Compliance schemes prepare for battery producer “bun-fight”

From today, prospective compliance schemes can formally begin the process of seeking approval from the environment agencies for their scheme, signing up producer members and securing the deals that will allow them to collect and treat enough batteries to meet their members' recycling obligations.

And, speaking to letsrecycle.com, Peter Hunt, chief executive of Leeds-based compliance scheme WasteCare, revealed that he expected competition to be fierce between schemes that did receive approval to sign up members.

“First we deal with getting our applications done – I would expect four schemes – and then it'll be a bun-fight thereafter because we're all going to be trying to attract producers by any means necessary,” he said.

Mr Hunt added that he was confident that WasteCare would be successful in signing up members, citing up the logistics and collection network the company has set up via its Battery Back pre-compliance scheme.

Meanwhile, Duncan Simpson, commercial director at another prospective battery compliance scheme (BCS) – Valpak – told letsrecycle.com that it would be “actively trying” to recruit members, adding that “we're already in discussions with prospective reprocessors and collection avenues”.

And, Michael Green, managing director of West Midlands-based battery recycling company G&P Batteries, explained that: “There's an awful lot of preparation going on now as compliance schemes get to grips with what they have got to do.”

Mr Green also revealed that his company, which last month officially re-opened its Darlaston sorting and recycling facility after it was damaged by fire in 2007 (see letsrecycle.com story) had spoken to “a number of prospective schemes”.

It is expected that there will be, at most, 10 schemes, with some in the sector suggesting that the high registration costs – schemes will be expected to pay a £17,000 application charge and a £118,000 annual 'subsistence charge' to register – are in place to ensure that, while there is competition to keep prices down, there are fewer schemes than seen in WEEE.

Councils

Meanwhile, another prospective battery compliance scheme, ERP, has called on councils to take today as a sign that they need to start considering how they might work with a compliance scheme, even though they have no legal requirement to collect batteries.

“Local authority chief executives should be thinking about battery compliance schemes now,” said the company's general manager, Scott Butler.

“Although there is no legal requirement for local authorities to collect batteries, there will be public expectation once the government launches national battery recycling,” he added.

Question marks

While the battery regulations – which were laid before Parliament last month (see letsrecycle.com story) – are in place, question marks remain over aspects of exactly how the system will work.

The European legislation means the UK must collect 25% of waste portable batteries by 2012, and increase this to 45% by 2016. Currently, just 3% of waste batteries are collected for recycling.

And, producers will not become financially responsible for collection, treatment and recycling until January 1, 2010.

In light of this, Mr Green told letsrecycle.com that, with the system which came into force today, “I believe we'll collect more batteries but I am not at all convinced we'll meet the targets.”

In particular, he took particular issue with the interim targets set by the government, which start at 10% for 2010, and will involve the regulators taking a 'soft touch' policy when taking action against schemes that miss them.

“The interim targets are more or less worthless, it looks like it'll take a lot for action to be taken if someone misses them,” he said.

Approval process

Mr Simpson said that, for Valpak, there was still a question mark over how hazardous waste regulations would affect the storage and transporting of batteries, and whether a hazardous waste license would be required, explaining that “we're still waiting for clarification on the licensing regime”.

And, he questioned the wisdom of the regulations allowing small producers, with sales of less than one tonne a year of batteries, not having to join a compliance scheme to meet their obligations – which purely relate to having to submit sales data.

“We would have preferred everyone to have to have registered with a scheme. We could have taken a lot of the administrative burden away from government,” he explained.