Speaking to letsrecycle.com yesterday, Hewlett Packard's WEEE Directive programme manager Kirstie McIntyre said own brand responsibility should be an option for manufacturers, so they can take responsibility for their own brand of WEEE in arisings, rather than basing the responsibility on current market share.
Under the EU Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) Directive, producers in the UK and the rest of Europe will have to take responsibility for the collection and recycling of end of life electrical goods.
The government's preferred approach is a collective responsibility market share system which involves a company being held directly responsible for waste equipment based on the amount of new equipment it places on the market each year.
In response to the government's consultation on draft WEEE regulations, which closed on Friday, Hewlett Packard expressed disappointment that there was no mention of independent producer responsibility as a potential option for producers of WEEE.
Independent producer responsibility would enable companies who produce long lasting electronic equipment to benefit, the manufacturers suggested. Dr McIntyre explained: “Products have different life-spans, they come back as WEEE in different times. If a product is well manufactured and lasts, it is likely to take longer to become WEEE than a poorly manufactured product.”
She said that the collective responsibility option is unfair on producers of quality goods who have large market shares. “The percentage of electrical goods Hewlett Packard places on the market is not necessarily the same as the percentage of WEEE that comes back at any one time. Collective responsibility penalises the successful,” she said.
Eco Design
Dr McIntyre also claims that collective responsibility discourages “eco design”, she believes that companies who are involved with producing environmentally friendlier electronic equipment will want to see some return for their efforts.
“I didn't think the WEEE Directive was just about diverting from landfill, it should be encouraging companies not produce so much waste in the first place. If a company puts the money into a product that is easier to recycle than its competitors it shouldn't have to pay out again at the end, it wouldn't be worth the work in the first place,” she said.
Hewlett Packard believe that the best way forward could be a system similar to the one that is being implemented in Germany. Under the German system a governing body will look at a certain sized sample of WEEE and from this sample they will calculate a company's responsibility according to the arisings of its branded products. According to Hewlett Packard this system rewards companies whose equipment lasts and will encourage the production of more durable products.
Dr McIntyre said there is no need for the government to force companies to take independent producer responsibility in its regulations, it only needs to make it an option for them to take.
She said: “To sort out a process where everyone is responsible for their own goods isn't possible at this point in time, but we are working on it. It would be a more sensible option if the government left the possibility of independent producer responsibility open rather than try and alter the legislation at a later date.
“We are not going to have a system for sorting our own brands in place in the next six months, but it is a possibility down the road. If the government leave the option open and we are unable to sort anything out then we will have to continue with collective responsibility.”
Register for free to comment