Sony Electronics has participated in several electronics recycling events, including a collection program in the St. Paul, Minn., area that worked in conjunction with the Minnesota Office of Environmental Assistance and several other electronics manufacturers.

The following is an exclusive Q & A with Doug Smith of Sony Electronics, headquartered in New Jersey, about the pilot collection programs the company has participated in as well as the issue of producer responsibility and what Sony feels the company’s obligations are in that area.

Asset Recovery Corp. collection program in St. Paul--

Q. What did the collection event and the study of the materials collected find about the make-up of materials collected? Any patterns as to common units found in residential collection events or any surprising findings?

A. The findings were very similar to the pilot project we sponsored in 1999. Except that for the '99 pilot we (participating companies and recycler) went after "anything with a cord or battery" and for this event with ARC we concentrated on e-scrap only.

Q. What was the outcome of the program? Was it successful in your mind or are there things you think could be improved if another event such as this was held?

The program was successful. Electronic waste was collected from residents and properly recycled without funding from the general state taxpayer--which is one of the primary goals of this economically sustainable recycling model. Consumers played the biggest role in returning their waste, local government organizations helped promote the events to their respective constituencies, and three manufacturers funded the events based on their brand name product returns.

It's up to the state/county municipalities and service providers to make the program the best it can be. One other improvement would come with greater participation from other manufacturers. That would be a huge help ensuring the viability of this type of program. Unfortunately it can't survive with only three manufacturers participating.

Q. What specific obligations do you see facing manufacturers and producers of electronics goods as far as take-back and recycling of the product they manufacture?

The obligations of manufacturers should be to get these programs going because we cannot continue making products in the current use and throw away model. Sony is putting its brand strength behind these recycling programs to help consumers easily identify that this is a legitimate program. But an equal, if not more important step will have to come at the local municipality level in order to make this truly convenient to consumers. That's where we think the biggest impact will be made -- is at the curbside, similar to what many communities have today with bulk pick-up / “spring cleaning” days. We want the same thing for electronic recycling.

Q. Do you think producer responsibility laws are fair to the manufacturers? Why or why not? What do you think the most fair solution would be if indeed a solution was found involving producers, consumers and potentially the government?

A. There definitely needs to be responsibility by the manufacturer. But this is a shared responsibility between the manufacturer, the consumer and the government. A program such as the economically sustainable recycling model we have begun is based on that shared responsibility. This creates a win-win-win for the consumer, manufacturer and the government.

For the consumer there is no tax, for the manufacturer there is a constant supply of post consumer recyclable material and for the government there have happy residents and don't need to create an over-complicated state-run recycling program. The infrastructure is already in place.

Q. How would your company be affected if there were mandated producer take-back laws in place, as the ones being discussed in Europe?

Unfortunately the impact would not be on the manufacturer, but on the consumer who would essentially be forced to pay a recycling tax on electronics products. We don't see that as a positive for anybody. Communities have the electronics recycling infrastructure in place today to create a program that does not tax consumers--and that's what we and others associated with this program have been trying to do.

Q. What end markets are there for materials recovered from electronics units? Is there still much end market development to be done?

For the Minnesota pilot project we conducted in 1999 700 tons of e-scrap was collected, of which 87% was recycled. That's pretty good for first time, especially when many thought there wasn't a real electronics recycling infrastructure in place at that time.

E-scrap is made up of raw materials that can be used in many other products. The materials include steel, copper, plastic and aluminum. Glass is also recycled. Glass is very special to Sony because we are a large producer of televisions and computer displays.

Sony is addressing glass recycling, for instance, at our glass plant in Pittsburgh by re-using old post-consumer glass in new products. Plastic end market development has a way to go, but technology and know-how has already been demonstrated. The only problem is capturing significant material volume which is why more manufacturers need to get involved.

The following is a report on one of the collection events Sony has participated in and findings from the materials collected. Sony Electronics, Sharp Electronics, Matsushita Electronic Corp. of America (Panasonic), and Asset Recovery Corp. have teamed together to hold a series of 12 municipal electronics collection events in the St. Paul/Minneapolis areas. Panasonic, Sharp and Sony all funded the recycling of their own brand name equipment. Fees were charged for any other equipment.  

Objective

The purpose of this project was to offer an opportunity to recycle sponsored electronic equipment at no cost and to gather information on the make-up of products collected.  The project was carried out in conjunction with 12 annual community clean-up events normally served by Asset Recovery Corporation.

Process

The events were broken down into two phases. The first phase included the kick-off event held at the ARC facility and the City of Shakopee collection. The products collected from these events were  reviewed in detail to gather data on manufacturer name, types of items, age of items, and total weight. The second phase included the remaining collection events where data on total weight of sponsored equipment was collected.

Data from Kick-off Events

For phase one, we collected 12,716 pounds. Half of the equipment was generated on the first Friday/Saturday of the event. The remaining equipment was collected in the following week.

Our kick-off event was advertised in local newspapers and press releases were distributed through local media. The event made the evening news and following Saturday morning programs.  The sponsors each contributed approximately $500 worth of new equipment for use in a raffle designed to attract additional residents. This raffle was mentioned in the advertisement.  Although residents did partake in the raffle, it was only after we reminded them of the opportunity.  We felt the two primary reasons most residents came was to take advantage of the free recycling of OEM sponsored equipment and that they simply did not know where to take their old electronics previously. We used the following rates on equipment not sponsored by Panasonic, Sharp, and Sony:

Console TVs, Console Stereos and Copiers                                  $25

Non-Console TVs                                                              $15

Monitors                                                                                 $10

Phones, Peripherals, Stereos, Printers                                               $ 5

Additional information regarding manufacturer names could not be gathered either due to equipment missing labels or the time it would take to write down all of the manufacturers. As counting began, ARC staff identified the first major 15 brands and considered other brand names too few to recognize. We estimate that there were an additional 30-40 other brand names.

A sample of products was taken and tracked throughout the de-manufacturing process to identify the particular volumes of scrap material generated on a percentage basis. The sample was based upon several brand names to obtain a cross-section of televisions, monitors, and other electronic scrap.

Remaining Collection Events

The remaining events were held in conjunction with neighborhood hazardous waste clean-ups and gathered 69,109 pounds of material. For these events, there was a marked difference in the response to the sponsorship. In the kick-off events, over 30% of material collected was sponsored brand name equipment. In the remaining events, it averaged 6%. We believe this was due to a number of factors that all promoted the sponsorships for the first event including the advertisement, local media, and the press release. In the future, we anticipate pursuing more aggressive promotion strategies in these areas.