New Delhi: Experts have warned that the government’s proposed changes to the rules governing the disposal and recycling of electronic waste (e-waste) in India could backfire.
Experts say the proposed changes published in May, such as removing key players and meeting recycling targets for brands, threaten to destroy an ecosystem of e-waste management that was slowly picking up speed, He warned that the changes could instead exacerbate the mismanagement of e-waste, putting it in the hands of the informal sector.
Apart from raising the recycling target, which brands must achieve, the draft proposal also suggests that the scope of e-waste management rules be expanded to include more electronic products, 21 included in the current framework. to 95 in total.
The proposals were published in a draft notification by the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change on May 19. The draft amendment rules are open for public comments until Tuesday.
ThePrint reached out to officials of the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) via telephone and email and through email to officials of the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change for comments on the concerns raised by stakeholders on the proposed changes, but did not respond. not found. This report will be updated upon receipt of feedback.
India of the world third largest generator Number of e-waste after China and US UN Global E-Waste Monitor Report, Between 2019 and 2020, Indians Yield 10 lakh tonnes of e-waste, which was 7 lakh tonnes three years ago.
In India, the 2016 e-waste management rules sought to formalize the collection and recycling of this waste – which is hazardous to human health and the environment – by holding brands accountable for its recovery, and act State and Central Pollution Control Board with monitoring of the system.
However, while data show The volume of e-waste collected through the system has increased from 69,414 tonnes in 2017 to a little over 2 lakh tonnes in 2020, a large part of which is still processed by the informal sector. E-waste disposal by the informal sector is not recognized under the law.
Read also: There could be 75 million metric tons of e-waste in the world by 2030. Here’s How We Can Avoid It
What do the draft rules propose
Under the current framework, brands must withdraw a portion of their products at the end of life and send it to authorized dismantlers and recyclers. To do this, they may employ a Manufacturer Responsibility Organization (PRO) – a company that oversees the collection, dismantling and recycling of its products on behalf of the brand.
The CPCB is in charge of approving the PRO, and state pollution boards (PCBs) are authorized to issue licenses to other players in the recycling chain, such as the dismantler (who separates the product into its various parts), and the recycler (who converts has) commodity as its raw material).
The brand or PRO it employs is responsible for informing customers what to do with their e-waste, and for setting up collection centers where the waste can be deposited.
The new draft rules propose to amend the definition of Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) to eliminate PROs, dismantlers and collection centers and remove the burden from brands.
Previously, EPR was defined as “channelization of e-waste to ensure environmentally sound management of such waste” by brands, including authorized dismantlers, recyclers and Prof.
However, the draft amendment now proposes that the definition of EPR be changed to: “Meet recycling targets only through registered recyclers of e-waste to ensure environmentally sound management of such waste.” “.
Among the changes listed in the draft proposal is the introduction of fines, which violators, from brands to recyclers, will have to pay for failing to comply. It also suggested that recyclers and brands be asked to upload information about how much e-waste they have recycled on an online portal.
In addition, the draft proposal suggests setting up of a steering committee – comprising members from the environment ministry, CPCBs, state PCBs, and recycling and brand associations – to oversee the implementation of the revised e-waste management rules.
current system problem
According to the website of CPCB, there are 472 authorized dismantlers and recyclers in the country (of which dismantlers constitute the majority), and 77 Pros.
Although the rules for e-waste collection in India have since 2011 – 2011 rules were replaced by new ones 2016After another amendment in 2018 , Experts say there is room for improvement. A 2020 report good The CPCB found that as of 2018, 95 per cent of the e-waste was processed by the informal sector.
a study by researchers from Monash University Malaysia, published last month in the journal mineral engineeringfound that India has a limited number of formal recyclers who have insufficient capacity to process the total e-waste generated in the country.
“Furthermore, there is limited information about the final waste management strategies implemented to dispose of the waste generated by these authorized recyclers (such as solid waste residue and acidic liquid waste after recycling e-waste),” it said.
The 2020 CPCB report also found that dismantlers and recyclers were flouting norms by claiming to process a high proportion of e-waste, as they did not have the space. It also indicated that leakages in the informal sector are likely to occur through recyclers and dismantlers, and that state PCBs were not conducting adequate investigations to prevent these leaks.
Speaking to ThePrint, Pranshu Singhal, Founder, Gurugram-based PRO Karo Sambhav, said, “The e-waste management rules definitely need to change as there are problems in monitoring and compliance. There is no mechanism to check the physical balance of what the recycler receives and the output post processing, which needs to be strengthened. PROs and recyclers need to be audited. ,
An official of the Maharashtra Pollution Control Board (MPCB) told ThePrint that the rules needed to be changed because shortage of manpower was an issue. There are 116 authorized dismantlers and recyclers in the state.
“Our biggest concern is that dismantlers have been put away, as we have more dismantlers than recyclers in the state. If they are removed, we need some alternative. We are also concerned about how the collection mechanism will work,” said the field officer, who did not wish to be named.
This view was echoed by Assam PCB officials, who spoke to ThePrint on condition of anonymity.
Why the industry is concerned about the new rules
Under the proposed definition of EPR, brands will no longer be responsible for the collection of e-waste, and can purchase certificates from recyclers to show that they have met their targets under the rules.
“It completely goes against the spirit of EPR,” said Preeti Mahesh, chief program coordinator of Toxics Link, a Delhi-based environmental NGO that has been involved with India’s e-waste policy for over a decade.
“The concept of Extended Productive Responsibility is associated with the idea of a circular economy. If brands are responsible for collecting their waste, they are more likely to try and design products that have a longer life or create less waste. do,” she said.
As brands are no longer responsible for the take-back system, Mahesh worries that the responsibility for collection will rest with the recyclers, and that the concept of EPR “has been reduced to simply purchasing certificates from recyclers”.
There is also concern that regulations will enable recyclers to engage further with the informal sector when it comes to collection and disposal.
Shobha Raghavan, a Bengaluru-based public relations officer, chief operating officer of Sahas, told ThePrint: “In the current framework, the PRO is held responsible for ensuring that the recycler is actually recycling and recycles the waste within the system. Not broadcasting. Now, that entire burden will be on the State Pollution Control Boards, which do not have the bandwidth.”
“There is a lot of underhand paper trading going on, and once the certificates are issued, who will account for the checks and balances? Brands can lose out if the recyclers are not genuine, because it is the job of the government to check. Will happen,” said Deepali Khetriwal, co-founder of e[co]Work, a Delhi-based organization that audits e-waste recyclers.
Both Khetriwal and Raghavan said the pricing and availability of certificates, which are likely to be based on recycling capacity, could create volatility in the market.
The increase in product types that have to be recycled can also pose a problem for the ability of the ecosystem to process e-waste.
“This huge jump in product types and categories will only make recycling that much harder. With only 21 product types, collection and recycling was a challenge. Now the number of categories of products has more than quadrupled. This is a radical departure from the arrangement, and one that we did not expect,” said Raghavan.
(Edited by Amritansh Arora)
Read also: Repairing – not recycling – is the first step in tackling e-waste from a smartphone