Page 31 from: April 2013

31April 2013

Given their role as ‘important manufacturing

centres for new electronic products’, non-OECD

countries are deemed likely to have large sec-

ondary-use markets for refurbished UEPs. This

drives demand in those countries for raw mate-

rials derived from UEPs for use as inputs in the

manufacture of new products, the study argues.

And despite a common belief to the contrary,

88% of all UEPs exported as repaired/refur-

bished were sent ‘tested and working’. Only a

tiny fraction of all exported material – 0.8% to

be exact – was sent overseas for disposal.

Considering that whole products sold for reuse

as working electronic products ‘generally yield

a larger pay-out’ than whole products or com-

ponents intended for recycling, the former

made up the majority of all US exports in 2011

both in value as well as in volume terms

(respectively, US$ 762 million and 1.1 million

tons). These figures apply to products such as

computers, mobile phones and televisions. The

report also notes that commodity scrap metals

represented the next highest level of output of

UEPs, amounting to some 710 000 tons.

‘Considerable demand’
Commodity scrap materials such as metals,

plastics and glass ‘are still in considerable

demand’, the ITC continues. The same goes for

parts not intended for reuse – such as whole and

shredded printed circuit boards, wires and

cables, and separated leaded cathode ray tube

(CRT) glass, mercury lamps and batteries. At

91%, they represented the biggest volume by

far of total US exports of disassembled elec-

tronics and electrics in 2011, the report states.

With 323 772 tons of material sent to other coun-

tries for sorting, smelting or refining, the most

popular end-use for exported used electronics in

2011 was materials processing with a 43% share,

according to the ITC. ‘However, respondents did

not know the intended final use of nearly 18% of

UEP exports by weight,’ it is noted.

In some cases, overall demand was slowed by

‘tightened regulations’ among other factors, the

report observes. ‘The United States has limited

capacity to process UEPs in two segments of the

industry – CRT glass and final smelting – creat-

ing incentives to export CRT monitors, CRT

glass and circuit boards destined for smelting

to retrieve precious metals,’ says the ITC. The

world’s few available CRT processing facilities

are mostly located in Mexico and India, it adds.

‘US entities that handle CRT glass either export

it or, reportedly, stockpile it in the United States

because US processing is cost prohibitive,’ the

report underlines. Unlike other materials from

disassembled electronic products that are eas-

ily exported, US companies are required to

cover the recycling costs of CRTs themselves.

Besides, exports of CRTs are regulated by the

US Environmental Protection Agency. The

document concludes: ‘US regulations in place

in 28 states generally depress exports by chang-

ing the cost structure of the local UEP industry.’

Non-working stream
Describing current certification programmes

as ‘a significant factor in the UEP industry’, the

ITC states that the nation’s ‘most prevalent cer-

tification programmes’ – namely R2 and

e-Stewards – do more than promote industry

best practices. Both ‘likely limit exports of

whole “non-working” UEPs’ by requiring recy-

clers and others in the industry to carefully

track their exports and submit to audits to

verify their downstream processes. The Basel

Convention is cited as another obstacle in the

path of exporting non-working material even

though ‘there is strong demand in developing

countries’.

Mexico, India, Hong Kong, China and other Asia-Pacifi c markets made
up the ‘top fi ve destinations’ for US exports of e-scrap in 2001.

RI-3_E-Scrap.indd 31 08-04-13 09:16