Executive Summary
The need to effectively and efficiently address end-of-life waste arising from electrical and electronic products is acknowledged as an important priority in need of industry, government and community action. Evidence and activity worldwide is highlighting the need to develop sustainable solutions that can significantly reduce the life-cycle environmental impacts associated with production and consumption. This imperative has been acknowledged through the Ministry for the Environment's discussion document on product stewardship and water efficiency labelling.
It is understood this project may contribute to the Ministry's policy development process with a view to developing a coherent product stewardship policy for various product categories and waste streams in New Zealand, including whiteware. The project objectives and terms of reference as outlined in the project brief were extensive and challenging. In particular, the project aimed to: "Study the issues associated with the environmental impact of the whiteware sector, case study any existing product stewardship schemes to address this and establish what assistance a national product stewardship policy could offer."
Within the context of life-cycle thinking and the need to pursue sustainable production and consumption, the widely accepted definition of 'product stewardship' provided the guiding concept for the project ie "Product Stewardship is the term used to describe an approach whereby producers, importers, brand owners, retailers, consumers and other parties involved in the life cycle of a product accept a responsibility for the environmental impacts of the products through their life cycle."
Whiteware is made predominantly of steel. The steel component varies according to the appliance type, ranging from 90% for clothes dryers and cookers to less than 60% for dishwashers. The presence of metal is a major factor in the economic viability of whiteware recycling. Steel yields a relatively small price (less than NZ$200/tonne) while non-ferrous metals have significant monetary value.
An estimated 600,000 whiteware units are sold in New Zealand every year. [Market research information, provided by Fisher & Paykel Ltd.] More than half of the whiteware sold in New Zealand is imported. In 2005, approximately 330,000 units were imported into New Zealand, representing 55% of the total market. The New Zealand whiteware market is characterised by a single, dominant domestic manufacturer and distributor (Fisher & Paykel Appliances Ltd) whose products represent as much as 50% of the total whiteware market. Overseas studies have found that whiteware represents approximately 60-70% of the e-waste stream by weight. [Data average from: Network Recycling (2003)CA Site WEEE Capacity in the UK: An Assessment of the Capacity of Civic Amenity Sites in the United Kingdom to Separately Collect Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment; and Industry Council for Electronic Equipment Recycling (2005)Interim Status Report on WEEE in the UK; January 2005.] This indicates that whiteware could represent between 48,000 and 56,000 tonnes of waste every year in New Zealand.
In relation to municipal activity, local authorities have responsibility for managing domestic waste and recycling in their geographical areas. Some councils divert resalable whiteware through stores at their recycling centres. Others simply collect quantities of whitegoods at their collection sites and a scrap metal dealer will visit, crush the appliances with a mobile crusher, and pay the council a price according to the market rate for scrap.
The re-use and/or recycling of whiteware is considered environmentally preferable compared to landfilling for several reasons. Landfilling results in the loss of valuable materials including ferrous and non-ferrous metals. To extract from landfill, process, assemble and transport these materials involves enormous amounts of resources. In addition, whiteware can contain some hazardous substances. Major appliances contain fewer hazardous substances than other electronic and electrical equipment. Nevertheless, appliances (particularly older products) do contain various toxic and hazardous substances. These substances include lead, cadmium, hexavalent chromium, CFCs, HCFCs, brominated flame retardants, as well as oils and greases from refrigerators and other major appliances. [Environment Australia (2001)Major Appliances Materials Project.]
Most whiteware in New Zealand is not ending up in landfill. There is no reliable data on the quantities that are ending up in landfill, however, the opinion of the waste and recycling industry and local authorities is that up to 95% of whiteware waste is being recycled in New Zealand, at present. Overall, the environmental impacts of whiteware disposal in New Zealand appear to be relatively low because there is currently a high rate of diversion of product for recycling. The resulting shredder floc has the potential to be an environmental concern, however publicly available evidence is currently lacking in New Zealand.
It is widely acknowledged that Design for Environment (DfE) has a key role to play in maximising overall environmental performance. More specifically a DfE strategy that follows the waste management hierarchy has the potential to reduce end-of-life whiteware waste, including shredder floc. While there is evidence of DfE related environmental improvements in imported whiteware, there does not seem to be any information about end-of-life collection and recycling schemes operating in New Zealand.
This report describes the two noteworthy whiteware product stewardship schemes currently underway in New Zealand ie Fisher & Paykel and Electrolux. A range of views, concerns and perspectives is also presented. Beyond the activities of these two companies there is no compelling evidence or widely promoted information that any other whiteware importers or suppliers are proactively pursuing a product stewardship approach to the life-cycle management of the products they supply in New Zealand.
The environmental and economic benefits resulting from whiteware product stewardship in New Zealand are not insignificant, particularly in relation to Fisher & Paykel's scheme.
- The take-back scheme contributes to materials recycling and resource conservation by diverting end-of-life from landfill. Approximately 32,000 whiteware units diverted from landfill were recovered and recycled during 2004.
- DfE contributes to waste avoidance, materials efficiency and reduced use of hazardous substances.
- The take-back scheme helps to safely recover and control hazardous and toxic substances that might otherwise lead to human health or ecosystem impacts.
- Recovery of materials back into the economy eg reuse and/or recycling of metals and plastics.
- Cost reduction related to Fisher & Paykel's waste management activities for post-industrial waste.
- Costs savings of materials efficiency improvements in product development and manufacturing.
- Costs savings to whiteware retailers through participation in Fisher & Paykel scheme.
- Broader economic benefits of facilitating the removal of inefficient whiteware from the energy grid.
While regulatory interventions are potentially valid and necessary in some cases, there is scope for environmental change and improvement through other, non-regulatory means. The success of non-regulatory measures would depend significantly on the level of voluntary commitment, foresight and resourcing from the sector, the Government and other relevant stakeholders. In relation to regulatory and non-regulatory interventions and incentives, a diverse range of options was canvassed in regard to:
- DfE;
- consumer education and information;
- market development for recovered materials;
- end-of-life management - collection and processing.
Government policy, together with a proactive whiteware sector, could drive and support a range of very specific measures that would target different aspects of the whiteware life cycle with a view to maximising waste avoidance and resources recovery in a cost-effective manner. Several options were considered in concept form and provide a sense of what may be relevant and possible within New Zealand:
- Option 1 - Status quo: industry driven and voluntary schemes (not recommended by the consultants)
- Option 2 - Industry-led schemes with free-rider regulation (recommended by the consultants)
- Option 3 - Mandatory approach to product stewardship (not recommended by the consultants)
- Option 4 - Voluntary and regulatory mix of approaches (strongly recommended by the consultants)
- Option 5 - Mandatory refund system (strongly recommended by the consultants).
Several specific issues emerged from the project including lessons learned that should inform ongoing product stewardship policy formulation in New Zealand. These observations and conclusions are accompanied by specific recommendations aimed at real-world solutions and action.
