LAWR

WASTE HANDLING Councils urged to have a light bulb moment to help recycling process Financial constraints since 2008 mean that some councils have been buying cheap light- emitting diode (LED) lamps instead of quality ones, according to Julian Rinfret. He argues that this is causing a big problem when it comes to recycling them further down the line. ou get what you pay for, so the saying goes, and when it comes to large- scale lamp recycling, those words are as true now as ever. Here at Balcan Engineering, we're seeing an increasing number of waste LED lamps coming through our lamp recycling facilities that were originally sourced cheaply and in large quantities from places like the Far East. We are a waste management company that has seen LED lamps coming through the recycling process earlier than expected. The majority of these were manufac- tured by businesses that don't comply with current UK regulations. This makes the job of recycling that much more diffi- cult further down the line and could leave businesses liable to pay for the costs of recycling these products in years to come, should current regulations change. There's no doubt that making the switch from fluorescent lamps to LEDs is something that all local authorities should be planning for over the long- term. Just one fluorescent lamp contains enough hazardous mercury to pollute thirty thousand litres of water if not properly recycled, yet almost 100m are still sold in the UK every year. Disposing of these lamps safely while protecting the workforce is a vital yet costly additional responsibility that falls to local authorities – this duty that can be made considerably easier by using LEDs instead. The earth metals found in fluorescent lamps – rare oxides making up 12% of the vital component compound phos- phors – are being depleted at a rate of knots. Global demand for earth metals as a whole is outstripping supply by 10,000 tonnes a year, while the costs and regula- tions involved in mining new deposits make it an increasingly unattractive busi- ness option, not to mention the environ- mental impact. Choosing non-phosphor-based LEDs, then, is clearly a positive step for organi- sations to take to counteract these chal- lenges. However, the cost of switching to LEDs can be expensive and in many cases an inhibitive barrier to change. Faced with this high initial outlay, organisations might feel that choosing the cheapest option for LEDs makes the most sense financially. However, choosing cheaper, non-com- pliant products creates a false economy within the recycling industry. It might look like the most cost-effec- tive option at the time, but the real price will be paid later on by local authori- ties and waste handling companies alike, those groups left with the responsibility for the recycling. Non-compliant manufacturers are flooding the market with cheap, lower quality LEDs, creating a time bomb of non-compliant lamps that will one day need recycling. In most cases, these man- ufacturers are only able to offer lower prices because they do not adhere to the UK's environmental regulations. To the untrained eye, these products appear to be good value for money, how- ever they are storing up problems further down the line in the recycling process. It is better to get quality branded LEDs than cheap ones, as this can save you money in the long run. Councils must to be prepared to ask whether their potential LED suppliers are compliant with the latest WEEE regulations. If they cannot produce the paperwork, chances are they aren't, and customers therefore cannot be sure that the products are what they say they are. The regulations are there for a good reason. As with so many things in life, getting good value for money is not always just about the price tag. Julian Rinfret is sales director at Balcan Engineering. For more information contact: www.balcan.co.uk Y June 2014 Local Authority Waste & Recycling 13 Balcan lamp crusher

• Cover