Sustainable Development 09MMP409 Coursework David Coombes – A911652
09MMP409 – Sustainable Development: the Engineering Context
Contents 1.0 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 3 2.0 Product Recovery .............................................................................................................................. 3 2.1 What is product recovery? ............................................................................................................ 3 2.2 Product recovery goal ................................................................................................................... 3 2.3 Waste Hierarchy............................................................................................................................ 4 3.0 Non-Producer responsibility legislation ............................................................................................ 4 3.1 Duty of Care .................................................................................................................................. 4 3.2 Precautionary Principle ................................................................................................................. 4 3.3 Command and Control vs. Economic Instruments ....................................................................... 5 4.0 Producer Responsibility Legislation .................................................................................................. 5 4.1 Waste of Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) ................................................................. 5 4.1.1 Overview ................................................................................................................................ 5 4.2 End-of-Life Vehicles (ELVs) ............................................................................................................ 6 4.2.1 Overview ................................................................................................................................ 6 4.3 Restriction of Hazardous Substances (RoHS) ................................................................................ 6 4.4 Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and restriction of CHemicals (REACH) ........................... 6 5.0 Directive Implications ....................................................................................................................... 7 5.1 Technological Issues...................................................................................................................... 7 5.2 Business and Economical Issues ................................................................................................... 8 5.3 Resource Requirement Issues ....................................................................................................... 9 5.4 Logistic and Operational Planning Issues ...................................................................................... 9 5.5 Information Management Issues ................................................................................................ 10 5.6 Manufacturing Supply Chain Issues ............................................................................................ 11 6.0 Conclusion ....................................................................................................................................... 11 7.0 Appendices ...................................................................................................................................... 13 Figure 1 - (24) .................................................................................................................................... 13 Figure 2 ............................................................................................................................................. 13 Figure 3 ............................................................................................................................................. 14 Figure 4 ............................................................................................................................................. 15 Figure 5 ............................................................................................................................................. 16 Figure 6 ............................................................................................................................................. 16 8.0 Bibliography .................................................................................................................................... 17
2
David Coombes – A911652
09MMP409 – Sustainable Development: the Engineering Context 2. Recent producer responsibility legislation such as ELV and WEEE European Directives are aimed at reducing the quantity of waste from such products sent to landfill at the end of their life. Discuss the nature of these directives and what their implications are for the design of affected products and for their manufacturing supply chain.
1.0 Introduction “In the future all companies will need to implement strategies to reduce the environmental impact of their products and services. For some, environmental management is seen as a necessary evil, with little economic benefit. This is a very short-sighted view. In fact, companies failing to address environmental performance in product design and development will find it increasingly difficult to be competitive into the next century”. (1). The increased awareness regarding the situation of our environment has lead to an increase in legislations and regulations trying to control the problem. These legislations are forcing companies and organisations to become more environmentally friendly, with the potential to go out of business if the legislations are not adhered to. The legislations are there to try and guide companies to adopt a more proactive approach to the development of more environmentally friendly activities, rather a reactive approach to what already has happened. This proactive approach will eventually be the difference between succeeding and failing, both on the business front and the environmental front. Extended producer responsibility (EPR) is “an environmental policy approach in which a producer’s responsibility for a product is extended to the post-consumer stage of a product’s life cycle.” (2). In recent years, legislations that implement this extended responsibility are becoming more and more common. These legislations are aimed to reduce the amount of material sent to landfill. This is achieved by promoting the re-use and recycling of recoverable materials. These legislations affect whole design process and the whole supply chain. This report will initially look at background information regarding product recovery and aids used to improve product recovery. A shift towards legislations, initially non-producer responsibility based legislation then towards producer responsibilities regulations, will take place. Pen ultimately a view of the implications caused by these legislations. This will directly precede the conclusion, where issues will be brought together and the report summarised.
2.0 Product Recovery 2.1 What is product recovery? Product recovery is “the transformation of the used and discarded goods back into a useful form through reuse, repair, recondition and recycle processes.” (3). This idea of an extended life for every product has been brought forward due to the scarcity of natural resources and the quantity of materials disposed of every year.
2.2 Product recovery goal Traditional manufacturing in the past has been seen as a linear process. The process of; supply, manufacture, use and dispose as a linear process, has been replaced by the ideas of environmentally conscious manufacturing. This replaces dispose with recovery which links back into supply, providing
3
David Coombes – A911652
09MMP409 – Sustainable Development: the Engineering Context a perpetual cycle. This perpetual cycle is the ultimate goal, so that everything used within manufacturing can be recovered and supplied back into the cycle with no waste material. This goal is currently an unrealistic situation; some materials that will be used are currently not recoverable. Also some materials that can be recycled and reused are limited to the number of time this can be completed, the material properties will degrade during this process of recovery and eventually become unusable.
2.3 Waste Hierarchy This product recovery is aided by the waste hierarchy (or a simpler version using the 3 R’s). The waste hierarchy, which could be considered as waste management strategy gives a hierarchy in order of importance of how waste could be dealt with. Figure 1 shows the waste hierarchy. This shows that the most favourable option when considering environmentally conscious manufacturing is to reduce. Not using materials at all is better than using them and recycling them. Reusing the materials for the same application is the next favoured option with the recycling of the material for a different application following this. Finally there is Recovery and Landfill, Recovery is when the products are disposed of using incineration and energy is reclaimed from the waste.
3.0 Non-Producer responsibility legislation Producer responsibility legislations are not the only ways of enforcing environmentally activities. There are numerous other legislations for the UK alone, these include; Health and Safety at Work Act, Control of Substances Harmful to Health and Environmental Protection Act. The Health and Safety at Work Act (1974) “imposes general duties on everybody connected with work.” (4). “Using chemicals or other hazardous substances at work can put people’s health at risk, causing diseases including asthma, dermatitis or cancer.” (5). With this in mind, a set of regulations were devised to try and improve the safety whilst working with harmful substances and to improve the disposal of such substances after manufacture is completed. Finally the Environmental protection act aims to “prevent the pollution from emissions to air, land or water from scheduled processes the concept of integrated pollution control has been introduced.” (6).
3.1 Duty of Care Within the legislations mentioned above, there is the legal obligation known as duty of care. Initially this duty of care is for every employer to ensure that all employees are not exposed to risks to their health and safety. This also covers all visitors, contractors, customers, passersby and any other individual that could be affected by the actions of the company. This duty of care also extends to the production of waste. Within the disposal chain of any waste, it is everybody’s responsibility to ensure no-one within the chain commits an offence when disposing of waste. This is a method of self-regulation. With all members within the chain held responsible for each other’s actions, it ensures that the disposal of waste is carried out correctly. This obligation forms the basis of many of the producer responsibility legislations.
3.2 Precautionary Principle Contained in the Environmental Protection Act is the precautionary principle. This principle states “where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost-effective measures to prevent environmental degradation.” (7). The European commission adopted the principle as a fundamental element of the environmental
4
David Coombes – A911652
09MMP409 – Sustainable Development: the Engineering Context policy (8) and stated that preventative methods should be undertaken, with reducing environmental impact as a priority and that is should be rectified at source, and the polluter should pay.
3.3 Command and Control vs. Economic Instruments There are two main ways of enforcing environmentally activities, the first is a traditional approach to environmentally friendly legislation and is often known as command and control. These highly specific legislations and are rigidly enforced. Usually these legislations specify a measurable aspect of environmental damage (emissions) and set levels that need to be adhered to. These have been effective, and helped to reduce emissions to air and water, but there are numerous concerns with this format of introducing environmentally friendly legislation. The second method, works by attaching at price to using the environment. This gives polluters the option to invest in methods that reduce the pollution or to pay for the pollution caused. This payment will go to governments, and then can go towards funding other environmental activities. For this reason, and because they do not restrict the potential for innovative solutions, these methods are becoming more and more popular. The concern with this is that the costs incurred by the producer will be passed onto the consumer in the form of higher prices.
4.0 Producer Responsibility Legislation There has been a plethora of legislations that have been produced by the European Commission over the last few years. The concept of producer responsibility was “was formed at the Rio Earth Summit in 1992. The aim is to improve the environment by looking upstream to the producers of products rather than concentrate on the end users for disposal.“ (9). Looking upstream means that the expenses that are involved with aiding the environment are aimed at the ones who make most profit from the production of the products, rather than the ones who dispose of the products. This includes, what are sometimes called, take-back schemes. Producers have decided to take the products back themselves, or through an independent recoverer, and recover them themselves. This way, the producers know that the recoverable targets set by the directives have been reached. If an independent recoverer is used, the recovery process is carried out by them, and the recovered items are returned to the producer for reuse. Image 2 and 3 shows different methods of product recovery.
4.1 Waste of Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) In January 2007 the WEEE directive came into force, with the aim “to both reduce the amount of electrical and electronic equipment being produced and to encourage everyone to reuse, recycle and recover it” (10) and to also minimize the risk to the environment when using and disposing of potentially harmful materials. 4.1.1 Overview The WEEE directive states that “Electrical and electronic equipment must not contain lead, mercury, cadmium, hexavalent chromium, polybrominated biphenyls or polybrominated diphenyl ethers” (11). Alongside these numerous materials that cannot be used, consumers are entitled to return their equipment to collection facilities free of charge. All costs related to the collection, treatment, recovery and disposal will be covered by the producers. Finally the directive gives levels of recycling and recovery that need to be achieved by certain electrical products. These include; “Large household appliances (e.g. fridges, washing machines, electric ovens) – 75wt% recyclable, 80wt%
5
David Coombes – A911652
09MMP409 – Sustainable Development: the Engineering Context recoverable” (12)and “IT and Telecommunication equipment (e.g. computers, photocopiers, telephones) – 65wt% recyclable, 75wt% recoverable” (12). Other electrical items are included, such as; small household appliances, lighting equipment, sports equipment and medical equipment systems. Each of these has its own targets to reach, individual to the item.
4.2 End-of-Life Vehicles (ELVs) In September 2000 the end-of-life Vehicle directive was “officially adopted by the European Parliament and council” (13). This was brought about by the excessive large number of vehicles that were scrapped every year. “There were around 30 million motor vehicles in use within the UK in 2002. Every year, approximately 2 million new vehicles are registered and a similar number are scrapped.” (14). 4.2.1 Overview To cope with the nine million tonnes of vehicles that reach their end-of-life, the ELV directive was drawn up. The purpose of the directive is encourage; reuse, recovery and recycling of components. To also “pushes producers to manufacture new vehicles also with a view to their recyclability” (13) and finally limits the use of hazardous substances. Certain components within the vehicle must “be free (except for trace impurities) of mercury, cadmium and lead” (15). The only situation that lead is allowed to be used is as an alloy within certain materials for joining applications. The proposed improvement in recoverability is encouraged by the directive setting targets for all vehicles to match. The directive states that 85wt% of all end-of-life vehicle has to be recovered, with a minimum of 80wt% recycled. This allows for 5wt% to be recovered through incineration and energy reclamation. This was to be achieved by January 2006, and is intending to be increased by January 2015. This increase will take the values to 95wt% recoverable, with a minimum for 80wt% recycled.
4.3 Restriction of Hazardous Substances (RoHS) This directive prohibits the use of six hazardous materials within the manufacture of various types of electronic and electrical equipment. These include; lead, mercury, cadmium, hexavalent chromium, polybrominated biphenyls and polybrominated diphenyl ethers. This directive intends to reduce the hazardous materials sent to landfill. It is linked very closely to the WEEE directive, where the WEEE directive encourages environmentally friendly design of electrical and electronic equipment, RoHS tries to limit the hazardous material within manufacture. “Put another way, RoHS regulates the hazardous substances used in electrical and electronic equipment, while WEEE regulates the disposal of this same equipment.” (16).
4.4 Registration, CHemicals (REACH)
Evaluation,
Authorisation
and
restriction
of
This directive requires companies that are manufacturing or importing chemical substances in the European Union to register these substances with the European chemicals agency. In December 2006 this directive was brought in, and has been described as “the most complex in EU history.” (17). This legislation was brought into force, to not only protect human health, but to also protect the environment.
6
David Coombes – A911652
09MMP409 – Sustainable Development: the Engineering Context
5.0 Directive Implications There are numerous areas that the WEEE directive effects. Technological issues, Economic issues and Logistical issues are just a small number of areas that are affected. With all these issues a proactive response, rather than a reactive one is preferred. This will ensure that consequences are not felt before changes are enforced. Something which has been missing up until now.
5.1 Technological Issues One of the main technological problems that arise, occur within the design stage. With the new directive; a large proportion of the material used need to be recycled or recovered. This causes the design stage to think considerably more about the end of life of the designed product. This includes design for a disassembly. Design for disassembly, is considers the product once it has become obsolete and allows for easy and economical disassembly in order to re-use components or recycle materials. “Successful DFD entails the application of three critical disciplines: 1. the selection and use of materials; 2. the design of components and the product architecture; and 3. the selection and use of joints, connectors and fasteners. “ (18) The three disciplines will aid the recovery of materials and components and can potentially lead to longer service life for the product. Figure 4 shows some of the design for disassembly rules that need to be adhered to when completing “eco-design”. In the case of the electrical items affected by the WEEE directive, some of the technological issues can be overcome by incorporating a modular design. This means the elements within any electrical item can be removed and reused if possible or recycled if not. Trying to reduce the material contamination will aid this. If individual elements are made from the same or similar materials, the recycling of these parts would be made significantly easier. Some aspects of vehicles can be also designed modularly, such as the interior. This could be removed from the chassis and leaving a metallic shell. As all products within these “take-back” schemes need disassembling, reducing the time this takes could be extremely valuable. This would mean that a large consideration should go into the way components are assembled. Simple joining techniques, such as screws are ideal when it comes to non-destructive dismantling of components, but are incredibly time consuming. Clip on items are a lot quicker to disassemble, and providing they provide enough support whilst in use, should be considered wherever possible. Clear labelling is also a vital part when it comes to the recycling. Once the components have been disassembled, it potentially could be difficult to distinguish what material it is and how to go about recycling it. With labelling of components, this sorting can take place significantly quicker. Figure 5 shows some of the labelling that can be added to plastic components to aid the sorting. Even though these symbols indicate a recycling symbol surrounding a number, it does not mean the material is recyclable, only distinguishes what material it is. If these materials are contaminated in anyway, recycling comes very difficult and labelling impossible. Wherever possible, materials should not be
7
David Coombes – A911652
09MMP409 – Sustainable Development: the Engineering Context combined, such as metal inserts within plastic moulding. This reduces the value of the plastic to virtually nothing. Currently within vehicles, a large percentage of the weight comes from metal which is valuable, and easy to recycle. Providing the disassembly of these components is quick and easy, a large proportion of the directives criteria when it comes to weight percentage recycled can be completed by recycling the metal. Plastics are heavily used within vehicles due to the lightweight properties, improving economy. The use of plastics reduces the vehicle’s environmental impact during its lifetime, but without it being recyclable at the end of life, this impact would be increased. Labelling and contamination need considering, along with the actual selection of materials. Within the electronic items, PCB’s can be recycled by de-soldering the individual components. If the circuit boards themselves were attached using plastic clips and not screwed in, the initial removing could be improved. For organisations to ensure their product abides by the WEEE and ELV directives, more consideration of a products impact at end of life needs to be undertaken at the beginning of its life. If; design for disassembly, material selection and remanufacture technologies are all considered then the product should abide by the new directives.
5.2 Business and Economical Issues There are going to be economical issues that need to be thought through in product recovery. There is a trade off between value of used products and the cost of recovery. Also capital investment required to undertake the recovery process. The trade off between the cost to recover and the value of the recovered parts can be improved significantly if material selection and design for disassembly is completed from an early stage. There will be accost of non-compliance, depending of the value of the forfeit of regulations, it may be cheaper than the cost to set-up and run recycling facilities. Finally from a business aspect, considerations need to be made if there is a market for recycled parts within the product area in question, and whether these recycled parts can be sold for a competitive price. Initially for any organisation there is the issue of non-compliance and what the penalties are for not complying with the legislations. This cost may initially not be greater than the set-up cost tied in with setting up the recycling facilities but eventually the recycling facilities will return the initial output where as the cost of non-compliance will never be recuperated. Figure 6 shows the predicted profit and loss account for manufactures affected by WEEE & ELV directives. This shows this initial capital cost to comply with the legislations as a heavy loss, but as time progresses this loss is slowly turned into a profit with the recovery of products and the savings made by re-using and recycling components. There is a decision to be made about certain aspects within cost analysis. With the cost of capital investment an issue when considering that compared to the cost of non-compliance, it also needs to be considered against the recovery revenue. The initial capital costs will have return on investment date, unlike the cost of non-compliance. This return on investment (ROI) date is governed by the recovery revenue. This higher the recovery revenue, the quicker the ROI date. Where as a higher capital cost means a longer timescale when considering ROI. This is a balance that needs assessing before any investment takes place. After this initial investment there is further analysis that needs to
8
David Coombes – A911652
09MMP409 – Sustainable Development: the Engineering Context be considered during the recovery. This relates the value of the recovered material to the cost to recover it in the first place. For example, it is possible to recycle oil by a method of “removing excess water and filtering out particulates” (14) and used as fuel burnt in heavy industry and power stations. This very costly to recover and the cost of recovery outweighs the value of the recovered product. Any component that operates in this way would not make economical sense to recover for any organisation. On a business front act of reuse and recycling needs to be aided by the fact there is a market for selling the recovered products at a viable price. “Environmentally conscious individuals are willing to pay 15-20% more for greener products” (19). This indicates there is a market for recycled products, providing the price to recover the components do not make the resale cost excessive. Other business positive could be seen as a greener image for the producer. The recycled products need to be of adequate quality to ensure that the producer does not get a poor reputation for producing lower quality goods.
5.3 Resource Requirement Issues In order to take back the products that have reached their end of life, there are numerous issues relating to available resources. This initially includes hardware requirements. A facility in which to complete the recovery of the obsolete products is needed. This may involve significant capital investment, and can also be regarded as an economical issue. The producer could continue without the capital investment of acquiring a complete facility, and subcontract the recovery to an external source. Alongside this hardware resource issue, there are human resource issues. Adequate training would be required, to improve the expertise of the workforce. This starts with training and knowledge improvement from the beginning of the product lifecycle. The designers all the way through to recoverers will need to be trained accordingly. For companies needing to recover products, facilities to complete this recover are needed. If an external recoverer is used, a fee will be incurred rather than a capital investment by the organisation. These hardware requirements will come at a significant cost. These costs need to be considered within the economical issues, but also put a strain on resources within the organisation. If the recovery is completed by the organisation, then there will be strain on the human resource. Adequate training will need to be provided to ensure that the workforce is capable of completing the recovery task. This training can consist of half day seminars costing £30 (20), ranging to a full two training course costing ten times that of the half day seminars (21).
5.4 Logistic and Operational Planning Issues Reserve-logistics of the product take schemes cause a significant problem. There is a large amount of planning involved when taking back a large quantity of obsolete products. This reverse-logistics will comprise of; number and location of collection points, forwards and reverse distribution, return incentives and recovery chain management. Inventory control will need to be managed stringently, as there will be a large number of components that need organising. The demand versus supply needs to be considered as well as procedures for the product recovery process. There are numerous issues relating to reverse logistics, and mainly centred on the reverse distribution. “Manufacturers worldwide are increasing facing responsibility for their products at the end of life and must provide for collection and product recovery or proper disposal” (22). Collection
9
David Coombes – A911652
09MMP409 – Sustainable Development: the Engineering Context points are feasible for all take-back schemes; this would entail the customer to bring their products to these collection points and the producer to gather numerous products from each collection point rather than individual components from individual locations. This is considerably easier for vehicles rather than large bulky electronic equipment. Some schemes are in place where forward and reverse logistics are combined. “Why send a second truck to a location to pick up returned product, when one truck has already been sent there to deliver new product?” (23). This is a lot more viable for producers producing electronic and electrical equipment rather than vehicles, and some major high street stores are completing this task on behalf of the producers. Return incentives can be used to encourage the consumer to return the product to the producer. The current scrappage scheme on vehicles was generated to initially aid the floundering motor industry. This also aids the recovery and reverse logistic issues that some vehicle manufacturers face. Such incentives can be put in place to encourage the return of products that have reached their end of life. Inventory management has many issues attached to it. These include categorizing and producing an inventory of all new and recovered items. Many traditional inventory management methods find it difficult to integrate the flow of returned of items with the new stock, yet keep them separate. The two options for a producer are to meet demand by purchasing all the goods or to recondition components and reduced the purchased quantity. “The objective of inventory management is to control external component orders and the internal component recovery process to guarantee a required service level and to minimize fixed and variable costs.” (23). With producers having very little control in the quantity of returned items, a very complex and intelligent inventory management system needs to be in place to reduce the quantity of purchased items.
5.5 Information Management Issues The sharing of information between manufacturer and a recoverer is essential when the recovery of the product is being completed. All materials need to be labelled clearly and effectively and issues with product confidentiality need to be overcome. Manufacturers need to feel safe that their sensitive information, such as product intelligence, is kept secret. Without guarantees to the manufacturers of this, they will be reluctant to use independent recoverers. Information throughout the life of the product will need to be shared with all involved. This will include information such as materials used, assembly techniques and recovery possibilities. Alongside this the product use and history information will need to be transferred. As all items have a lifespan, this includes item that can potentially used numerous times for the same task, eventually they will degrade to a condition where they are unusable for the desired function. This will need to be tracked to ensure components are not over used. There are issues related to product confidentiality when sharing this level of information and potentially using an external supplier. Any potentially private product information may not be kept that way if an external recoverer is used. This means that companies using an external supplier could be forced into shifting where the value of the product is. Rather than the value being situated around the physical product, the value will be transferred into the service of the product. This reduces the reliance on guarded information to remain undisclosed.
10
David Coombes – A911652
09MMP409 – Sustainable Development: the Engineering Context
5.6 Manufacturing Supply Chain Issues The directives will not only effect the final manufactures but the issues will also be felt further down the supply chain by the suppliers on all tiers. Manufactures will ensure that all goods supplied will make abiding by these producer responsibilities regulations as easy as possible. This potentially could include suppliers considering all the above issues. All of the issues that are considered by the producer can also be considered by all levels of the supply chain, just at a smaller scale. Some top level manufactures may request certain changes in the products to aid the recovery process, and ensure that directives are fully reached. For example, suppliers that provide a component that is produced of a material that is difficult to recycle maybe asked to change the material or to reduce the weight of this material in order for the manufacturer to find it easier to comply with the directives. Manufacturers within the supply chain will concentrate on the technological issues, and attempt to reduce the environmental impact of their organisation by the redesign of their products and manufacturing techniques. The resource and logistical issues will not be as vital to be considered for the suppliers as it is for the concluding producers. Overall these take-back schemes aimed mainly at the producer will be felt further down the supply chain by most companies providing products to the final producer.
6.0 Conclusion There are numerous issues that relate to the compliance of the producer responsibility legislations. These span the breadth of the organisation and need to be considered. It is considered that only companies that comply with the environmental directive will be successful and organisations that don’t will eventually fall short. The legislations have completed the task of improving designs, and reducing the amount of nonrecyclable material used and also improved the recyclability of existing products. This results in the the quantity of materials sent to land-fill has been reduced and the amount of material that has been recycled has increased. This is not the only benefit seen by introducing the producer responsibility legislations. Greener supply chains have also being achieved by introducing the legislations. Smaller companies did not see being more environmentally friendly as a worthwhile activity. Now the pressure to become more ecologically aware from the larger organisations up the supply chain has meant that these smaller companies have had to adopt more efficient technologies and use more eco-friendly activities. OF the design issues mentioned, most imperative to consider is the waste hierarchy. If materials usage can be eradicated, the ability to achieve sustainable development becomes significantly easier. All materials will not be able to be eliminated from all products, the sustainable aspect within development, can be achieved by selecting environmentally friendly materials and designing them in such a way that once the products end of life comes around, disassembly is quick and easy and the materials are readily recyclable.
11
David Coombes – A911652
09MMP409 – Sustainable Development: the Engineering Context These producer responsibility legislations are currently the most effective way of reducing waste to landfill and improving sustainable development. By targeting the individuals who generate the most revenue from the products ensures that measures are taken to taken to abide by these legislations. With current generations not considering sustainable development, developing in a manner which means future developments will be restricted will ultimately restrict the progression of the human race. Thought during the design, manufacturing, and recover now could have a profound effect for future generations.
12
David Coombes – A911652
09MMP409 – Sustainable Development: the Engineering Context
7.0 Appendices
Figure 1 - (24)
Figure 2 - (3)
13
David Coombes – A911652
09MMP409 – Sustainable Development: the Engineering Context
Figure 3 - (3)
14
David Coombes – A911652
09MMP409 – Sustainable Development: the Engineering Context
Figure 4 - (18)
15
David Coombes – A911652
09MMP409 – Sustainable Development: the Engineering Context
Figure 5 - (25)
Figure 6 - (3)
16
David Coombes – A911652
09MMP409 – Sustainable Development: the Engineering Context
8.0 Bibliography 1. Cavanagh-Downs, Graham. Foreword. [book auth.] Nicola Morelli, Chris Ryan John Gertaskis. Return to Sender - An Introduction to Extended Producer Responsibility. Melbourne Victoria : The National Centre for Design at RMIT University, 1998, p. 3. 2. OECD. Extended Producer Responsibility. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. [Online] 17 August 2006. [Cited: 17 November 2009.] http://www.oecd.org/document/19/0,3343,en_2649_34281_35158227_1_1_1_1,00.html#. 3. Rahimifard, Shahin. Product Take-back: Legislation and Implications. Sustainable Development Lecture Notes. s.l., Loughborough, UK : Loughborough University, 12 Novemeber 2009. 4. Health and Safety Click Ltd. h & s business. healthandsafetyclick. [Online] 2009. [Cited: 17 November 2009.] http://www.healthandsafetyclick.net/health_and_safety_at_work_act.cfm. 5. HSE. Control of Substances Hazardous to Health (COSHH). Health and Safety Executive. [Online] 2009. [Cited: 17 November 2009.] http://www.hse.gov.uk/coshh/index.htm. 6. Health and Safety. The Environmental Protection Act 1990. Health and Safet Home Pages. [Online] 2006. [Cited: 17 November 2009.] http://www.healthandsafety.co.uk/envas.htm. 7. West Oxfordshire District Council. Glossary. The website of West Oxfordshire District Council. [Online] 2009. [Cited: 17 November 2009.] http://localplan.westoxon.gov.uk/document.aspx?document=6&display=glossary&id=2. 8. Environmental Regulatory Decision Making Under Uncertainty. Stewart, R. B. 2002, Research in Law and Economics, pp. 71-126. 9. Waste Connect. Producer Responsibility. Waste Connect. [Online] 2002. [Cited: 17 November 2009.] http://www.wasteconnect.co.uk/page.aspx?ID=e3d92c15-28f8-4a83-914e-4027c8d16032. 10. Environment Agency. Waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE). Environment Agency. [Online] 2009. [Cited: 17 November 2009.] http://www.environmentagency.gov.uk/business/topics/waste/32084.aspx. 11. Environmental Protection Agency. The Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment Regulations 2006. London : The Stationery Office Limited, 2006. 12. B2B WEEE - Environ. WEEE: Obligations on B2B producers. Environ UK ltd. [Online] 2007. [Cited: 17 November 2009.] http://www.b2bweee.com/legislation/weee-obligations. 13. europa.eu. End of Life Vehicles. europa.eu. Environment - Waste. [Online] 2009. [Cited: 22 November 2009.] http://ec.europa.eu/environment/waste/elv_index.htm. 14. Waste Online. End of life vehicle and tyre recycling information sheet. Waste Online. [Online] September 2004. [Cited: November 22 2009.] http://www.wasteonline.org.uk/resources/InformationSheets/vehicle.htm. 15. Tyco Electronics. EU RoHS/ELV Compliance Definitions . Tyco Electronics. [Online] 2009. [Cited: 22 November 2009.] http://www.tycoelectronics.com/catalog/html/en/leadfreecompliance.html.
17
David Coombes – A911652
09MMP409 – Sustainable Development: the Engineering Context 16. RoHS Guide. RoHS & WEEE -- Information Guide to RoHS Compliance. RoHS Guide. [Online] 2009. [Cited: 22 November 2009.] http://www.rohsguide.com/rohs-faq.htm. 17. euobserver. EU's REACH chemicals law begins life in Helsinki. euobserver.com. [Online] 2009. [Cited: 27 November 2009.] http://euobserver.com/9/24169. 18. Design for disassembly: a critical twenty-first century discipline. Bogue, Robert. 2007, Assembly Automation, pp. 285-289. 19. A theory of environmental buyer behaviour and its validity: the environmental action-behaviour model. Suchard, H.T and Polonski, M.J. Chicago : Marketing Association, 1991. AMA Summer Educators' Confrence Proceedings. pp. 187-201. 20. Vehicle Certification Agency. THE WASTE ELECTRICAL AND ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT REGULATIONS 2006. Vehicle Certification Agency. [Online] 2009. [Cited: 3 Decemeber 2009.] http://www.vca.gov.uk/enforcement/weee-training-days.asp. 21. WEEECo. WEEE Training. WEEECo. [Online] 2008. [Cited: http://www.weeeco.co.uk/the_weeeco_solution/weee_education.html.
3
December
2009.]
22. Reverse-Logisitics Strategy for Product Take-Back. Klausner, M and Hendrickson, C.T. 2000, Interfaces, Vol 30, No. 3, pp. 156-165. 23. Quantitive models for reverse logistics: a review. Fleischmann, M, et al. 1997, European Journal fo Operational Research. Vol. 103, No. 1, pp. 1-17. 24. Hind, Joe. Waste Hierarchy – What level have you reached? Waste Aware Business. [Online] 2009. [Cited: 20 November 2009.] http://wasteawarebusiness.wordpress.com/2009/03/04/wastehierarchy-what-level-are-you-at/. 25. Interesting finds. Plastic Labeling System Often Confused for Recyclability of Plastic Products. wordpress.com. [Online] 17 April 2009. [Cited: 27 November 2009.] http://thewere42.wordpress.com/2009/04/17/plastic-labeling-system-often-confused-forrecyclability-of-plastic-products/.
18
David Coombes – A911652