A proposed law introduced in the California legislature last week would require makers of electronic equipment to phase out the use of hazardous materials in all devices sold in that state by 2008. Assembly Member Lori Saldaña (D) introduced Measure AB 2202, sponsored by Californians Against Waste , a grass-roots advocacy group with a track record of legislative successes.
Current California law requires the phase out of toxic substances in electronic devices with a video display. AB 2202 would expand the prohibition to include any electronic or battery-operated devices, including cellular phones and other wireless communications devices.
According to Mark Caldwell, executive director of CAW, the proposed California bill is identical to current mandates by the European Union to phase out hazardous materials in handsets and recycling policies. “We’re piggy-backing on the EU’s directives,” Caldwell said.
In that case, the mobile communications industry can breathe a sigh of relief. Joe Farren, public affairs director for CTIA, said that vendors already are addressing the EU restrictions, phase outs and recycling policies spelled out in the EU’s Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment and Restrictions on the use of Hazardous Substances Directives, thus California’s concerns would not spell any new challenges to the industry.
“These are pretty far-reaching directives,” Farren said.
“If the California law mirrors European Union law, this is no big deal” for the mobile communications industry, according to Joe Laszlo, an analyst with Jupiter Research.
EU policies require the phaseout, reduction or elimination of hazardous materials and exempts materials for which there are no viable alternatives. Under the WEEE Directive, member states must ensure by the end of this year that targets for reuse/recycling and recovery of electronic devices have been met. Under the RoHS Directive-which is an extension of WEEE-member states must ensure that all electrical and electronic equipment placed on the market are void of lead, mercury, cadmium, hexavalent chromium or flame-retardant plastics by this July.
“We’re sending a signal to the electronics industry that this issue will not go away,” Caldwell said. Yet, he added, “we haven’t heard from any vendors that this idea is crazy, though some are negotiating with the EU on the specific requirements for some phaseouts in order to comply.”
Existing California law has a take-back provision going into effect this spring, he said. “We think that for small consumer electronics, such as cell phones, retail take-back is the answer. That’s the model we’re looking for.”
The proposed California legislation roughly coincided with a new law now in force in Westchester County, N.Y., that requires mandatory recycling for cell phones, apparently the first in the nation. Both news reports actually served to underscore the wireless industry’s efforts to meet EU mandates already in place and the degree to which the industry has initiated voluntary recycling programs and supported commercial recycling efforts. It also reflected the classic debate over whether well-publicized, voluntary programs favored by industry are more effective than legally mandated requirements.
In fact, Westchester County’s mandate-which imposes penalties for residents who dispose of cell phones through any means other than county-approved programs-coincided with a level of success in that locale and elsewhere in the country by private recycling firms such as ReCellular Inc., which coordinates a number of programs in partnership with Verizon Wireless, Sprint Nextel Corp., T-Mobile USA Inc., Best Buy and Wal-Mart, whose retail stores accept used phones for recycling. CTIA’s Farren also pointed out the industry trade association’s participation in RecycleWirelessPhones.org, where participating members offer a wide variety of means to dispose of unwanted handsets properly. The RecycleWirelessPhones.org Web site offers links to more than a dozen wireless firms’ recycling programs.
Still, the magnitude of the challenge and differing views on the effectiveness of volunteer campaigns has stirred California to spell out in existing and proposed legislation the prescribed behavior as it seeks to counter a massive waste stream heading into its landfills and, by extension, its water supplies.
Of the half-million ton of e-waste headed annually for California landfills, about half can be attributed to PC monitors and TVs, and another quarter is PC-related, according to CAW. Less than 20 percent can be attributed to small consumer electronics, a category that includes cell phones, personal digital assistants, cameras and handheld games. Batteries remain a major concern, nickel-cadmium batteries in particular, but CAW believes that the mobile industry is migrating to lithium-ion batteries, which are not a concern at landfills.
In a state beset by e-waste, however, Caldwell said that a decade-long national program for voluntary recycling of batteries has only generated about a 20-percent compliance rate. According to CAW, better education, publicity and, perhaps, legislation may be necessary to spur greater participation.
