304
undertake chemical testing of products. If these measures do not succeed, and producers are found to be non-compliant, corrective steps are needed to isolate and
clear affected products from distribution.
Energy effi ciency standards, including power caps, allowances, and power management, and information requirements, focus on reducing the energy used by a
device to perform a particular defi ned task. For example, energy allowances are
higher for categories of PCs with more powerful processors. Such standards do not
necessarily result in an overall reduction in energy use of a product, as new products
with increasing performance over time may use more energy overall, even if energy
used per unit output falls.
Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) legislation, requiring producers to
fi nance and organise collection, treatment, and recycling of their products at end of
life, has been enacted for a range of different types of products and in many different jurisdictions internationally. The main intention of such regulations is to ensure
producers have fi nancial incentives to design their products to be easier to treat and
recycle at end-of-life, and also therefore to improve recycling and standards of environmental protection at end of life. Typically such regulations covers batteries,
packaging, waste electrical and electronic products, tyres, household hazardous
wastes, and automobiles in many areas of the world.
1
This chapter draws on two decades of the author’s personal experience working as
an environmental/sustainability professional in the electronics and recycling sector
within Europe, and also a number of associated case studies (Martin 2008 ; Webb 2014 ;
Mayers 2007a , b ; Mayers and Butler 2013 ) as an example of how producers respond
to this new wave of product-based regulations. Content has also been taken from a
presentation by the author prepared for a taught module on Life Cycle Assessment at
the Centre for Environmental Strategy at the University of Surrey (Mayers 2011 ).
2 Dealing with Hazardous Substance
Restrictions in Products
Regulations can target substance use in specifi c sectors, such as with the European
Union (EU) Restriction of Hazardous Substances Directive covering electrical and
electronic equipment (2011/65/EU) and the Packaging and Packaging Waste
Directive (94/62/EC), or may focus on specifi c chemicals across product classes,
such as with Danish lead restrictions (Danish Statutory Order No. 1012). The EU
REACH Regulation (EC/1907/2006) takes a combined approach by restricting
chemicals according to their specifi c applications. Overall, applicable substance limits depend on the product and material concerned. For example, as of January 2015,
there are around 17 different hazardous substance regulations in Europe affecting
Sony Computer Entertainment products, restricting 46 different substances, and
including 78 different limit values for different types of products and materials.
1 See special feature volume on EPR : Journal of Industrial Ecology, Vol. 17, Issue 2, 2013.
K. Mayers
undertake chemical testing of products. If these measures do not succeed, and producers are found to be non-compliant, corrective steps are needed to isolate and
clear affected products from distribution.
Energy effi ciency standards, including power caps, allowances, and power management, and information requirements, focus on reducing the energy used by a
device to perform a particular defi ned task. For example, energy allowances are
higher for categories of PCs with more powerful processors. Such standards do not
necessarily result in an overall reduction in energy use of a product, as new products
with increasing performance over time may use more energy overall, even if energy
used per unit output falls.
Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) legislation, requiring producers to
fi nance and organise collection, treatment, and recycling of their products at end of
life, has been enacted for a range of different types of products and in many different jurisdictions internationally. The main intention of such regulations is to ensure
producers have fi nancial incentives to design their products to be easier to treat and
recycle at end-of-life, and also therefore to improve recycling and standards of environmental protection at end of life. Typically such regulations covers batteries,
packaging, waste electrical and electronic products, tyres, household hazardous
wastes, and automobiles in many areas of the world.
1
This chapter draws on two decades of the author’s personal experience working as
an environmental/sustainability professional in the electronics and recycling sector
within Europe, and also a number of associated case studies (Martin 2008 ; Webb 2014 ;
Mayers 2007a , b ; Mayers and Butler 2013 ) as an example of how producers respond
to this new wave of product-based regulations. Content has also been taken from a
presentation by the author prepared for a taught module on Life Cycle Assessment at
the Centre for Environmental Strategy at the University of Surrey (Mayers 2011 ).
2 Dealing with Hazardous Substance
Restrictions in Products
Regulations can target substance use in specifi c sectors, such as with the European
Union (EU) Restriction of Hazardous Substances Directive covering electrical and
electronic equipment (2011/65/EU) and the Packaging and Packaging Waste
Directive (94/62/EC), or may focus on specifi c chemicals across product classes,
such as with Danish lead restrictions (Danish Statutory Order No. 1012). The EU
REACH Regulation (EC/1907/2006) takes a combined approach by restricting
chemicals according to their specifi c applications. Overall, applicable substance limits depend on the product and material concerned. For example, as of January 2015,
there are around 17 different hazardous substance regulations in Europe affecting
Sony Computer Entertainment products, restricting 46 different substances, and
including 78 different limit values for different types of products and materials.
1 See special feature volume on EPR : Journal of Industrial Ecology, Vol. 17, Issue 2, 2013.
K. Mayers