some problems for suppliers to comply with the standards and I'm sure that a lot of documentation will be changed. But for the resellers, the main concern would be that the goods being sold were covered by the directive's policies. However, 99 per cent of it will be down to the supplier. It doesn't really concern the channel."
Tony Beddows, managing director of IBM reseller Cambourn, is in the same boat. "I've never heard of the directive and I'm not so sure I want to.
IBM sends us so much information that sometimes it feels like a bottomless pit.
"I'm really not aware of anything like this, but I'm sure if I don't make myself aware, it will smack me between the eyes and by then it may be too late."
Boyce agrees: "No one will have to do anything until the directive becomes law. But what we are saying is that, the sooner businesses start thinking about how they are going to work with this directive, the cheaper and more efficient it will be for them when they come to do it for real."
PIONEERING PARTNERS JOIN FORCES TO RECYCLE ANY OLD IRON
Systems and services company ICL, and high street clothing retailer Marks & Spencer are working together on a project which will increase the amount of IT equipment that can be reused and recycled. This is the first of ICL's bespoke corporate recycling partnerships.
Marks & Spencer has about 17,500 PCs, back office systems and advanced electronic point of sale (EPOS) checkout equipment installed in 326 stores in the UK and Europe, plus warehouses and offices worldwide.
The ICL/Marks & Spencer bespoke recycling partnership aims to ensure optimum use of equipment. And it enables the retailer to donate second-life equipment to charities, schools and non profit-making organisations.
During the pilot scheme, which lasted 12 months, Marks & Spencer returned 4,000 PCs and tilling equipment, of which 75 per cent were reused, and 15 per cent of PCs were distributed to charities. Five per cent were resold and the remaining 5 per cent stripped down and environmentally recycled.
This represents a threefold return in investment for every £1 that Marks & Spencer puts into the scheme.
Rowland Hill, environmental affairs manager at Marks & Spencer, says: "In partnership with our IT services company, M&S has developed an approach to reusing and recycling obsolete equipment which is designed to minimise waste whenever hardware is upgraded. Obsolete PCs and tilling equipment is returned to ICL, which then decides on the most efficient form of reuse or recycling."
Equipment for reuse is stripped down, cleaned, checked and repaired where necessary and repackaged. This is then supplied back to Marks & Spencer where it can be used for lower grade applications or used to enable a faster extension of IT projects than could otherwise be achieved.
Marks & Spencer also donates a large number of these PCs to schools, voluntary groups and charities. When these organisations get a second-life computer, they also get a help box, a one-off service from ICL which helps them to set up the equipment.
The programme also allows ICL to buy back unwanted checkout tills, which are then used as a valuable supply of spares to help service the 13,000 ICL EPOS systems installed worldwide.
As part of Marks & Spencer's ongoing upgrade programme, more than 100,000 individual pieces of equipment will be removed, processed and recovered in the next 18 months and all of it will go through the ICL/Marks & Spencer recycling partnership programme.
ICER BEST PRACTICE GUIDELINES FOR EQUIPMENT RECYCLERS
Why such guidelines are needed:
- The European Commission is developing a directive to increase recycling of electronic and electrical equipment. This is likely to require recycling to be carried out properly by approved recyclers. These best practice guidelines may help towards defining the criteria for approved recyclers.
Companies are becoming increasingly aware that equipment should be recycled and can have a value. Users of recycling services need to be able to differentiate between the services offered by various recyclers and ensure they are sending equipment to people who can deal with it properly.
Guidelines and bench marks are needed to help recyclers achieve the best practice and to maximise the output of the recycling process.
Requirements for best practice:
- Appropriate licences or exemption certificates for all sites in accordance with waste regulations. Use of waste transfer notes and authorised transport operators.
An audit tracker which shows what happens to products, their components and materials throughout the recycling process. This will require detailed records and must be supported by a mass balance (total weight of products in equals total weight of resulting materials/components/products streams).
A method statement which clearly sets out procedures to be followed, in particular those for identifying, handling and disposing of any hazardous material within the feedstock.
Safe working practices. For example, operators to be provided with safety clothing and workplace monitored for dust and fumes.
Proper attention to process effluents (to land, water or air), including clear identification, notification on the audit tracker, and appropriate disposal.
Proper classification and disposal of any waste from their processes (controlled waste, special waste).
Correct disposal of wastes to appropriately licensed sites.
Testing of equipment before resale to ensure it complies with legislation.
Where subcontractors are used, companies must identify them and be able to demonstrate that those subcontractors also operate to the standards set out above.
In addition to these operating standards, 'best practice' should also include:
- innovative initiatives, such as designing products made from recycled components or materials, or redesigning
or modifying products to correct service faults
- working with manufacturers to influence the design process
- improved recycling processes that address environmental issues
- investment in recycling research and development
- operating efficiently in terms of the ratio of material or energy recovered from the recycling process to total input to that process
THE PROS AND CONS FOR THE INDUSTRY OF RECYCLING EQUIPMENT
The Industry Council for Electronic Equipment Recycling (ICER) has, as part of the second draft of its proposal for a directive on computer disposal, considered some of the main advantages and drawbacks to recycling from the perspective of resellers, retailers and distributors.
It concluded the following:
- Retailers and resellers welcome the fact that the directive now states that they only have to offer to take back a similar product when selling a new one.
All parties are concerned about requirements to physically take back end-of-life products, the fact that many retailers which directly import products will also be treated as producers, and the broad scope of the directive.
The problem with compulsory physical take-back of old products is that it will add unnecessary costs to implementing the directive. It may also reduce the environmental benefits of recycling because of additional transport required.
Retailers calculate that if it took just five minutes a day to deal with products coming back, it would add £78m per year to the wage bill in the retail sector. However, the more realistic calculation of about 30 minutes to deal with each take-back transaction would add between £170m and £180m per year.
Programmes would need to be designed and implemented to manage the health and safety risks for staff who will have to deal with returned products which may be old and damaged.
There are worries about using prime retail space to store waste products until sufficient quantities have been accumulated to transport onwards.
These costs will be particularly difficult for the many small and non-specialist retailers to bear.
There is a perceived lack of clarity in this draft of the directive on how producers will fund recycling and collection and how this will affect retailers in terms of take-back systems.
It is impractical for manufacturers to set up new systems for collecting waste material from private households.
It would be less costly and have less environmental impact to use existing local authority systems.