With reform of the WEEE collection and treatment system in full swing, Scott Butler, Managing Director of ERP UK, talks us through the changes being brought about by the recast directive and government’s Red Tape Challenge
Like everybody else in the industry, we have been eagerly awaiting the outcome of BIS’s consultation on the WEEE recast and the Red Tape Challenge.
It has been well documented that we have had a number of issues with the old UK WEEE (waste electrical and electronic equipment) system. Organisations that were neither responsible, nor had been authorised by producers to be responsible, for making the decisions on how WEEE is collected and treated were provided a 100 per cent guarantee that whatever they collected would have to be paid for by somebody else. This created a uniquely dysfunctional market. Through the EU recast and the government’s Red Tape Challenge (and Review of Producer Responsibility Regimes), we have had a rare opportunity to reboot the system. Various forums and the government’s own consultation have shown that the majority of stakeholders recognise the need for change.
On 11 October 2013, BIS confirmed that we would move ahead with its Option 3 – implementing a collection target and compliance fee to finance the collection of household WEEE (other options considered were: do nothing; create a national compliance scheme; or match collection sites to producer compliance schemes (PCSs)). So, after months of debate and discussion, we now have a clearer idea of what the future UK WEEE system will look like.
Looking to the future, we need to build a system that strengthens the relationship between producers and the waste that they are responsible for. Compliance schemes should not be collecting WEEE from local authorities and other stakeholders unless they have producer members who need this WEEE or have an equivalent advance agreement with another scheme. The UK needs a system that provides the right incentives for ensuring that as much WEEE as possible is collected and treated, and to the highest possible standards. To tackle the real challenge, Option 3 must shift the emphasis away from seemingly never-ending and circular arguments about the trading of WEEE evidence.
The freedom provided to local authorities to retain the value from WEEE streams is another positive step. But we also need to future-proof the system and not be distracted by the current global resources value boom. This will ensure that support for WEEE collections and treatment is provided in good times as well as bad. To ensure stability, PCSs with robust financial models – based on solid relationships with producers – surely offer the best way forward.
In terms of UK business, I believe the recast could have a positive impact. The de minimis proposal, for example, is interesting, innovative and pragmatic, and it is hard to argue against something that promotes growth and a fairer deal for smaller businesses, especially in uncertain economic times. The five-tonne threshold seems a sensible starting point, but the government should keep an eye on this threshold level to ensure that environmental responsibilities are shared equitably across all producers.
The UK has a well-developed network of recyclers, and I do not believe that the proposed changes will have any negative impacts for them. The government’s consultation has shown that it believes changes to the system will reduce the cost of compliance for producers, allowing more funds and resources to be channelled into reuse and recycling. Lastly, if the recast delivers fair and healthy competition between compliance schemes in the UK, this will have a positive impact on business.
The one thing that we do know for sure is that targets for collection and recycling will increase, and reuse will continue to be recognised as vital in the UK. We need to ensure that any changes promote environmental performance and drive up treatment standards. Through the development of its Best Available Treatment, Recovery and Recycling Techniques (BATRRT), the Environment Agency is also working hard to ensure that the environmental performance is improving. Finally, the WEEELabex/Cenelec standard will have a further positive impact on recycling performance.
The challenge to the WEEE community is to work in partnership to secure a future WEEE system that will: promote competition in the right places; ensure environmental quality; and provide assurance to local authorities that they will always be supported by producers, through PCSs.
Get our weekly digest
resource.co article ai
How will the government and DMOs address the challenges of including glass in DRS while ensuring a level playing field across the UK?
There's no easy solution to include glass in the DRS while maintaining a level playing field. Potential approaches include a phased introduction of glass, potentially with higher deposits to reflect its logistical challenges. The government and DMOs could incentivise innovation in glass packaging design and subsidise dedicated return points for glass-handling. Exemptions for smaller businesses unable to handle glass might also be necessary. Any successful solution will likely blend several approaches. It must address the differing priorities of devolved administrations, balance environmental benefits with logistical and cost implications, and be supported by robust consumer education campaigns emphasizing the importance of glass recycling.