EU Proposing Mandatory Battery Recycling 278
Ironsides writes "The BBC Reports that the European Union is working on a directive to mandate battery recycling. Among other things, it will ban more than trace amounts of cadmium and mercury and require all batteries to be removeable. If it passes, it will be interesting to see how this affects such devices as MP3 players that generally do not have removeable rechargeable batteries."
Very brave (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:OMG! (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Very brave (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:OMG! (Score:3, Insightful)
Not a bad idea (Score:4, Insightful)
If nothing else, one the law is in place, it is easy to amend it for future purposes than to draft a new one. The law also probably has something to do with putting in a europe-wide standard for such things as opposed to a hodge-podge of laws.
Convenience (Score:5, Insightful)
However, if you have to call around to chase a moving target to turn risky garbage in, most will just dump it in the regular garbage.
The trash pickup company could have a policy whereby tech waste is put in say blue bags by the side of the curb with the rest of the trash one day of the month. A small tax on semi-hazardous tech devices could pay for it. Or perhaps regular bags with a pre-determined message/sign taped to it.
Non-removable batteries (Score:4, Insightful)
Future models will likely have a cell-phone like removable battery with a slide/screw off case. Several people will comply to save the babies.
My question: What are they going to do about computer CMOS batteries, and other really embedded batteries. Why stop there, we need to put an end to the electrolyte seepage from large capacitors.
Who uses NiCad anymore anyway? NiMH is all I've seen for some time. Though I'm not a battery expert, I assume NiCad is still used in cheaper devices. The "memory" on those batteries was always horrible, charge it once before it was almost completely dead and that's the new lifetime unless you work to rebuild its capacity.
Chalk this one up to expensive and ineffective legislation to make a news story and do little else.
Interesting? I think not (Score:3, Insightful)
If you define interesting as "it will increase the overall price with respect to current units, and the increased amount of government regulation and oversight which will require additional tax funds," then yes, I agree with you, it's quite interesting.
Look, I'm as keen to recycle as the next guy, but since when did government become the solution to all problems? Here's a radical, way-far-out-there idea: if you want the battery industry to change, refuse to purchase devices that are non-recyclable! Nothing stirs an industry quite so quickly -- or so efficiently -- as a consumer revolt. We get greener products, the industry adapts to deliver what we want, and there's no intrusive government leaning over somebody's shoulder telling them what to do. What an elegant solution! It's a pity the knee-jerk reaction these days -- regardless of what continent or island group you're on -- is to scream "Here's a problem! We must demand that government do more to fix it!"
Re:Won't change much in appearance (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Interesting? I think not (Score:5, Insightful)
That only changes the problem, without solving it.
Just because "X" buys only recycled paper doesn't me he is going to put the discarded stuff back in the recycling bin.
The public wants recycled goods, but it also doesn't want to be bothered with actually recycling them...
Re:Battery Bonfire (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:OMG! (Score:4, Insightful)
It's a dangerous path you tread.
I would imagine there are people who say My computers sole purpose is so I can surf the web and read email. Windows does that. Why should I need to know any more than that?
It's just not in the geek vocabulary to say why should I need to know any more than that
Re:OMG! (Score:2, Insightful)
Unintended consequences (Score:3, Insightful)
After this, people will chuck their cell phones into the nearest river, even more directly polluting the environment they tried to protect.
Re:Unintended consequences (Score:5, Insightful)
Now WHY would someone do that? Out of spite for the new law? No, I think not.
This requires shops to collect used batteries at NO COST, so I can't see any reason someone would do something as insane as going out of their way to toss it into a river.
This is a good thing... (Score:3, Insightful)
Removable != replacable (Score:4, Insightful)
shouldn't be a problem. (Score:3, Insightful)
As the disposal has to be free of cost for private households (also free of cost for businesses if the devices were made after august 2005 AFAIR)
Re:Very brave (Score:3, Insightful)
Besides which, even if this is something of a non-issue, introducing the legislation will at least prevent it from becoming an issue again in the future. Not to mention that if the opposite were true, that most batteries would be affected by this, you'd have people here screaming blue murder about how impractical it was.
How about standardizing batteries and chargers (Score:4, Insightful)
It cannot be beyond the realms of science to design 5 or so "pocket" style batteries for small devices and perhaps 5 or so "laptop" style batteries for larger devices, ranging in power and dimensions and require all consumer devices to use them. The likes of Intel, Nokia, HP could even have a hand in their specification to ensure they were up to the job just as long as they were standardized.
I can't see any reason whatsoever for the multitude of chargers. It's virtually dictated by the brand rather than the device in that brand. Standardization also means there is no need for the multitude of chargers and docks that every device needs. If the batteries were the same then the chargers could or should be too, meaning less packaging and waste since you could buy the charger separately and use it with many devices.
Who tags the taggers? (Score:4, Insightful)
Whoever put those tags deserves to live close to a landfill where these batteries would be freeely disposed.
enlighted EU makes me want to live there (Score:4, Insightful)
Compared to living in Australia, it's tempting because the EU has (my personal top 10 reasons):
Most and Least Livable Countries: UN Human Development Index, 2005
see http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0778562.html [infoplease.com]
http://www.cancer.org.au/content.cfm?randid=96074
Re:Reduce, Re use, Recycle discrimination (Score:3, Insightful)
(Note that partially this exists because "broken" car parts can be easily refurbished and resold, so they really are buying a moderately-defective part back from you. I'm not sure how true that is with computers.)
How long does a battery last? (Score:2, Insightful)
When I put a pair of AAA pen cell batteries in my remote control they last forever, or at least longer than they do in my noise-cancelling headphones. These, in turn, last longer than in a Minidisc player, and longer still than in an MP3 player, or a torch. How, then, do they propose that batteries should be labelled? Any meaningful measure of longevity (say by expected life at a given current drain) would be incomprehensible to the average person in the street.
Re:Not a bad idea (Score:3, Insightful)