E-WASTE MANAGEMENT AT RECOVERY FACILITIES
IN KLANG VALLEY
NURUL AIN BINTI MOHD NORDIN
DISSERTATION SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL
FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR
THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF TECHNOLOGY
(ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT)
FACULTY OF SCIENCE
UNIVERSITY OF MALAYA
KUALA LUMPUR
2017
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
iii
ABSTRACT
‘E-waste’ which is the term used to describe electrical and electronic waste, have been
rising sharply in its generation. This is due to increased use of electrical and electronic
equipments. The implication of this increase in e-waste and its improper disposal will lead
to major problems to human health and environment. E-waste recycling is a very important
industry to recover valuable components in e-waste which can contribute to significant
economic value, and to reduce pollution caused by improper disposal of e-waste that
contain hazardous materials. Material recovery facility (MRF) is an important element in
e-waste recycling. Through MRF, valuable parts of e-waste are processed and recovered.
The objective of this study is to analyze the flow of e-waste among MRF using material
flow analysis (MFA) model. MFA modeling would include collection, sorting, recovery
and disposal. Furthermore, MFA also led to better system analysis which aid in giving
practical recommendations for sustainable management of e-waste in MRF. 15 MRF in
Klang Valley participated in this study. Five of them are full recovery facilities and the
other 10 are partial recovery facilities. Data were collected by using questionnaires / survey
and interview with the relevant stakeholders. Observation during site visit was done to
explore e-waste management at these recovery facilities. STAN (subSTance flow
ANalysis) 2.5 software was used to perform the MFA modeling. The findings showed that
MRF of e-waste in Malaysia needs to comply with legal requirements set by the
government to avoid improper management of hazardous waste. Environmental
Management System (EMS) is also one of the criteria practised by hazardous waste
management facility in Malaysia. All of recovery facilities involved in this study are
licensed by Department of Environment, Malaysia and followed the stipulated regulations.
The constructed MFA model showed that these recovery facilities collected approximately
263 tonnes of e-waste per month. Personal computers and laptops were the highest e-waste
collected (42%). Crushing is the most popular method used by the recovery facilities
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
iv
involved. The products are sold as recyclables, 200,000 kg/month (90%), sent to other
recovery facilities for further recovery, 2,800 kg/month (2%), or exported to other
countries, 19,000 kg/month (8%). The hazardous residues and non-hazardous wastes
generated are disposed at Kualiti Alam and municipal solid waste landfill at 20,000
kg/month (60%) and 14,500 kg/month (40%), respectively. This research helps us to
understand various ongoing activities within MRF and thus, encourage the formulation for
a proper e-waste management strategy in Malaysia.
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
v
ABSTRAK
‘E-sisa’ merupakan istilah yang bermaksud sisa elektrik dan elektronik yang sedang
meningkat jumlah penjanaannya. Ini disebabkan oleh peningkatan penggunaan peralatan
elektrik dan elektronik. Peningkatan e-sisa dan cara pelupusannya yang tidak betul telah
menyebabkan masalah yang serius kepada kesihatan manusia dan alam sekitar. Kitar
semula e-sisa adalah satu industri yang penting untuk memperoleh kembali komponen-
komponen berharga dari e-sisa. Ini dapat menyumbang nilai ekonomi yang positif dan
mengurangkan pencemaran akibat pelupusan e-sisa yang tidak sempurna kerana
kandungan bahan berbahayanya. Kemudahan pemerolehan kembali (MRF) adalah elemen
yang penting dalam industri pengitaran semula e-sisa. Melalui MRF, bahan berharga dari
e-sisa diproses dan diperoleh kembali. Objektif kajian ini adalah untuk menganalisis aliran
e-sisa di MRF dengan menggunakan model material flow analysis (MFA). Model MFA ini
akan menunjukkan proses pengutipan, pengasingan, pemerolehan kembali dan pelupusan.
Selain itu, model MFA dapat memudahkan proses analisis sistem, sekaligus membawa
kepada pengurusan e-sisa yang mampan di MRF. 15 MRF di Lembah Klang telah
menyertai kajian ini. Lima darinya adalah kemudahan pemerolehan kembali penuh dan 10
lagi kemudahan pemerolehan kembali separa. Data dikutip dari kaji selidik dan temu bual
dengan pihak MRF. Pemerhatian semasa lawatan ke tapak telah dibuat untuk menyelidik
pengurusan sisa di MRF ini. Perisian STAN (subSTance flow ANalysis) 2.5 telah
digunakan untuk membina model MFA. keputusan kajian ini menunjukkan bahawa MRF
e-sisa di Malaysia perlu mengikut syarat perundangan yang ditetapkan oleh kerajaan untuk
mengelakkan pengurusan sisa berbahaya yang tidak betul. Sistem Pengurusan Alam
Sekitar (EMS) adalah salah satu kriteria yang digunapakai oleh MRF dalam menguruskan
sisa berbahaya. Semua MRF yang terlibat dalam kajian ini mempunyai lesen dari Jabatan
Alam Sekitar, Malaysia. MFA menunjukan bahawa MRF ini mengumpul lebih kurang 263
tan e-sisa sebulan. Komputer peribadi dan komputer riba adalah jenis e-sisa yang paling
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
vi
banyak dikutip (42%). Proses penghancuran merupakan kaedah paling popular di
kemudahan pemerolehan kembali yang terlibat. Produk yang dihasilkan dijual kepada
pasaran kitar semula (90%), dihantar ke kemudahan pemerolehan kembali yang lain untuk
proses pemerolehan kembali selanjutnya (2%), atau dieksport ke negara lain (8%). Bagi
sisa yang dijana, sisa berbahaya dilupuskan ke Kualiti Alam (60%) dan sisa tidak
berbahaya dilupuskan ke tapak pelupusan sampah (40%). Kajian ini membantu kita untuk
memahami pelbagai aktiviti yang dijalankan di MRF, dan sekaligus dapat merancang
strategi pengurusan e-sisa yang sewajarnya di Malaysia.
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
vii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
All praise to Allah, the Almighty, for giving me the opportunity to embark on this journey,
for the strength to carry on, and for the joy of coming to an end of a meaningful journey.
My heartfelt gratitude to my supervisor, Prof Dr. P. Agamuthu, for his continuous
guidance, support, knowledge and speed throughout the process. It was indeed an eye
opener as well as a learning phase in my life. I would like to thank all the recovery
facilities and individuals that participated in the research, without whom, this dissertation
would not have been possible. Next, my appreciation towards my friend, Hawa and
Badariah who were together with me embarking this research journey. My special thanks
to Jayanthi, Aziz, Nicole, Kee, Huda, Lim, Frank, Lihun, Asni, Jue, Kak Ida, Carol, Kak
Maridah, Farah, and the rest who have given their utmost encouragement, support and
guidance throughout the journey. My thanks to my lecturers, MTech mates, ISB, IPS, UM
and the Dean of the Institute of Postgraduate Studies and Research for the funding of this
study (IPPP Grant, PO005-2013B). Last but not least my profound gratitude goes to my
parents and family for always believing in me. Thanks for the encouragement, advice and
financial support. To you I am forever indebted.
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
viii
Table of Contents
Original Literary Work Declaration ii
Abstract iii
Abstrak v
Acknowledgements vii
Table of Contents viii
List of Tables xiii
List of Figures xvi
List of Abbreviations xvi
CHAPTER 1
1.1 Introduction 1
1.2 Global e-waste generation 3
1.3 E-waste generation in Malaysia 5
1.4 E-waste management in material recovery facilities 6
1.5 Problem statement 8
1.6 Research objectives 9
CHAPTER 2
2.1 Introduction 10
2.1.1 E-waste definition 10
2.1.2 Categories and types of e-waste 10
2.1.3 Generation of e-waste 15
2.1.4 Components and composition of e-waste 17
2.1.5 Weight and estimated lifespan of e-waste 20
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
ix
2.2 E-waste management approaches and principles 21
2.2.1 Waste Management Hierarchy 21
2.2.2 Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) 23
2.2.3 Material Flow Analysis (MFA) 24
2.3 E-waste recycling 25
2.3.1 Collection 26
2.3.2 E-waste recycling technologies 26
2.4 E-waste environment and health risks 27
2.5 E-waste transboundary movement 29
2.6 E-waste in Malaysia 34
2.6.1 E-waste policies and regulations in Malaysia 35
2.6.2 E-waste generation in Malaysia 36
2.6.3 E-waste collection, recycling and recovery in Malaysia 38
2.6.4 Transboundary movement of e-waste in Malaysia 40
2.6.5 E-waste awareness in Malaysia 41
2.7 Effective e-waste management system 43
2.7.1 Voluntary private initiatives 44
2.7.2 State/regional initiatives 44
2.7.3 Global initiatives 45
2.8 E-waste management in Material Recovery Facilities 46
2.8.1 E-waste Material Recovery Facilities in Malaysia 46
2.8.2 E-waste Material Recovery Facilities in United States 46
2.8.3 E-waste Material Recovery Facilities in Europe 48
2.8.4 E-waste Material Recovery Facilities in China 49
2.8.5 E-waste Material Recovery Facilities in India 49
2.8.6 Summary of Material Recovery Facilities in Selected Countries 51
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
x
CHAPTER 3
3.1 Introduction 52
3.2 Research design 52
3.3 Research scope 53
3.4 Data collection methods 55
3.4.1 Questionnaire / survey 55
3.4.2 Interview 56
3.4.3 Site visit 56
3.5 Data analysis 56
3.6 Flow Chart of the Research Methodology 57
CHAPTER 4
4.1 E-waste recovery facilities survey 58
4.1.1 E-waste recovery facilities involved 58
4.1.1.1 Business Involved in Recovery Facilities 59
4.1.2 E-waste management in recovery facilities 60
4.1.2.1 Presence of inventory record 60
4.1.2.2 Presence of accreditation 61
4.1.2.3 Frequency of purchasing e-waste 62
4.1.2.4 Duration of e-waste being stored 63
4.1.2.5 Implementation of safety and health aspect 64
4.1.2.6 Challenges faced by recovery facilities 66
4.1.2.7 Types of e-waste collected 67
4.1.2.8 Sources of e-waste collected 68
4.1.2.9 Methods to process e-waste 69
4.1.2.10 Destination of e-waste from recovery facilities 70
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
xi
4.1.2.11 Generalized process flow of all recovery facilities 71
4.1.3 Material Flow Analysis 73
4.1.3.1 Material Flow Analysis for Company A 74
4.1.3.2 Material Flow Analysis for Company B 76
4.1.3.3 Material Flow Analysis for Company C 78
4.1.3.4 Material Flow Analysis for Company D 80
4.1.3.5 Material Flow Analysis for Company E 82
4.1.3.6 Material Flow Analysis for Company F 85
4.1.3.7 Material Flow Analysis for Company G 87
4.1.3.8 Material Flow Analysis for Company H 89
4.1.3.9 Material Flow Analysis for Company I 91
4.1.3.10 Material Flow Analysis for Company J 93
4.1.3.11 Material Flow Analysis for Company K 95
4.1.3.12 Material Flow Analysis for Company L 97
4.1.3.13 Material Flow Analysis for Company M 99
4.1.3.14 Material Flow Analysis for Company N 101
4.1.3.15 Material Flow Analysis for Company O 103
4.1.3.16 Material Flow Analysis of total e-waste collected
through all recovery facilities involved 105
4.2 General Discussion 108
CHAPTER 5
5.1 Conclusion 110
5.2 Recommendations 111
5.2.1 Awareness Campaign 111
5.2.2 E-waste Collection Bins 111
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
xii
5.2.3 Extended Producer Responsibility 112
5.3 Areas for Future Research 112
REFERENCES 113
APPENDICES 123
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
xiii
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1.1: Global generation of e-waste 4
Table 2.1: Categories of WEEE under EU directives 11
Table 2.2: Category of e-waste 15
Table 2.3: Global quantity of e-waste generated 16
Table 2.4: Material composition of four e-waste categories (%) 18
Table 2.5: The weight and expected life span of some common WEEE items 20
Table 2.6: Health effects of hazardous substances and contaminants in e-waste 28
Table 2.7: The number of licensed e-waste recovery facilities according to
states in Malaysia 38
Table 2.8: Summary of Material Recovery Facilities in selected countries 51
Table 3.1: List of active e-waste recovery facilities in Klang Valley 54
Table 4.1: Type of recovery facility involved 58
Table 4.2: Presence of accreditation in recovery facilities 61
Table 4.3: Presence of ISO accreditation within recovery facilities involved 61
Table 4.4: Frequency of recovery facilities purchasing e-waste in a month 63
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
xiv
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1.1: E-waste generation in Malaysia 6
Figure 1.2: General process sequence at a materials recovery facility (MRF)
for e-waste recycling 7
Figure 1.3: Material flow of e-wastes in Malaysia 8
Figure 2.1: Recovery of resources from computer 19
Figure 2.2: Recovery of resources from mobile phones 19
Figure: 2.3: Waste Hierarchy 22
Figure 2.4: Export of e-waste 33
Figure 2.5: Future Projection for WEEE in Malaysia for the Year 1981-2020 37
Figure 2.6: Transboundary movement of e-waste – Asian region 41
Figure 2.7: The typical process steps at a materials recovery facility (MRF) in
U.S. 47
Figure 3.1: Location of recovery facilities involved is in the red box 55
Figure 3.2: Process flow of the research 57
Figure 4.1: Type of businesses involved in recovery facilities 59
Figure 4.2: Frequency of monitoring inventory record by recovery facilities 60
Figure 4.3: Duration of e-waste being stored by recyclers before transporting to
other destinations 64
Figure 4.4: Presence of authorized person/committee in handling safety matters 65
Figure 4.5: Presence of safety and health program 66
Figure 4.6: Obstacles faced by recovery facilities involved 67
Figure 4.7: Amount of different types of e-waste collected 68
Figure 4.8: Amount of e-waste generated by different sources 69
Figure 4.9: Amount of e-waste being processed by different methods 70
Figure 4.10: Amount of e-waste being sent to different destination 71
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
xv
Figure 4.11: Generalized process flow in e-waste recovery facilities in Klang
Valley, Malaysia 72
Figure 4.12: Indicators for the MFA 73
Figure 4.13: MFA of e-waste collected by Company A 75
Figure 4.14: MFA of e-waste collected by Company B 77
Figure 4.15: MFA of e-waste collected by Company C 79
Figure 4.16: MFA of e-waste collected by Company D 81
Figure 4.17: MFA of e-waste collected by Company E 84
Figure 4.18: MFA of e-waste collected by Company F 86
Figure 4.19: MFA of e-waste collected by Company G 88
Figure 4.20: MFA of e-waste collected by Company H 90
Figure 4.21: MFA of e-waste collected by Company I 92
Figure 4.22: MFA of e-waste collected by Company J 95
Figure 4.23: MFA of e-waste collected by Company K 96
Figure 4.24: MFA of e-waste collected by Company L 98
Figure 4.25: MFA of e-waste collected by Company M 100
Figure 4.26: MFA of e-waste collected through by N 102
Figure 4.27: MFA of e-waste collected by Company O 104
Figure 4.28: MFA of total e-waste collected by recovery facilities involved 107
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
xvi
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
CRT Cathode Ray Tube
DOE Department of Environment
EEE Electrical and Electronic Equipment
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
EPR Extended Producers Responsibility
EQA Environmental Quality Act
EU European Union
MFA Material Flow Analysis
MRF Material Recovery Facility
PC Personal Computer
PCB Polychlorinated Biphenyl
POPs Persistent Organic Pollutants
UNEP United Nation Environmental Programme
US The United States
USEPA United States Environmental Protection Agency
WEEE Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
1
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
1.1 Introduction
Electrical and electronic equipments waste (WEEE) or e-waste is increasing
significantly throughout the year due to rapid changes in equipment features, decrease
in prices and the growth in internet use (Tanskanen, 2013). Baldé et al. (2015) stated
that global e-waste is growing rapidly at a rate of 4% to 5% annually which is three
times faster than normal municipal waste. E-waste is the fastest growing waste stream
in the world (Herat and Agamuthu, 2012). The advancement of technology had kept
people changing their out of date devices to more sophisticated products. As time goes
by, the complicated functions and technology of electrical and electronic devices has
caused rapid obsolescence of the products. The short lifespan of electrical and electronic
equipments cause increase in e-waste generation (Baldé et al., 2015).
Apart from the rising volume of e-waste, the toxic contents in e-waste have become a
major problem. E-waste contains both valuable materials and hazardous materials
(Widmer et al., 2005). The hazardous materials are toxic to the environment and human
health if not properly managed. Common toxic substances in e-waste include: toxic
metals (barium, beryllium, cadmium, cobalt, chromium, copper, iron, lead, lithium,
lanthanum, mercury, manganese, molybdenum, nickel, silver, hexavalent chromium)
and persistent organic pollutants (POPs) (dioxin, brominated flame retardants,
polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, polychlorinated biphenyls, polybrominated dibenzo-
p-dioxins and dibenzofurans, polyvinyl chloride) (Baldé et al., 2015).
In 1970’s and 1980’s, hazardous waste including e-waste exported from developed
countries to developing countries caused serious environmental pollution (Shinkuma &
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
2
Huong, 2009). The emerging issue came to rest in 1992 when Basel convention (The
Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movement of Hazardous Wastes
and Their Disposal) was put into effect. Since then, many studies have been conducted
to develop and implement methods to quantify flows and exports of e-waste (Kahhat &
Williams, 2012; Nnorom & Osibanjo, 2008). The Basel Convention reported by
Widmer et al. (2005) amended Basel Ban that prohibits the export of e-waste from
developed countries to industrializing countries for disposal.
The terms e-waste and WEEE have been used widely to describe electrical and
electronic waste. However, there are some distinctions to both terms. E-waste refers to
waste that comes from electronic equipments, such as computers, televisions and mobile
phones, while WEEE is not restricted to electronic equipments only, but also includes
non-electronic products such as refrigerators, washing machines and ovens (Robinson,
2009).
Basel Convention that is governed by United Nations (UN) is the organisation that
manages e-waste internationally. The convention defines e-waste as ‘waste electrical
and electronic assemblies or scrap containing components such as accumulators or other
batteries included in list A, mercury switches, glass from cathode ray tubes, or other
activated glass and PCB (polychlorinated biphenyl) capasitors, or contaminated with
Annexe I constituents (for example, cadmium, mercury, lead, PCB) to an extent that
they posses any of the characteristics contained in Annexe III’ (Basel Convention).
European Directive defines e-waste as ‘Waste electrical and electronic equipment,
including all components, subassemblies and consumables which are part of the product
at the time of discarding’ (Gaidajis, 2010).
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
3
In Malaysia, e-waste is managed by Department of Environment (DOE) Malaysia. E-
waste is defined by DOE as ‘waste form the electrical and electronic assemblies
containing components such as accumulators, mercury-switches, glass from cathode-ray
tubes and other activated glass or polychlorinated biphenyl capasitors, or contaminated
with cadmium, mercury, lead, nickel, chromium, copper, lithium, silver, manganese or
polychlorinated biphenyls’ (DOE, 2010a).
According to Puckett (2005), Malaysia is listed as one of the countries that receive e-
waste from United States (US). Malaysia is also exporting e-waste to other less
economically developed country such as India (Puckett, 2005). This is still happening
despite the fact that Malaysia is a signatory to Basel Convention that restricts
import/export of e-waste with the national law (Section 34B of Environmental Act 1974
[EQA 1974]).
1.2 Global e-waste generation
There are no reliable data on the exact quantity of e-waste generated globally. However,
some countries have conducted e-waste inventory every year to identify the composition
of hazardous waste. Apart from the e-waste inventories, data from electrical and
electronic equipment (EEE) production and sales, incorporating with its estimated life
span, can be used as information to estimate the global generation of e-waste.
From a study by Robinson (2009), it is estimated that globally, 20-25 million tonnnes of
e-waste is generated annually with most e-waste being produced in Europe, the United
States and Australasia while China, Eastern Europe and Latin America will become
major e-waste producers in the next ten years. The growth of e-waste generation is three
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
4
times faster than normal waste stream and the estimated rate of increment is about 4%
to 5% per year (Baldé et al., 2015).
Rapid innovation of new technology coupled with early obsolescence of electrical and
electronic devices have made consumers keep changing their EEE and thus,
contributing to generation of greater amount of e-waste. Kahhat and Williams (2012), in
their study in United States had identified that 40 million used and scrap computers
were reaching its end of life in 2010, which does not include other EEE. It is also
estimated that the amount of mobile phones replaced annually in UK is about 18
million; with 50 to 90 million mobile phones stored in UK homes (Ongondo and
Williams, 2011). Japan also has become one of the major e-waste generators, which has
discarded 610 million computers in December 2010 (Kiddee et al., 2013). In India,
around 2.49 million tonnes of e-waste is generated during 2007 to 2011, and most of it
comes from obsolete television and personal computers (PC), desktop, and notebook
(Dwivedy and Mittal, 2012). Global generation of e-waste is shown in Table 1.1.
Table 1.1: Global generation of e-waste (Herat and Agamuthu, 2012)
Country E-waste Generation
(Tonnes) Year
Per capita
generation
(kg/person)
USA 2,250,000 2007 7.5
China 2,212,000 2007 1.7
Germany 1,100,000 2005 13.3
UK 940,000 2003 15.8
Japan 860,000 2005 6.7
Brazil 679,000 - 3.5
India 439,000 2007 0.4
Argentina 100,000 2.5
Canada 86,000 2002 2.7
Switzerland 66,042 2003 9
South Africa 59,650 2007 1.2
Nigeria 12,500 - -
Kenya 7350 2007 0.2
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
5
1.3 E-waste generation in Malaysia
Rapid rise of the use and changing of EEE have led to higher generation of WEEE in
Malaysia. Malaysia generated e-waste mostly from households, business entities, and
institutions (Afroz et al., 2013). Due to sharp increase in electrical and electronic waste
generation in 2006, DOE has introduced e-waste as a new waste category under the
Environmental Quality (Scheduled Wastes) Regulations 2005 (DOE, 2006). The rising
of e-waste generation year by year has become the driving force behind the
development of waste and environmental management policies (Agamuthu & Victor,
2011)
As shown in Figure 1.1, DOE recorded that Malaysia generated 40,275 tonnes of
WEEE in 2006 (DOE, 2006), 52,718 tonnes in 2007 (DOE, 2007), rose to 102,808
tonnes in 2008 (DOE, 2008), 134,036 tonnes in 2009 (DOE, 2009), 163,340 tonnes in
2010 (DOE, 2010), 152,722 tonnes in 2011 (DOE, 2011), and dropped to 78,278 metric
tonnes of e-waste in 2012 (DOE, 2012). Malaysian e-waste was estimated to be about
1.2 million tonnes in 2020 (Agamuthu & Victor, 2011). The significant increase of e-
waste in Malaysia would lead to major problems in waste management and
environment.
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
6
Figure 1.1: E-waste generation in Malaysia (DOE, 2006 to 2012)
1.4 E-waste management in material recovery facilities
E-waste contains both valuable materials and hazardous materials (Widmer et al.,
2005). Therefore, e-waste should not be disposed with other normal waste, as it will end
up in landfill. The hazardous content of e-waste will cause toxic leakage in the leachate
at the landfill. E-waste should be either recycled or sent back to the manufacturer. The
main concern in e-waste recycling is to recover valuable materials while preventing the
leakage of hazardous materials to the environment. By identifying the valuable
materials and hazardous substances in e-waste, cost-effective and environmentally
friendly recycling system can be developed. The major economic driving force for
recycling of e-waste is the recovery of precious metals (Chancerel et al., 2013).
Precious metals that can be obtained from e-waste are gold, palladium, copper, and
plastics (Kang and Schoenung, 2006). Palladium is the most profitable materials to
recover from e-waste (Puckett et al., 2002).
40,275
52,718
102,809
134,036
163,340
152,722
78,278
-
20,000
40,000
60,000
80,000
100,000
120,000
140,000
160,000
180,000
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
To
nn
es o
f E
-wa
ste
Year
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
7
Within the e-waste recycling industry, material recovery facility (MRF) is the critical
element (Kang and Schoenung, 2006). MRF is a facility that has the capability to
process waste by sorting, cleaning, and bulking. The processed waste will be used later
as raw materials for remanufacturing and reprocessing (Lim, 2006). At the recovery
facilities, e-waste can be recovered and eventually became marketable output. Figure
1.2 shows the general process sequence at a material recovery facility for e-waste
recycling. Commonly, collection will be the first step in e-waste recycling and
subsequently, e-waste will be transport to MRF. Then, sorting process will be done to
isolate resalable items and non-functional equipments will be dismantled. The
establishment of resale in MRF will increase the efficiency of the facilities with the aid
of expert technician. The remaining materials are then shredded and the residues are
separated.
Figure 1.2: General process sequence at a materials recovery facility (MRF) for e-waste
recycling (Kang and Schoenung, 2006)
In Malaysia, e-waste recyclers are classified as full recovery facilities or partial
recovery facilities. Full recovery facilities are those recovery facilities that have the
capability to recycle all part of e-waste while partial recovery facilities are those with
limited capacity to recycle electronic equipment they received (Babington, 2010).
Figure 1.3 shows material flow of e-wastes in Malaysia.
Collection Transport Sorting Dismantling Consumers Size
reduction Separation Materials
recovery
Shredder
Residues Resalable
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
8
Figure 1.3: Material flow of e-wastes in Malaysia (Theng, 2008)
1.5 Problem statement
In reality, the generation of e-waste was higher than expected because most of the
generated e-waste is dumped into the landfill without being recorded. However, the
public do not have enough knowledge and awareness to properly dispose their e-waste
that eventually e-waste will end up in municipal landfill. Hazardous contents of e-waste
will lead to serious problems if improperly disposed. If e-waste is directly disposed into
the landfill, the hazardous chemicals can be released into the environment and may pose
a threat to human health. By sending e-waste to the appropriate recovery centre for
recycling, e-waste disposal to the landfill can be reduced. Valuable materials in e-waste
can recovered and thus give significant profit to the recyclers. Nevertheless, many
generators do not send their e-waste to recyclers. Therefore, the money is lost when e-
waste is dumped at the landfill and will be wasted, besides damaging the environment
and human health.
Scrap Computers / Television / Other
Electronic Appliances (E-wastes)
Free / sell
Recycling Centres Scrap Collectors Middlemen / Junkshops
sell
E-waste Recyclers Disposal Facility
(such as Kualiti Alam) Second hand
items
sell Residue
Scrap Plastics
/ Others
Electronic
Components
Main Board /
Computer monitor
Raw Materials (such
as precious metals)
Pre-treatment (Separation)
sell sell sell sell
Domestic
Markets
- Recycling
Domestic Electronic
Industries
- Refurnish/re-condition
Export Markets
(e.g. China)
- Reassembling
Export or Local
Markets
- As raw materials
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
9
In recent years, the DOE Malaysia has encouraged the practice of e-waste recycling.
DOE has placed 309 recycle bins for collection of mobile phones and its accessories in
many place including supermarkets, universities, government offices and other suitable
locations (Babington et al., 2010). The establishment of e-waste recycling and recovery
facilities by private sectors is expanding. According to DOE (2014), until the end of
2013, 147 e-waste recycling facilities have been licensed by DOE. The process of e-
waste recycling must be optimized in order to achieve best result for both the
environment and the economy. The recovery process must be done in appropriate
manner to prevent deleterious effect to the environment. Therefore, environmentally
sound management of the facilities is very important. The economic value of e-waste
can also be optimized by implementing the best recovery technique. By investigating
the management of recovery facilities, both environmental and economic aspects related
to the e-waste recovery facilities can be studied. This research will fulfil this missing
gap to study the management of e-waste by licensed recyclers. Therefore, the objectives
of this research are as follows:
1.6 Research objectives
1. To investigate the process of e-waste management in recycling facilities.
2. To analyse e-waste flow at recovery facilities using Substance Flow Analysis
(STAN) 2.5 software.
3. To determine the level of implementation of environmentally sound
management of e-waste in these recovery facilities.
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
10
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Introduction
This chapter presents a review of the existing literature on various subjects of e-waste. It
covers a wide scope, from the smallest component to the global management of e-waste.
Besides that, the chapter looks into the recycling of e-waste from regional to national
perspectives and practices.
2.1.1 E-waste definition
The terms e-waste, and electrical and electronic equipments waste (WEEE) have been
used widely to describe electrical and electronic waste. In Malaysia, e-waste refered to
electrical and electronic equipment or components that are destined for recycling or
recovery (DOE, 2010a). Within European Union (EU), the term WEEE is widely used,
which define as end-of-life electrical and electronic equipment (Tengku Hamzah, 2011).
United Nation Environmental Programme (UNEP) defines e-waste as ‘a generic term
encompassing various forms of electrical and electronic equipment (EEE) that are old,
end-of-life electronic appliances and have ceased to be of any value to their owners’
(UNEP, 2007).
2.1.2 Categories and types of e-waste
Computer devices are among the most common types of e-waste generated, which
constitute to one-third of the total e-waste (Ahluwalia and Nema, 2007). Under the
European Union (EU) legislation, e-waste is classified into ten categories as listed in
Table 2.1.
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
11
Table 2.1: Categories of WEEE under EU directives (EU Directive, 2012)
No Category Indicative list
1 Large household
appliances
• Large cooling appliances
• Refrigerators
• Freezers
• Other large appliances used for refrigeration,
conservation and storage of food
• Washing machines
• Clothes dryers
• Dish washing machines
• Cookers
• Electric stoves
• Electric hot plates
• Microwaves
• Other large appliances used for cooking and other
processing of food
• Electric heating appliances
• Electric radiators
• Other large appliances for heating rooms, beds,
seating furniture
• Electric fans
• Air conditioner appliances
• Other fanning, exhaust ventilation and conditioning
equipment
2 Small household
appliances
• Vacuum cleaners
• Carpet sweepers
• Other appliances for cleaning
• Appliances used for sewing, knitting, weaving and
other processing for textiles
• Irons and other appliances for ironing, mangling and
other care of clothing
• Toasters
• Fryers
• Grinders, coffee machines and equipment for opening
or sealing containers or packages
• Electric knives
• Appliances for hair cutting, hair drying, tooth
brushing, shaving, massage and other body care
appliances
• Clocks, watches and equipment for the purpose of
measuring, indicating or registering time
• Scales
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
12
Table 2.1, continued
No Category Indicative list
3 IT and
telecommunications
equipment
Centralised data processing:
• Mainframes
• Minicomputers
• Printer units
Personal computing:
• Personal computers (CPU, mouse, screen and
keyboard included)
• Laptop computers (CPU, mouse, screen and
keyboard included)
• Notebook computers
• Notepad computers
• Printers
• Copying equipment
• Electrical and electronic typewriters
• Pocket and desk calculators and other products and
equipment for the collection, storage, processing,
presentation or communication of information by
electronic means
• User terminals and systems
• Facsimile machine (fax)
• Telex
• Telephones
• Pay telephones
• Cordless telephones
• Cellular telephones
• Answering systems and other products or equipment
of transmitting sound, images or other information
by telecommunications
4 Consumer
equipment and
photovoltaic panels
• Radio sets
• Television sets
• Video cameras
• Video recorders
• Hi-fi recorders
• Audio amplifiers
• Musical instruments and other products or
equipment for the purpose of recording or
reproducing sound or images, including signals or
other technologies for the distribution of sound and
image than by telecommunications
• Photovoltaic panels
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
13
Table 2.1, continued
No Category Indicative list
5 Lighting
equipment
• Luminaires for fluorescent lamps with the exception
of luminaires in households
• Straight fluorescent lamps
• Compact fluorescent lamps
• High intensity discharge lamps, including pressure
sodium lamps and metal halide lamps
• Low pressure sodium lamps
• Other lighting or equipment for the purpose of
spreading or controlling light with the exception of
filament bulbs
6 Electrical and
electronic tools
(with the
exception of large-
scale stationary
industrial tools)
• Drills
• Saws
• Sewing machines
• Equipment for turning, milling, sanding, grinding,
sawing, cutting, shearing, drilling, making holes,
punching, folding, bending or similar processing of
wood, metal and other materials
• Tools for riveting, nailing or screwing or removing
rivets, nails, screws or similar uses
• Tools for welding, soldering or similar use
• Equipment for spraying, spreading, dispersing or
other treatment of liquid or gaseous substances by
other means
• Tools for mowing or other gardening activities
7 Toys, leisure and
sports equipment
• Electric trains or car racing sets
• Hand-held video game consoles
• Video games
• Computers for biking, diving, running, rowing, etc.
• Sports equipment with electric or electronic
components
• Coin slot machines
8 Medical devices
(with the
exception of all
implanted and
infected products)
• Radiotherapy equipment
• Cardiology equipment
• Dialysis equipment
• Pulmonary ventilators
• Nuclear medicine equipment
• Laboratory equipment for in vitro diagnosis
• Analysers
• Freezers
• Fertilization tests
• Other appliances for detecting, preventing,
monitoring, treating, alleviating illness, injury or
disability
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
14
Table 2.1, continued
No Category Indicative list
9 Monitoring and
control
instruments
• Smoke detector
• Heating regulators
• Thermostats
• Measuring, weighing or adjusting appliances for
household or as laboratory equipment
• Other monitoring and control instruments used in
industrial installations (e.g. in control panels)
10 Automatic
dispensers
• Automatic dispensers for hot drinks
• Automatic dispensers for hot or cold bottles or cans
• Automatic dispensers for solid products
• Automatic dispensers for money
• All appliances which deliver automatically all kinds
of products
Electrical and electronic equipment (EEE) is classified into two types, which are ‘white’
goods (e.g. refrigerators, washing machines, microwaves, etc.) and ‘brown’ goods (e.g.
televisions, radios, computers, etc.) (Khetriwal et al., 2009). Large ‘white’ goods
contribute a vast amount of WEEE by weight, while ‘brown’ goods come in a smaller
size and make up the majority of WEEE by number (Darby and Obara, 2005).
Handling of e-waste in Malaysia is conducted according to the “Guidelines for the
classification of used electrical and electronic equipment in Malaysia”, provided by the
Department of Environment (DOE). The guideline scope is used to assist all parties
concerned in identifying and classifying used electrical and electronic equipment or
component. Parties involved include waste generators, transporters, importers or
exporters, and also any relevant authorities involved in the management of e-waste.
According to the “Guidelines for the classification of used electrical and electronic
equipment in Malaysia”, e-waste is classified into 25 categories as shown in Table 2.2.
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
15
Table 2.2: Category of e-waste (DOE, 2010a)
Category of e-waste
Used television
Used air-conditioning unit
Used computer
Used refrigerator
Used washing machine
Used video recorder
Used telephone
Used photostate machine
Used facsimile machine
Used microwave / oven
Used radio
Used printers
Used audio amplifier
Used cathode ray tube (CRT)
Used electric cable
Used mobile phone
Used motherboard
Used hard disk drive
Used printed circuit board
Used waste metal contaminated with heavy metals such as cadmium,
mercury, lead, nickel, chromium, copper, lithium, silver and manganese
Used lead frame
Used patterned wafer
Used or rejected or waste of integrated circuit
Used electrical and electronic equipment/product imported from other
countries
Wastes or products processed out of the partial recovery facilities
2.1.3 Generation of e-waste
E-waste is the fastest growing waste stream in the world (Nnorom and Osibanjo, 2008).
Robinson (2009) claims that the growth of e-waste is correlated with the Gross
Domestic Product (GDP) of a country. Robinson (2009) also explains that electronic
items are essential to most countries, except those with a primitive economy. Economic
growth results in more e-waste production. The exponential increase in production and
sales of electronics is the main factor towards the increase of e-waste (Widmer et al.,
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
16
2005). There are three factors that attribute to the rise of electronics usage: (a) the
decrease in EEE price, (b) emergence of internet and (c) the frequent upgrades of
electronic items (Campbell and Hasan, 2003). These factors encourage people to
constantly change and upgrade their electronic devices. Table 2.3 shows the global
quantity of e-waste generated from 2010 to 2018 (data 2015 onwards are forecasts).
Table 2.3: Global quantity of e-waste generated (Baldé et al., 2015)
Year E-waste generated
(Mt)
Population
(billion)
E-waste generated
(kg/inhibitant)
2010 33.8 6.8 5.0
2011 35.8 6.9 5.2
2012 37.8 6.9 5.4
2013 39.8 7.0 5.7
2014 41.8 7.1 5.9
2015 43.8 7.2 6.1
2016 45.7 7.3 6.3
2017 47.8 7.4 6.5
2018 49.8 7.4 6.7
(Data 2015 onwards are forecasts)
The United States of America (USA) is the largest e-waste generator with accumulated
total of 3 million tonnes of e-waste (Oliveira et al., 2012). 2% to 5% municipal waste in
the US is e-waste (Kang and Schoenung, 2005). A study conducted by Bushehri (2010)
presents the e-waste generated by the US, and reported that there are more than 500
million computers which became obsolete between 1997 and 2007, while 130 million
mobile phones were discarded in 2005 (equal to 65,000 tonnes of e-waste). Almost 400
million electronic items were reported to have been discarded within a year in the US
alone (Sthiannopkao and Wong, 2013).
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
17
In Europe, e-waste accounts for 8% of all municipal waste (Streicher-Porte et al., 2005).
Huisman and Magalini (2007) reported that the total annual e-waste production of the
27-member-states of the European Union (EU-27) was 8.3-9.1 million tonnes per year.
China generates 2.3 million tonnes of e-waste each year, making China the second
largest e-waste generator in the world after the US (Oliveira et al., 2012).
2.1.4 Components and composition of e-waste
E-waste contains both valuable and hazardous components. By analysing in detail the
contents of e-waste, there are more than a thousand different substances listed
(Lundgren, 2012). The substances fall under ‘hazardous’ and ‘non-hazardous’
categories (Jain, 2008). Based on their relative amount in e-waste, these substances are
classified into three categories, which are: bulk elements, elements in small quantity,
and trace elements (Tengku Hamzah, 2011). The bulk elements are mainly Pb, Sn, Cu,
Si, C, Fe and Al which contribute a large percentage of e-waste. Cd and Hg are
elements contained in e-waste in smaller quantity, while there are many trace elements
with a small percentage that can be found in e-waste, such as Pt, Ar, Ag, Au, Li, Ti, Co,
Mn and many others (Rajeshwari, 2008).
The most common substances discovered in e-waste are Pb, Hg, Ar, Cd, Se, and Cr6+
(Puckett, 2002). Most of these substances are toxic. Despite the high value of precious
metal (Pt, Ag and Au) found in e-waste, they are usually found in very small amounts.
These precious metals have become the driving force of the e-waste recycling industry.
As evident from Table 2.4, a ferrous metal (iron) is the highest amount in most EEE
(except for lamps, where aluminium is the highest percentage).
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
18
Table 2.4: Material composition of four e-waste categories (%) (EMPA, 2009)
Component
Percentage of content in equipments (%)
Large household
appliances
Small household
appliances
ICT and consumer
electronics Lamps
Ferrous
metal 43 29 36 -
Aluminium 14 9.3 5 14
Copper 12 17 4 0.22
Lead 1.6 0.57 0.29 -
Cadmium 0.0014 0.0068 0.018 -
Mercury 0.000038 0.000018 0.00007 0.02
Gold 0.00000067 0.00000061 0.00024 -
Silver 0.0000077 0.000007 0.0012 -
Palladium 0.0000003 0.00000024 0.00006 -
Indium 0 0 0.0005 0.0005
Brominated
plastics 0.29 0.75 18 3.7
Plastics 19 37 12 0
Lead glass 0 0 19 0
Glass 0.017 0.16 0.3 77
Other 10 6.9 5.7 5
Total 100 100 100 100
The pie charts in Figure 2.1 and Figure 2.2 classified in detail the percentage of various
useful components that can be commonly recovered from computers and mobile
phones, respectively. The composition of computers and mobile phones indicates the
possibility of recovery of valuable materials. The recovered materials can be used as
raw materials for other products. For example, Ni and Co are obtained from mobile
phones and can be used to make stainless steel (Rajeshwari, 2008) Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
19
Figure 2.1: Recovery of resources from computer (Rajeshwari, 2008)
Figure 2.2: Recovery of resources from mobile phones (Rajeshwari, 2008)
Plastic
23.00%
Lead
6.00%
Aluminium
14.00%
Iron
20.00%
Copper
7.00%
Silica
25.00%
Zinc
2.00%
Other metals
3.00%
Epoxy
9.63% Nickel and
compounds
1.07%
Ceramics
17.11%
ABS (acrylonitrile
butadiene styrene)-
PC (polycarbonate)
31.02%
Iron
3.21%
Silicon plastics
10.70%
Zinc and
compounds
1.07%
Cu and compounds
16.04%
Silver and
compounds
1.07%
Other plastics
8.56%
Al, Sn, Pb, Au, Pd,
Mn etc.
0.53%
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
20
2.1.5 Weight and estimated lifespan of e-waste
Robinson (2009) explained that the impact of e-waste differed, depending on the type of
e-waste. Different types of e-waste have distinct weights and estimated lifespan.
Therefore, evaluating the quantities of units disposed will not measure their impact to
the environment. As an example, a personal computer (PC) has an average lifespan of
three years, and average weight of 9.9 kg, which is not comparable to a refrigerator that
has an estimated lifespan of ten years, and average weight of 35 kg. PC has a shorter
lifespan than a refrigerator will contribute to a higher e-waste generation, regardless of
the weight (Table 2.5). Hence, to determine the contribution of certain types of EEE to
the rise of e-waste generation, Robinson (2009) proposed a formula to evaluate annual
e-waste production, E (kg/year), as follows:
E=MN/L ---- Eqn. 2.1,
where M is the mass of the item (kg), N is the number of units in service, and L is its
average lifespan (years).
Table 2.5: The weight and expected life span of some common WEEE items (Tengku
Hamzah, 2011)
Device Weight of device (kg) Typical life span (year)
Computer 9.9 3
Facsimile machine 3 5
Mobile phone 0.1 2
Electronic games 3 5
Photocopier 60 8
Radio 2 10
Television 30 5
Video recorder and DVD player 5 5
Refrigerator 35 10
Microwave oven 15 7
Air conditioning unit 55 3
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
21
2.2 E-waste management approaches and principles
With the increasing quantities of e-waste generation, a number of waste management
approaches and principles have been used to formulate e-waste management strategies.
The objectives of the various concepts are to mitigate the negative environmental
impacts of waste, promote waste as raw material through recycling, reuse or energy
generation, and to make organizations, institutions, the public and individuals, more
responsible for their own waste. This study focused on three approaches that are crucial
to e-waste management, namely:
a) Waste Management Hierarchy
b) Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR), and
c) Material Flow Analysis.
2.2.1 Waste Management Hierarchy
The Waste Hierarchy Concept is a classification of several waste management options
in order of their level of effectiveness and environmental impacts. There are five main
classifications of waste management options, which are reduction, reuse, recycling, and
recovery and disposal (Raina, 2010):
1. Prevention,
2. Reuse,
3. Recycling,
4. Recovery, e.g. energy recovery, and
5. Disposal.
The Waste Hierarchy Concept of waste impacts minimization by: reducing quantity of
waste, reusing it with simple treatments, and recycling it by using it as a raw material to
produce the same or modified products. This is referred to as the “3Rs”. As can be seen
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
22
in Figure 2.3, prevention (reduction) is the most desirable in the hierarchy, followed by
reuse and recycling, which are less desired or favoured options.
Figure: 2.3: Waste Hierarchy (Raina, 2010)
This concept is important for sustainable management of e-waste. The principle of the
3Rs is, for example: using resources with care can and will reduce the pace of
consumption of resources, ultimately reducing waste significantly in waste streams.
When products with a long usable life span are reused continuously, it compensates
harvesting of new resources to produce similar products. This reduces raw resources
exploitation and waste generation quantities. Some waste products can be used as
materials for production of different goods or the same product, meaning recycling the
same resource. This too saves raw resource exploitation and compensates waste
generation. All in all, the 3Rs, individually or collectively, reduce fresh resources
exploitation, add value to the already exploited resources, and very importantly,
minimize the waste quantities generated and the resultant ill effects. Waste
minimization efficiency is stated to be better achieved applying the 3Rs in hierarchical
order – Reduce, Reuse and Recycle (Raina, 2010; EPA, 2015)
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
23
2.2.2 Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR)
The concept of Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) was first introduced in Sweden
by Thomas Lindhqvist in a 1990 report to the Swedish Ministry of the Environment.
The official definition of EPR is: “a policy principle to promote total life cycle
environmental improvement of product systems by extending the responsibilities of the
manufacturer of the product to various parts of the entire life cycle of the product, and
especially to the take-back, recycling and final disposal of the product” (Lindhqvist,
2000). EPR is also known as a take-back program, or product stewardship. Jain (2008)
describes EPR as a financial model that places responsibility of taking back and treating
e-waste on the producing organizations. He further explains that EPR is based on a ‘fee’
paid by the consumers ‘in advance’ during the purchase of products. The ‘fee’ finances
the whole e-waste management to its grave.
The main aim of EPR is to internalize the recycling and disposal cost of products into
the product’s purchase price (Amankwah-Amoah, 2016). This will eventually shift the
economic responsibility of managing e-waste from municipality to manufacturers, and
limit the amount of e-waste being directly dumped to final disposal sites without being
recycled. However, the responsibilities of producers may not only focus on the final
stage of a product’s life cycle, but also the initial stage, which is at the product
designing stage (Dimitrakakis and Gidarakos, 2008). The EPR principle will encourage
producers to design environmental friendly products to prevent pollution and reduce
resources and energy use. The practice of EPR can be either mandatory or voluntary
take back, depending on the company and the legislation of the country (Wagner, 2009;
Lundgren, 2012).
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
24
In a majority of the countries worldwide, management of e-waste is based on EPR.
There are more than 25 countries that have adopted the EPR concept in their e-waste
management (Khetriwal et al., 2009). EPR is practiced by European Union (EU)
member countries by following the Waste Electrical and Electronics (WEEE), and the
Restriction on the Use of Certain Hazardous Substances (RoHS) Directives (Wagner,
2009). South Korea enacted the EPR Law in 2003, which required local manufacturers,
distributors and importers of consumer electronics such as air conditioners, televisions
and computers to achieve official recycling targets or face financial consequences
(Kahhat et al., 2008).
In Malaysia, EPR has been incorporated in Malaysian policy and legislation since the
early 1980s. Environmental Quality (Recycling and Disposal of End-of Life Electrical
and Electronic Equipment) Regulations has been set up by the DOE to enforce
electronic manufacturers to design EEE that have minimum hazardous components, and
eventually facilitate the treatment and recycling process (Agamuthu and Victor, 2011).
2.2.3 Material Flow Analysis (MFA)
Material Flow Analysis (MFA) is an assessment of flows and stocks of materials within
a system that is defined in space and time (Brunner, 2004). The goal of MFA is to
increase the understanding of a studied system, which may lead to better system control
and management (Steubing et al., 2008). The basic equation for MFA is:
ΔM = ƩFin – ƩFout -----Eqn 2.2
where ΔM represents the variation of the material stock in a process, ΣFin is the sum of
flows entering a process and ΣFout is the sum of flows leaving a process (Steubing et al.,
2008).
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
25
Material flow analysis is an e-waste management tool that has been used in most parts
of the world. In Chile, a study using MFA was used to comprehensively analyze e-
waste, identifying relevant streams of e-waste, and providing a basis for authorities and
producers of electronic goods in order to take the necessary actions to establish an
adequate recycling system (Steubing et al., 2008). In 2007, Germany and the US used
MFA in a research to determine the flows of small e-waste, gold and palladium
(Chancerel, 2010). Liu et al. (2006) conducted a study in Beijing, China using MFA to
predict the quantity of e-waste from urban households and to identify the flow after the
end of their useful phase. The quantity handled in 2005 was 885,354 units, and is
expected to increase two times of the previous amount by 2010, due to consumption
growth and the expansion of urbanization (Liu et al., 2006). The study estimated that
the amount will increase to approximate 2,820,000 units by 2020, which is 70% of the
e-waste awaiting collection for possible recycling; 7% will be stored at the owner's
home for an average of one year, and 4% will be discarded directly to enter the
municipal solid waste collecting system (Liu et al., 2006). The remaining items will be
reused for about three years on average after the change of ownership (Liu et al., 2006).
From the study, MFA helped in assisting the waste management authorities of Beijing
to plan the collection methods and facilities needed for the management of e-waste
generated in the future.
2.3 E-waste recycling
In the US, a total of 410 thousand tonnes, or 13.6%, of e-waste was recycled in 2007,
while the rest was improperly disposed in landfills or incinerated (Oliveira et al., 2012).
A report from the United States Environmental Protection Agency states that, in 2009, a
great amount of e-waste was found in landfills and incinerators, and only 17.7 % of the
e-waste generated went to recyclers. There are many problems related to the recycling
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
26
e-waste, due to its size and diversity. For example, the collection of large ‘white’ goods
(refrigerators, washing machines, etc) might pose difficulties due to their size and
weight (Dimitrakakis et al., 2009).
2.3.1 Collection
Commonly, collection will be the first step in e-waste recycling, and subsequently, e-
waste will be transported to material recovery facilities (MRF). Then, the sorting
process is performed to isolate repairable equipment, and non-functional equipment will
be dismantled. Repairable equipment will be sold as second-hand products. The
remaining materials are then shredded, and the residues are separated.
Currently, the US e-waste collection and disposal focus on two main methods, which
are e-waste collected as MSW and disposed in landfills, and e-waste collected for
recycling in the US or exported (Kahhat et al., 2008). In Japan, the e-waste collection
follows E-waste Laws that require manufacturers and importers to take-back end-of-life
electronics for recycling and waste management, and are meant to ensure separation of
e-waste from the MSW stream (Widmer et al., 2005; Kahhat et al., 2008). In 2003,
South Korea enacted the Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) Law, which required
local manufacturers, distributors and importers of consumer electronics, such as air
conditioners, TVs and PCs, to achieve official recycling targets or face financial
consequences (Kahhat et al., 2008).
2.3.2 E-waste recycling technologies
There are three major steps in recycling, which are: disassembly (separating hazardous
and valuable components for specific treatment), upgrading (mechanical or
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
27
metallurgical processing to upgrade the desired materials), and refining (purifying the
recovered materials) (Cui and Zhang, 2008).
Disassembly, or the dismantling process, targets on singling out desirable components
(selective disassembly). This process usually involves separating hazardous and
valuable materials (Tsydenova and Bengtsson, 2011), or classification of different
grades of materials (Zeng and Li, 2016). The upgrading process uses
mechanical/physical processing and/or metallurgical processing to upgrade desirable
materials content. An example of the upgrading process is preparing materials for the
refining process, which is the last stage. In the refining process, desirable materials are
recovered and returned to their life cycle (Cucchiella et al., 2015).
A study on e-waste management scenarios in Malaysia by Suja et al. (2014) has
identified the existing technologies used to process e-waste most in of recovery
facilities in Malaysia, which are dismantling, crushing, grinding, air separation, or wet
separation via jigging, chemical extraction, electrowinning, and thermal refining.
2.4 E-waste environment and health risks
E-waste typically contains complex combinations of recoverable and hazardous
materials. The main hazardous substances commonly found in e-waste are heavy
metals, persistent organic pollutants (POPs), flame retardants and other potentially
harmful substances that are risky to human health and the environment (Lundgren,
2012). Health effects of hazardous substances and contaminants in e-waste can be seen
in Table 2.6. Proper management of these hazardous substances are crucial to ensure
human health and environmental safety.
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
28
Table 2.6: Health effects of hazardous substances and contaminants in e-waste (Tengku
Hamzah, 2011; Lundgren, 2012)
Source of e-waste Substances/contaminants Health Effects
Solder in printing
circuit boards, glass
panels and gaskets in
computer monitors
Lead (Pb) Damage to the central and
peripheral nervous system, kidney
and blood system. Affects brain
development in children.
Chip resistors and
semi-conductors,
batteries, toners
Cadmium (Cd) Irreversible toxic effects to kidneys,
cardiovascular system, bones and
testicular function.
Relays and switches,
printed circuit
boards, fluorescent
lamps, batteries
Mercury (Hg) Accumulates in the kidney, liver,
lungs and digestive system. Cause
neural damage.
Data tapes and
floppy disks
Chromium (Cr) Chronic damage to the brain.
Respiratory and skin disorders due
to bioaccumulation in fishes.
Cabling and
computer housing
Plastic including PVC Causes or aggravates asthma or
bronchitis. DNA damage.
Plastic housing of
electronic equipment
and circuit boards
Brominated flame
retardants (BFR)
Burning produces dioxin. It causes
reproductive and development
problems and immune system
damage; interferes with regulatory
hormones
Front Panel of CRT Barium (Ba) Disrupts endocrine system
functions. Short term exposure
causes muscle weakness, damage to
heart, liver and spleen.
Motherboard, silicon-
controlled rectifiers
Beryllium (Be) Carcinogenic (lung cancer).
Inhalation of fumes and dust causes
chronic beryllium disease or
beryllicosis and skin diseases such
as warts.
Batteries Nickel (Ni) Cause cancer of the lungs
Lithium (Li) Corrosive to the eyes, skin and
respiratory tract.
Toxic substances from e-waste can be found in leachates from landfills, particulate
matter from e-waste dismantling activities, fly and bottom ashes from e-waste burning
activities (incineration), wastewater from dismantling and shredding facilities, and
effluents from cyanide leaching and other leaching activities (Lundgren, 2012). In
Bangladesh, most of the e-waste is dumped in open landfills, farming land and open
water bodies causing severe health and environmental hazards (Agamuthu and Victor,
2013). There are two ways how toxic substances are released from e-waste to the
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
29
environment. The first way is due to the disposal of e-waste with municipal solid waste,
which ends up in landfills or incinerators. In landfills, hazardous substances from e-
waste are introduced into the environment by leaching and evaporation (Heacock et al.,
2016). By disposing even a small amount of e-waste with normal waste in a landfill
introduces a high amount of heavy metals and halogenated substances (Janz and
Bilitewski, 2008). Incineration of e-waste releases toxic fumes, i.e., polyhalogenated
dioxins and furans (Tsydenova and Bengtsson, 2011). Secondly, toxic substances from
e-waste can be released to the environment by improper treatment and recovery
processes, where open burning and acid baths are used to recover precious material,
which release toxic substances into the environment, while the less precious are
disposed of in an unsafe manner.
2.5 E-waste transboundary movement
The exportation of e-waste has begun since the late 1980’s and early 1990’s (Puckett,
2002). The trade, which is often justified as “recycling”, usually involves the export of
e-waste from more economically developed countries to less economically developed
countries, where the environmental awareness is low. The main motivating factors of e-
waste exports are the brute global economics. One of the recyclers in Seattle, U.S.,
Craig Lorch, who opposes e-waste exports, described waste trading:
“I think it’s about the money. When you move material offshore, you get paid
twice for doing very little work. You get paid on the front side for taking
somebody’s material and you get paid on the backside for getting rid of it to
Asia and you don’t do a whole lot of work for it, so it’s all about the money”
(Puckett, 2002).
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
30
The impact of e-waste is correlated with its rising amount, which is due to the
increasing amount of electrical and electronic equipment production and sales.
However, this statement cannot be applied to countries with low economic background.
E-waste that can be found in these countries is not only generated from domestic
sources, but also from imports, whether legal or illegal, mostly from developed
countries with more economic progress.
The Basel Convention on the Control of Trans-boundary Movements of Hazardous
Wastes and their Disposal was adopted on March 22nd
, 1989, and entered into force in
1992 (Basel Convention, 2011). It was adopted in response to a public outcry following
the discovery of deposits of toxic wastes imported from abroad in the 1980s, mainly in
Africa and other parts of the developing world (Basel Convention, 2011). The trans-
boundary movement of e-waste is regulated under the convention. Up until the end of
2014, 181 countries have ratified the Basel Convention. The objective of the Basel
Convention is stated as follows (Basel Convention, 2011):
“To protect human health and the environment against the adverse effects of
hazardous wastes. Its scope of application covers a wide range of wastes defined
as “hazardous wastes” based on their origin and/or composition and their
characteristics, as well as two types of wastes defined as “other wastes” -
household waste and incinerator ash.”
The Basel Convention does not place a ban on the trans-boundary movement of
hazardous waste and their disposal; it only attempts to control the latter. There are two
principles built in the Basel Convention, which are “Environmentally Sound Manner”
(ESM) and “Prior Informed Consent” (PIC). ESM is defined as “taking all practicable
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
31
steps to ensure that hazardous wastes or other wastes are managed in a manner which
will protect human health and the environment against the adverse effects resulting from
such wastes” (Puckett, 2002). ESM must be applied by related authorities to the Basel
Convention before permission for import and export can be granted (Levinson et al.
2008). PIC requires exporters to notify the destination country, as well as any
intermediary countries, and only allows export of hazardous waste with the written
consent from the recipient country (Puckett, 2002; Lundgren, 2012).
There are several factors of the widespread e-waste imports and exports, despite the
existence of an international treaty to overcome the problem. These waste flows from
imports and exports of waste not only offer a business opportunity, but also provide the
demand for affordable second-hand items to the less economically developed countries.
Other than economic reason, the lack of national regulation and enforcement of existing
laws encourage the illegal trades of e-waste. Tengku Hamzah (2011) stated that there
are three main challenges faced by the Basel Convention: (1) the difference in the
definition of hazardous waste in the national laws of member countries; (2) the term
‘environmentally sound manner’ is not well understood and remain ambiguous; and (3)
the use of ‘recycling’ as an excuse to export e-waste. A new economic sector which
involves reuse and recovery through recycling of e-waste is evolving, despite its
environmental and health hazards. China is one of the largest dumping sites of e-waste
in the world, which are imported from the US, Europe and neighbouring Asian
countries, including South Korea and Japan (Puckett et al., 2002; Terazono et al., 2006).
China dominates the highest proportion of all e-waste, which is about 70%, and
constantly rises each year (Lundgren, 2012). China witnesses great gaps in
environmental management, a high demand for cheaper second-hand electronic
equipment and common selling of e-waste to individual collectors, which eventually
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
32
lead to the growth of the informal recycling sector (Chi et al., 2014). Even the
stockpiles of e-waste have become a source of income for the locals; there is a high
probability that this activity will cause severe risks to humans and the environment.
European Union banned the exporting of hazardous electronic waste. Yet, it is still
classified as legitimate recycling by the US Environment Protection Agency
(Greenpeace, 2008). According to the US Interagency Task Force on Electronics
Stewardship (2011), a 2005 US Industry Report estimated that 74% of the recycler
exports used electronics for reuse, refurbishing and recycling, and much of this ends up
in Asia (China to be specific). China and some other East Asian countries are the
destination of e-waste imported from the US, mainly for cheap recycling and final
disposal, or due to the low labour costs and less stringent environmental regulations in
this region (Puckett, 2011). The continued trans-boundary movement of e-waste
involves many US electronics-recycling centres, notorious for accepting waste under the
presence of responsible recycling, and then quietly shipping their waste to China, India,
Africa and other parts of the world (Barnes, 2011; Lundgren, 2012).
The activity to import and export of e-waste is demonstrated in Figure 2.4. Usually,
China, South America and Africa receive most of their e-waste from the US and Eastern
Europe, while Africa and Asia receive their e-waste from Western Europe. Within the
Asian regions, large e-waste generators such as South Korea and Japan export their e-
waste mainly to China and Australia. Generally, small-scale exports go to West Africa,
while larger-scale exports go to Southeast Asia (Lundgren, 2012). China, India,
Pakistan, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Thailand and Vietnam are
common Asian destinations for e-waste (Lundgren, 2012). Exporters of e-waste to
China can avoid detection by routing container ships through Hong Kong, Taipei or the
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
33
Philippines, and then transhipping them to smaller ports in mainland China, where
customs officials are willing to look the other way in exchange for a share of profits as
stated by Lundgren (2012). Dubai and Singapore often serve as transit points for e-
waste from developed countries. Sony, Philips, Nokia, Microsoft, Canon, Dell and
Siemens are some of the e-waste brands from USA, Japan and Europe, which is found
in Ghana and recorded by Greenpeace (2008). Furthermore, labels revealed that the
equipment came from a range of organizations such as Den Kongelige Livgarde, the
Danish Royal Guard and the US Environmental Protection Agency (Greenpeace, 2008).
Figure 2.4: Export of e-waste (Bates, 2013)
Besides China, India is also one of the leading countries that faces a rapidly increasing
amount of e-waste by both local generation and illegal imports (Widmer et al., 2005).
Since the 1990s, India has been one of the largest centers of e-waste recycling, and most
of the e-waste is imported from the eastern half of the USA, EU, Central East Asia and
Southeast Asia (Shinkuma and Managi, 2010). In spite of India being a party of the
Basel Convention, the import of e-waste still occurs, due to the absence of proper
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
34
regulations. The presence of cheap labour has caused a massive trade of e-waste to
India, where equipment is prepared and reused to extend its useful life (Dwivedy and
Mittal, 2012).
In 2003, the Asian Network for Prevention of Illegal Trans-boundary Movement of
Hazardous Wastes was established by the Japan government, which aims at facilitating
the exchange and dissemination of information on trans-boundary movements of
hazardous waste and selected used/second-hand equipment among North-east and
South-east Asian countries. The Network is assisted by participating countries in
formulating an appropriate legislative response to such movements under each country's
system, taking into consideration necessary procedures required by the Basel
Convention. Useful information is provided by the network, which aims to contribute to
capacity building for the implementation of the Basel Convention among the
participating countries. The participating countries are Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia,
China, Hong Kong SAR (China), Indonesia, Japan, Republic of Korea, Malaysia,
Philippines, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam (Ministry of Environment-Japan, 2013).
2.6 E-waste in Malaysia
Director General of the Environment, Malaysia said that e-waste is one of the emerging
issues that has caught the attention of various policy makers, non-governmental
organizations (NGO) and the general public globally (DOE, 2010a). The attention of e-
waste is due to the increasing amount of e-waste being generated. Thus, activities such
as collection, dismantling and disposal of e-waste kept increasing and have caused
environmental pollutions and adverse impact to public health (DOE, 2010a).
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
35
2.6.1 E-waste policies and regulations in Malaysia
E-waste regulation and enforcement is put under the Department of Environment (DOE)
within the Ministry of Natural Resources and the Environment (NRE), Malaysia. E-
waste is regulated under the Environmental Quality (Scheduled Wastes) Regulations
2005, which came into effect on August 15th
, 2005, and the Environmental Quality
(Prescribed Premises) (Treatment, Disposal Facilities for Scheduled Waste)
Regulations, 1989 (control on collection, treatment, recycling and disposal of scheduled
waste, including e-waste) (Victor and Agamuthu, 2013). The importance of the
inclusion of e-waste in these regulations is to control the management of e-waste
generated, besides preventing the importation of e-waste, either for refurbishment or
recovery (DOE, 2010a).
In January 2008, DOE issued the ‘Guidelines for Classification of Used Electrical and
Electronic Equipment in Malaysia’ for assisting all stakeholders involved in e-waste
management to identify and classify the used products according to the regulatory codes
(DOE, 2010a). DOE has categorized e-waste as scheduled waste under the code SW
110, First Schedule, Environmental Quality (Scheduled Wastes) Regulations, 2005. The
SW 110 is classified as waste from electrical and electronic equipment containing
components such as accumulators, mercury-switches, glass from cathode-ray tubes and
other activated glass or polychlorinated biphenyl-capacitors, or contaminated with
cadmium, mercury, lead, nickel, chromium, copper, lithium, silver, manganese or
polychlorinated biphenyls (DOE, 2010a).
E-waste is also listed as A1180 and A2010 under Annex VIII, List A of the Basel
Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and
their Disposal, 1989. As a party of the Basel Convention, Malaysia must follow the
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
36
procedure of importation and exportation provided by the Convention. Importation or
exportation of the waste requires prior written approval from the DOE, as mandated
under Section 34B (1) (b) & (c), of the Environmental Quality Act, 1974 (DOE, 2010a).
2.6.2 E-waste generation in Malaysia
E-waste that is found in Malaysia comes from two main sources, which are
domestically generated or imported e-waste. The volume of e-waste in Malaysia is
expected to increase to 1.1 million metric tonnes in 2020, at rate of 14% annually
(Victor and Agamuthu, 2013).
The E-waste Inventory Project in Malaysia recorded that a cumulative total of 761.507
million units of e-waste in seven categories (television sets, personal computers, mobile
phones, refrigerators, air conditioners, washing machines and rechargeable batteries)
were generated from 2008 to 2020 (Perunding Good Earth Sdn. Bhd., 2008). Within
2008 to 2020, mobile phone rechargeable batteries (MPRB) show the highest
contribution, with a cumulative total of 257.168 million units, followed by mobile
phones with 199.594 million units. The least contributor to the e-waste projection
between the years of 2008 to 2020 is washing machines, with a cumulative total of only
10.245 million units (Perunding Good Earth Sdn. Bhd., 2008). Figure 2.5 shows the
future projection which indicates that all e-waste included in this study generally
increased throughout the year since 1981 to 2020, besides television sets and
refrigerators.
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
37
Figure 2.5: Future projection for WEEE in Malaysia for the year 1981-2020 (Perunding Good Earth Sdn. Bhd., 2008)
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
38
2.6.3 E-waste collection, recycling and recovery in Malaysia
The E-waste management strategy adopted in Malaysia is similar to that of many other
countries, which focuses on e-waste recycling and recovery processes (Tengku Hamzah,
2011). According to the DOE, until the end of 2014, 161 e-waste recycling premises
have been licensed by the DOE, with the breakdown between types of facilities, and its
distribution as shown in Table 2.7 below.
Table 2.7: The number of licensed e-waste recovery facilities according to states in
Malaysia (DOE, 2014)
State Partial Recovery
Facilities
Full Recovery
Facilities
Johor 17 6
Kedah 14 1
Melaka 13 4
Negeri Sembilan 4 4
Pahang 1 0
Perak 4 1
Pulau Pinang 26 12
Sarawak 11 1
Selangor 28 6
Terengganu 1 0
Wilayah Persekutuan 7 0
Total 126 35
Out of 161 recovery facilities licensed, 126 of them focus on partial recovery, which
have a limited capacity to recycle electronic equipment received (DOE, 2014). The
common methods used in partial recovery facilities are collecting, segregating,
dismantling and crushing e-waste, which needs further treatment before being fully
recovered. A total of 35 remaining facilities involved in full recovery process, which
have the capability to recover all parts of e-waste, and involve a complete chain of
processes starting from dismantling, recovery of precious metals, and finally, the
disposal of treated waste (DOE, 2014). The main technology employed by recovery
facilities to recover precious metals from e-waste is still limited to wet chemical
processes and electrolysis (Awang, 2010). Most of these facilities collect e-waste based
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
39
on contracts and tenders from industries and large organisations. Usually, e-waste
contractors pay for the e-waste collected from industries or e-waste generators.
Apart from industries, another source of e-waste is from households and the general
public, where most of e-waste is disposed with normal municipal waste. To solve this
problem, the DOE has provided e-waste collection centres throughout the country.
However, the e-waste collected are limited to used mobile phones, mobile phone
batteries and other accessories, computers and their accessories, as well as television
sets. The collection of e-waste is managed by the solid waste concessionaires or local
authorities (Awang, 2010). However, the low level of awareness among society has
reduced the efficiency of those collection centres. Small-sized e-waste such as mobile
phones and batteries are dumped together with normal municipal waste, and end up in
landfills, and bigger sized e-waste such as refrigerators, washing machine, and
television sets are normally sold to scrap buyers who are not illegal traders.
However, there is another collection system that has been efficiently done to collect
domestic e-waste, which is the take-back system. This involves the
producers/manufacturers collecting back their own products that reach end-of-life from
consumers. Malaysia has been putting a lot of effort to make this successful and make
sure the problem is eradicated before it gets persistent and out of control. The “Recycle
PC” campaign was conducted by the Association of the Computer and Multimedia
Industry of Malaysia (Pikom), in cooperation with Alam Flora Sdn. Bhd. (a waste
management company), to create environmental awareness by encouraging the public
and institutions to recycle PCs and their accessories. In conjunction to that, Panasonic
Malaysia Sdn. Bhd. handed over 60 used PCs and laptops to Alam Flora after a week of
launching the “Recycle PC” campaign (Hawari and Hassan, 2010).
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
40
2.6.4 Transboundary movement of e-waste in Malaysia
Malaysia is a party of the Basel Convention on the Transboundary Movements of
Hazardous Waste and Their Disposal, 1989. Therefore, the transboundary movement of
scheduled waste requires a prior written approval from the Director General of the
DOE. Imports of e-waste for recovery and disposal are not allowed. Exportation of e-
waste for recovery is only permitted for certain cases, since there are recovery facilities
already established in Malaysia to process and recover useful materials from e-waste.
Malaysia will only allow the exportation of e-wastes for overseas recovery if the local
recovery facilities do not have the capability and capacity to carry out such activities.
The exportation of e-waste for final disposal is not allowed (Awang, 2010).
As shown in Figure 2.6, Malaysia is located in the middle of the e-waste trans-boundary
flow from every corner of the world, making it a likely target for receiving and
dispatching e-waste en route to various recycling sites around the region. Malaysia is
also the final destination for some trans-boundary movement of e-waste. According to
the DOE, despite the stringent regulations of importation of e-waste, Malaysia still
accepts e-waste illegally (DOE, 2012a). DOE (2012a) stated that between 2008 and
2011, Malaysian authorities intercepted 38 containers containing e-waste and returned
them to the exporting countries. While in 2009, a Malaysian company manager was
sentenced to one day jail, and was fined RM 180,000.00 for illegal import of e-waste
(DOE, 2012a). Malaysia is also one of the parties to the regional initiative of The Asian
Network for Prevention of Illegal Trans-boundary Movement of Hazardous Wastes,
which was established by the Japanese government (Perunding Good Earth Sdn. Bhd.,
2008).
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
41
Figure 2.6: Transboundary movement of e-waste – Asian region (Basel Action
Network, 2010).
2.6.5 E-waste awareness in Malaysia
The management of e-waste has become an environmental concern in developing
countries due to illegal import or smuggling of e-waste, rapid growth of domestically
generated e-waste, lack of prevention and minimization strategies, indiscriminate
dumping and improper disposal of e-waste, tracking down illegal e-waste recycling
operators, and low awareness in the society on the environmental and health impacts of
hazardous substances of e-waste. Therefore, changing the attitudes of the government,
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
42
appropriate legislations related to e-waste, e-waste dumping control, implementation of
EPR, and transfer of technology on effective recycling of e-waste, have all become the
dominant issues in the green management of e-waste in developing countries (Afroz et
al., 2013).
A study by Afroz et al. (2013) in Kuala Lumpur reveals that the majority of the
households know that electrical and electronic devices may be hazardous to the
environment and human health and only few of the participants replied that they did not
know about this. Most of the respondents also stated that they considered environmental
factors when they purchased EEE for their households (Afroz et al., 2013). This means
that the majority of the households have awareness on e-waste and its negative impact
on the environment. Another survey conducted by Kalana (2010) shows that 57% of the
respondents are knowledgeable about e-waste, and the rest have no idea on what e-
waste entails, with most of the respondents have no knowledge of the proper ways of
disposing their e-waste. This explains why they tend to store e-waste in their houses or
premises and to throw away the waste with other general waste. It has also been
determined that most of the respondents in Malaysia kept their e-waste because lack of
information on how to dispose their e-waste appropriately (Kalana, 2010).
Kalana (2010) adds that most of the households do not know the method and the place
to dispose of electronic waste in an appropriate manner, consequently resulting in e-
waste storage in their premises or dumping it together with other waste (MSW). The
Minister of Natural Resources and Environment shared his view regarding this matter
by stating: “I know some MPs who can’t tell the difference. When you don’t know,
that’s where the problem starts. People will dump food, wires, telephones and other
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
43
items into rubbish bins.” Datuk Seri Douglas Uggah Embas – Natural Resources and
Environment Minister (Yu, 2010)
Some EEE contain materials that are valuable and can be recycled. Some previously
mentioned studies (Kalana, 2010; Afroz et al., 2013) have shown that most of
Malaysians perceived e-waste as equipment that still has a certain amount of value.
They have the feeling that the equipment could be sold to interested parties such as
metal scrap dealers, e-waste recovery facilities, assemblers, etc. The studies also
showed that most of the respondents were unaware of the existence of e-waste
contractors licensed by the DOE to collect unwanted EEE for recycling (Kalana, 2010;
Afroz et al., 2013). The value of e-waste to the consumer can be seen clearly. Usually,
the consumers sell their unwanted equipment at 10–20% of their purchase price, and the
price offered by the recyclers usually depends on the type of EEE, weight and condition
of the waste, rather than on the market price (Kalana, 2010). Since there is no proper
regulation to emphasize the public to pay for their own waste in Malaysia, there are
difficulties faced by the local community to participate in e-waste recycling. Even if
there are programs on the media or campaigns, a limited budget will be the main issue.
This shows that domestic consumers prefer to get paid by disposing their e-waste, rather
than pay other parties to do so.
2.7 Effective e-waste management system
There have been multiple attempts in managing e-waste. Initiatives put in place for
effective management of e-waste can be grouped into voluntary private initiatives,
regional initiatives, and global initiatives. By 2002, ten countries which are Belgium,
Denmark, Italy, Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, Portugal, Japan, and
Taiwan have “mandatory” electronic recovery laws, (Nnorom and Osibanjo, 2008).
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
44
Nnorom and Osibanjo (2008) also stated that at the same period, there were also
extensive voluntary programs in other countries, such as Germany, and a draft take-back
bill in several others.
2.7.1 Voluntary private initiatives
There have been several voluntary take-back programs for e-waste components in both
developed and developing countries. In the US, growing public and government
attention to the problems posed by e-waste has prompted a few manufacturers and
retailers to announce plans for small-scale take-back programs. Dell, Hewlett Packard
(HP), International Business Machines (IBM), and other market leaders all have
programs of one type or another, which are mostly focused on their customers/products
(Nnorom and Osibanjo, 2008). The European Recycling Platform (ERP), established in
2002 by Hewlett Packard, Sony, Braun and Electrolux, is another private initiative
aimed at enabling producers to comply with the EU WEEE Directive (Nnorom and
Osibanjo, 2008). The objective is to evaluate, plan and operate a pan-European platform
for recycling and waste management services.
2.7.2 State/regional initiatives
The European Union Waste Electrical Electronics Directive (Directive 2002/96/EC) is
part of a change in environmental legislation from processes to products that began in
the early 1990s. This is resulting from the upward trend in waste generation, which
must be halted and reversed in terms of both volumes and environmental hazard and
damage (Castell et al., 2004). In Finland, the technology industries introduced the
AWARENESS (Advanced WEEE Recovery and Recycling Management System)
Project in the summer of 2003, which focuses on influences of the WEEE Directive on
manufacturers and producers of EEE (Nnorom and Osibanjo, 2008). The goal of the
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
45
project is to support companies in arriving at a consensus on WEEE Directive
implementation details.
EPR has been developed quite differently in Japan as compared to Europe. In particular,
take-back does not have to be free. Consumers pay when they bring used equipment
back to retailers. Producers set the take-back fees for their own products (Nnorom and
Osibanjo, 2008). Nnorom and Osibanjo (2008) also stated that Japan established a take-
back system for four types of e-waste (air conditioners, TVs, refrigerators and washing
machines) in 1998. In order to implement the take-back system, the ministries and
authorities concerned mandated all producers of electronic products to undertake the
environmentally sound management of these categories of e-waste pursuant to the law,
regulations, and guidelines.
2.7.3 Global initiatives
The foremost global initiative aimed at tackling e-waste issues is the Basel Convention
and Basel Ban. This is a global agreement which was initiated in 1992, and aims to
regulate the movement of hazardous waste, including e-waste, between countries. There
are some ongoing initiatives at finding solutions to the e-waste problems from a global
perspective. One of these initiatives is the SteP Initiative (‘solving the e-waste
problem’, SteP), which is co-initiated and coordinated by the United Nations’ research
arm, and the United Nations University (UNU). The SteP Initiative started in 2004 at
the ‘Electronic Goes Green’ Conference in Berlin. The initiative is intended to build an
international platform to exchange and develop knowledge on WEEE Systems among
countries to enhance and coordinate various efforts around the world on the reverse
supply chain (Nnorom and Osibanjo, 2008; Widmer et al., 2005).
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
46
2.8 E-waste management in Material Recovery Facilities
Within e-waste recycling industry, material recovery facilities (MRF) are a critical
element within other infrastructures (sanitary landfills, metal scrap facilities, etc.). The
difference of MRF from other facilities is that the collected e-waste will be recovered
and recycled in MRF to obtain almost all valuable materials such as plastics, metals,
glass, etc., depending on the presence of technology in that particular MRF.
2.8.1 E-waste Material Recovery Facilities in Malaysia
A study conducted by Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) in 2005 found
that the e-wastes generated in Malaysia were collected by the junkshops, recycling
centres and scrap collectors. These stakeholders play an important role in bridging the
gap between the waste generators and recyclers, by collecting e-wastes generated from
various sources and sending these to e-waste recyclers. Consequently, as part of green
environment practices, the e-waste generators should never mix and discard the e-waste
into their waste bins, but instead sell or give them to dedicated collectors or middlemen
for proper recycling. E-waste recovery facilities collect e-waste from various
middlemen, collectors and recycling centres. Besides recycling normal recyclable
materials, such as plastics and metals, these recycling plants also extract precious
metals, such as gold, platinum, silver and lead, from the circuit boards of the e-waste
(Theng, 2008).
2.8.2 E-waste Material Recovery Facilities in United States
Kang and Schoenung (2005) have depicted e-waste material recovery facilities in the
US (see Figure 2.7). The collection of e-waste in the US occurs either on a periodic
basis like a general municipal waste collection, or by request. This collection method is
the most convenient for citizen, despite its higher operating costs as compared to other
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
47
collection options. E-waste that arrived at the recycling facility (MRF) will be tested
and sorted. The MRF process is the most important element in electronic recycling. At
MRF, the fate of the collected item is determined. Collected equipment in MRF can be
divided into two categories, which are reusable or recyclable. The items and parts that
can be reused are sorted, and others will eventually be recycled. The typical process
steps at a materials recovery facility (MRF) in U.S. are shown in Figure 2.7.
Figure 2.7: The typical process steps at a material recovery facility (MRF) in U.S.
(Kang and Schoenung, 2005)
As the e-waste arrives at the MRF, they will be sorted into three secondary markets,
each represents different economic values. The first market is for refurbished items that
can be sold or gave away to secondary users. The second market is for reclaimed items
that can be reclaimed, resold and reused. The third market is for scrap and recycled
materials (Kang and Schoenung, 2005). Although straight-forward, examination and
testing for reuse are time consuming and labor intensive tasks. A plug-and-play test is
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
48
used to identify equipment that is operational. Equipment that fails the test may be
dismantled for component resale and reuse. Recovery of individual components from e-
waste is more complex than the simple plug-and-play test that can be used for a
complete system. Employees responsible for component recovery must know how to
disassemble the system, which components are valuable, or require special care in
handling, such as a hard drive.
2.8.3 E-waste Material Recovery Facilities in Europe
Most recovery facilities in Europe utilise manual dismantling which is the major cost
element within any recycling technique (Dalrymple et al., 2007). Manual disassembly
includes the removal of harmful materials (i.e. batteries and other materials stated by
WEEE Directive) or classified the items into high and low grade material. By using
dismantling approach, component, part, and subassembly of a product can be removed
systematically. Furthermore, dismantling can also separate products into its components
for refining process.
Technical solutions have been reinforced in Europe e-waste recycling. A study by
Dalrymple et al. (2007) in Switzerland shows that the country has a proper take-back
and recycling systems, which are called SWICO and S.EN.S. SWICO is for recycling of
computers, consumer electronics and mobile equipment, while S.EN.S is for recycling
of household appliances (Dalrymple et al., 2007). Rather than sorting and disassembly
activities, the major concern were more on the main impact caused by treatment applied
during recovery process of secondary raw materials (Hischier et al., 2005). E-waste
recycling is advantageous from environmental perspective, if compared to incineration
of e-waste and primary production of raw materials. To achieve such systematic and
advantageous recovery, establishment of feasible technical processes is very important
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
49
for the sake of future stakeholders. Even though most parties support this statement,
they would focus their interest more on sorting and dismantling, which give more value
from the downstream recovery processes (Dalrymple et al., 2007).
2.8.4 E-waste Material Recovery Facilities in China
Chinese informal recyclers use old methods to recover valuable components and
materials, which poses high risk to the workers’ health and the environment. In most
cases, basic working protection (i.e. gloves, masks) and medical insurance is not
available (Schluep et al., 2009). For example, in Guiyu, Leung et al. (2006) stated that
recycling activity consist of toner sweeping, assembling of electronic equipment, plastic
melting, heating circuit boards over honeycombed coal blocks, burning wires to recover
copper, selling computer monitor yokes to copper recovery operations, and using acid
chemical strippers to recover gold and other precious metals. Not all activities are
related to recovery; some include open burning or dumping of unwanted e-waste (Orlins
and Guan, 2016). For the formal recyclers, technologies and equipments from the
developed countries are used, which is not suitable for China’s local situation (Yu et al.,
2010). Formal infrastructures like pyrometallurgical smelters, landfill specifically for
hazardous waste and incineration plants for specific waste streams are not fully installed
(Schluep et al., 2009).
2.8.5 E-waste Material Recovery Facilities in India
Sinha-Khetriwal et al. (2005) described the Indian recycling system as developing very
naturally by the scrap industry which collects scrap from many sources including
obsolete ships, old vehicles and building wastes. The rise of electronics devices, and as
electrical and electronic equipments started to reach their end of life, the already
established scrap metal facility accepts this type of waste. Industrial recycling networks
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
50
are systems of many different organisations, whether governmental or non-government
organisations, which can cooperate through common waste material and waste energy
utilisation (Korhonen et al, 2004). As described by Desrochers (2004), the e-waste
management system in India is an example of a successful industry which is self-
organised and market-driven.
In India, waste collectors paying the consumers for their e-waste (Sinha-Khetriwal et
al., 2005). Some small e-waste collectors sell their collections to middleman who
segregate and sort different kinds of waste, which is then being sold to recyclers to
recover metals. EMPA pilot study in New Delhi concludes that their e-waste industry is
based on connection between collectors, recyclers and traders (Sinha-Khetriwal et al.,
2005). Each of the parties has their own function in adding the value and creating
employment, at each point of the chain. As the amount of e-waste keep increasing,
many waste processors have focus on e-waste as their specialisation. This is supported
by the low initial investment, starting from collection, dismantling and recovery
process, which thus attract small entrepreneurs.
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
51
2.8.6 Summary of Material Recovery Facilities in Selected Countries
The summary of MRF system in selected countries is shown in Table 2.8.
Table 2.8: Summary of Material Recovery Facilities in selected countries
Countries Management at Material Recovery Facilities Reference
Malaysia - Collect e-waste from middlemen, collectors
and recycling centres.
- Recycle plastics and metals, as well as
extracting precious metals.
Theng (2008)
United State - Collection by general municipal waste
collection, or by request.
- Collected e-wastes are sorted into three
secondary markets which are:
1. refurbished items,
2. reclaimed, resold and reused items, and
3. salvaged and recycled items.
Kang and
Schoenung (2005)
Europe - Utilise manual sorting and disassembly Hischier et al.
(2005)
China - Many informal recyclers use primitive methods
which posses risk to human and environment
- Involve activity like burning and dumping of
unwanted e-waste
- Formal recyclers usually import e-waste from
developed countries
Schluep et al. (2009)
India - E-waste is accepted by already established
scrap metal industry
Sinha-Khetriwal et
al. (2005) Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
52
CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY
3.1 Introduction
This chapter explains detailed methodology of this research. The research methodology
covers two main methods, which are questionnaires/survey and interview session. The
survey and interview sessions were aimed to look into intensive e-waste management
throughout the selected recovery facilities. Other aspects that were included in the
survey and interview sessions is opinion from stakeholders.
The recovery facility survey which targeted the administrator of recovery facilities was
aimed to collect information on company management, as well as, the quantitative data
such as the amount and type of e-waste coming in and amount of products and residues
coming out. Interview session was conducted with the stakeholder and management
staff from selected e-waste recovery facilities for further understanding in e-waste
management, their subjective opinions and the connection between recovery facilities,
public, non-governmental organisation and the government.
3.2 Research design
Research design is a crucial element in research study, especially when formulating
research objectives and determining the data collection and data analysis techniques.
Quantitative method was used to determine the input and output of e-waste within
research scope while assimilating qualitative approach in order to explore the
management process. A descriptive survey design was used to collect numerical data for
material flow analysis. Interview sessions and observation were done to aim an accurate
portrayal of opinions, beliefs, awareness and level of knowledge of particular
stakeholders.
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
53
3.3 Research scope
The study was conducted in Klang Valley, the central region of Malaysia which
includes Wilayah Persekutuan Kuala Lumpur and Selangor. Kuala Lumpur is the
federal capital and the most populous city in Malaysia. The high population density will
bring high levels of e-waste generation. Selangor was chosen because it is the richest
and the most populous state in the country, with a high standard of living.
In 2014, there were 20 active e-waste recovery facilities in Klang Valley. All of these
recovery facilities are licensed by Department of Environment (DOE), Malaysia, to
legally operate their premises. Out of 20 recovery facilities, 15 recovery facilities were
willing to take part in this study (Table 3.1). Five of them are full recovery facilities and
the other ten are partial recovery facilities. Partial recovery is a process where the
recovered materials need further recovery process to produce the final product. The
partially recovered materials are still considered as hazardous wastes and are require to
be treated at prescribed premises. The location of 15 recovery facilities involved is
shown in Figure 3.1. All of these recovery facilities scattered throughout Kuala Lumpur
and Selangor Malaysia.
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
54
Table 3.1: List of active e-waste recovery facilities in Klang Valley
No Company Name
Type of
Recovery
Facilities
Participation
1 Company A Full Participated
2 Company B Full Participated
3 Company C Full Participated
4 Company D Full Participated
5 Company E Full Participated
6 Company F Partial Participated
7 Company G Partial Participated
8 Company H Partial Participated
9 Company I Partial Participated
10 Company J Partial Participated
11 Company K Partial Participated
12 Company L Partial Participated
13 Company M Partial Participated
14 Company N Partial Participated
15 Company O Partial Participated
16 Company P Full Not involved in the study
17 Company Q Partial Not involved in the study
18 Company R Partial Not involved in the study
19 Company S Partial Not involved in the study
20 Company T Partial Not involved in the study
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
55
Figure 3.1: Location of recovery facilities involved is in the red box, i.e. Klang Valley
3.4 Data collection methods
3.4.1 Questionnaire / survey
In data collection, questionnaires / surveys were used (Appendix A). The questionnaires
were distributed to selected recovery facilities. The questionnaires were targeted to the
administrators of the e-waste recovery facilities involved in the study. Questionnaire
was designed to collect data on the management of recovery facilities, the amount and
flow of e-waste and its economic value. The targeted administrator is the person who
has the information on the amount of e-waste collected, the type of e-waste collected,
the products and residues formed.
Initial contact with stakeholders was made via email and phone calls. Their contacts
were identified through company’s websites, as well as, through personal contacts of
interviewed stakeholders. However, responses were very slow. A more proactive
approach was employed using the official letter from University of Malaya. The
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
56
researcher personally went to the recovery facilities and requested audience with
relevant personnel. This approach proved successful and stakeholders were more than
cooperative in person.
3.4.2 Interview
In addition to the questionnaire, an in-depth interview was conducted during the site
visits to gather data. Through this method, the subjective views, experiences and
knowledge of key players in e-waste management were obtained. Most of the interviews
were carried out during visits to the company. This serves a better understanding in
evaluating the quality of work, and shed light on many unforeseen aspects of the
process. Interviews were also conducted via e-mails and phone calls.
3.4.3 Site visit
During the site visit, observation of the surrounding area, the workers, the workplace
and how e-waste was managed were done to record the e-waste management within
these recovery facilities. The results of the observation were discussed in Chapter 4.
3.5 Data analysis
Material flow analysis model was generated using Substance Flow Analysis (STAN)
2.5 software. STAN software supports graphical modelling of material or substance
flow (in terms of materials, substances or goods). STAN also features data
reconciliation, error propagation, gross error detection and displays the results in a clear
Sankey style for better visualization.
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
57
3.6 Flow chart of the research methodology
Figure 3.2 represents the procedures for the execution of the research.
Figure 3.2: Process flow of the research
Survey questionnaires were prepared for the management of recovery facility
Interview sessions were arranged with the handlers of e-waste at recovery facilities
Questionnaires were distributed among the stakeholders
Data from recovery facilities were collected and analysed
Models (STAN) were constructed based on the data collected
Results were evaluated and justified
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
58
CHAPTER 4: RESULTS & DISCUSSION
4.1 E-waste recovery facilities survey
Twenty e-waste recovery facilities located in Klang Valley were approached, but only
fifteen facilities agreed to take part in the research. The research involved interview
sessions and distribution of questionnaires to stakeholders and management staff of the
recovery facilities. The survey was conducted between October 2013 and July 2014.
The list of companies was obtained from Hazardous Substances Division, Department
of Environment (DOE), Malaysia.
4.1.1 E-waste recovery facilities involved
Out of fifteen the recovery facilities involved, five of them are full recyclers and the
others are partial recyclers (Table 4.1). E-waste full recyclers are those recovery
facilities that have the capability to recycle and recover e-waste until the desired
materials are obtained. E-waste partial recyclers are those with limited capability to
recycle e-waste because of technological limitations. Partial recyclers are usually
involved in collecting, sorting, dismantling, and crushing process, before the semi
processed e-waste is sent to full recovery facilities for further recovery.
Table 4.1: Type of recovery facility involved
Type of recovery facilities Number of recovery
facilities involved
Full recovery facilities 5
Partial recovery facilities 10
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
59
4.1.1.1 Business involved in recovery facilities
Generally, there are four common types of business done by e-waste recovery facilities
which are collecting, dismantling, repairing and processing/recovery. Figure 4.1 shows
the type of business involved by the recovery facilities. It shows that all of the recyclers
are involved in the collection of e-waste. The collection may either be from households,
companies or factories depending on their nature of business. Most recyclers have their
own transport to collect e-waste from the source.
Figure 4.1 also shows that twelve recovery facilities are involved in e-waste dismantling
process. Dismantling process does not involve any high technology because most of the
work is done manually. E-waste processing and recovery need to have specialized
technology, to obtain useful residues and precious metals. All the full recyclers are
involved in processing and recovery of e-waste (Figure 4.1). Only three partial recyclers
are engaged in e-waste processing and recovery. Four full recyclers and two partial
recyclers repair their collected e-wastes to produce second-hand electronic equipment.
Figure 4.1: Type of businesses involved in recovery facilities
4
5
4
5
2
3
8
10
0 5 10 15
Repairing
Processing /
Recovery
Dismantling
Collection
Number of recovery facilities involved
Ty
pe
of
bu
sin
esse
s
Partial
Recovery
Facilities
Full
Recovery
Facilities
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
60
4.1.2 E-waste management in recovery facilities
4.1.2.1 Presence of inventory record
All recovery facilities involved in this research have documented their own inventory.
Figure 4.2 shows the frequency of monitoring inventory records by the recovery
facilities. Most of the recovery facilities monitor its inventory records every six to
twelve months. DOE has requirement on the frequency of monitoring and maintaining
inventory record which is at least once in three years (Abdullah, 2010). This shows that
all recyclers involved in this research are in the right track in managing their inventory.
Inventory record is very important for systematic documentation for an efficient
operation in any organisation or institution (EPA, 2013). By evaluating inventory
record, one can trace the amount of e-waste collected and also it is a useful tool to
determine their loss and gain in business. Furthermore, data on weight, selling and
purchase of e-waste can be documented systematically, which make it easier to be
compiled in a system (e-consignment) developed by DOE (Abdullah, 2010).
Figure 4.2: Frequency of monitoring inventory record by recovery facilities
Never
Once
Every 1 - 2 years
Every 6 - 12 months
Every 1 - 6 months
Once a month
Several times a month
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Number of recovery faciltiies
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
61
4.1.2.2 Presence of accreditation
Accreditation is a certification or recognition granted to companies or organizations that
maintain certain standard. It is one of the aspects of Environmental Management
System (EMS) that is recommended by DOE for recovery facilities to achieve. Out of
fifteen recovery facilities involved, only seven recyclers (47%) have accreditation, as
shown in Table 4.2. Out of seven recyclers that have these certifications, three recyclers
have ISO 14001:2004; one recycler has ISO 9001:2008 and three recyclers have both
certifications (Table 4.3). The reason why most of the recovery facilities do not
implement accreditation is because most of them start their business on a small scale
and in low budget. Some of the companies will be pursuing accreditation in the future.
Table 4.2: Presence of certification in recovery facilities
Presence of Accreditation No. of Recovery Facilities
Yes 7
No 8
Table 4.3: Presence of ISO accreditation within recovery facilities involved
No Company ISO 14001:2004 ISO 9001:2008
1 Company B / /
2 Company C / /
3 Company E / /
4 Company I /
5 Company J /
6 Company K
/
7 Company L /
Total 6 4
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
62
4.1.2.3 Frequency of purchasing e-waste
Table 4.4 shows the purchasing frequency of the recovery facilities for e-waste in a
month. The information on purchasing and collecting e-waste by the recovery facilities
is very important to identify the availability of e-waste in Klang Valley area. The results
show that eleven recovery facilities purchased e-waste more than four times per month.
These recovery facilities have large scale business and have many clients to sustain their
e-waste supply. Some of the facilities were awarded with tender to collect e-waste from
various private companies and government agencies. Only two of the recyclers purchase
e-waste two to three times per month. One recycler purchased e-waste less than two
times per month, depending on the availability of e-waste. Those recovery facilities do
not take e-waste as their main priority in their business. They usually have multiple
types of business such as scrap metal recycling, plastic recycling, precious metals
recovery and others.
Only one recovery facility has no e-waste purchased in a month. They purchased
irregularly throughout the year because of the limited amount of supplier. To sustain
their income, they do different kind of businesses. Most of recyclers do not collect e-
waste from household as it requires high transportation and collection fees, but lower
supply of e-waste (Bouvier and Wagner, 2011). Therefore, the recyclers are more
encouraged to focus on large institutions that have higher supply of e-waste as
compared to household. In Klang Valley, the supplies of e-waste are quite reasonable
because many large institutions and organization are located in the areas that need e-
waste disposal service. The results show that eleven recyclers purchased e-waste more
than four times per month to fulfill the demand from their clients.
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
63
Table 4.4: Frequency of recovery facilities purchasing e-waste in a month
Frequency of monthly purchase of e-waste No. of recovery
facilities
None 1
Less than 2 times 1
2 - 3 times 2
More than 4 times 11
4.1.2.4 Duration of e-waste being stored
Figure 4.3 shows the duration of e-waste being stored by recyclers before being sent to
other destination. Most of the recyclers stored their e-waste three to six months. The
maximum duration set up by DOE for a premise to store their hazardous waste is six
months and the storage is not more than 20 tonnes (DOE, 2011). From this research, it
was established that no recyclers exceeded the DOE limit. There are also recyclers that
effectively transfer their e-waste within one to seven days. Storing hazardous waste,
specifically e-waste within the regulated time limit is very important to avoid leakage
and contamination to the environment which can cause harm to human health (DOE,
2012).
All of the recovery facilities involved in this research implemented e-consignment note.
E-consignment note is a system provided by DOE for reporting information about
scheduled waste (other term for hazardous waste used in Malaysia). All recovery
facilities involved in scheduled waste handling should commit to this system. The
system is very important for DOE to record the input and output of scheduled wastes
within the recovery facilities. The report will help DOE to monitor e-waste flow, so that
contractors will not exceed the limits regulated by DOE.
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
64
Figure 4.3: Duration of e-waste being stored by recyclers before transporting to other
destinations
4.1.2.5 Implementation of safety and health aspect
Implementation of occupational safety and health aspect is very important for high risk
industry. E-waste recovery facility is one of the industries that have high chance of
occupational accidents. E-waste recyclers deal with collection, dismantling, processing,
and recovery. The basic step in implementing occupational safety and health aspect is
having a safety committee and safety officer. If the organization has more than 40
employees, the safety officer must be registered by Department of Occupational Safety
and Health (DOSH) (DOSH, 2012). Referring to Figure 4.4, twelve recyclers
established their own safety committee. Only five companies have unregistered safety
officers, and five companies have registered safety officer. Safety committee should be
established by all recovery facilities regardless of their number of employees.
6%
27%
27%
40% 1 day - 1 week
1 week - 1 month
1 month - 3 months
3 months - 6 months
6 months - 1 year
More than 1 year
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
65
After having authorized person and committee in handling safety matters, a program
must be done to ensure continuous improvement in preventing accident. In general,
there are five programs that are often being held to enhance their safety and health
aspect. The programs are fire training and fire drill, accident reporting and investigation,
safety and health training, safety inspections and hazards assessments, and written
safety rules and procedures (OSHA, 2013). As displayed in Figure 4.5, most of the
recovery facilities involved in this research implemented all of these programs. The
management of recovery facilities is aware of the importance of safety and health
programs, which is to prevent occupational accidents.
Figure 4.4: Presence of authorized person/committee in handling safety matters
5
5
12
1
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Registered safety officer
Safety officer (unregistered)
Safety committee
None
Number of recovery facilities involved Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
66
Figure 4.5: Presence of safety and health program
4.1.2.6 Challenges faced by recovery facilities
The challenges faced by recovery facilities are shown in Figure 4.6. The most
prominent challenge cited is the high price of e-waste. Most e-waste generators sell their
e-waste to recovery facilities in high price. The recovery facilities feel burdened by this
situation as they might not obtain profitable income at the end. The establishment of
recovery facilities in Malaysia increased throughout the year. Increase of solid waste,
especially e-waste that can be recovered has become an opportunity to new
entrepreneur. However, low amount of e-waste has become one of the main obstacles
for the recyclers, which lead to competitive market among the recovery facilities. This
is parallel with another challenge, which is lack of public awareness. In reality, the
generation of e-waste was higher than expected. However, the public did not have
enough knowledge to properly dispose their e-waste and eventually the e-waste will end
up in municipal landfills. One of the companies also stated that the cost to comply with
11
11
10
12
13
0 5 10 15
Written safety rules/procedures
Safety inspections/hazard assessments
Safety and health training
Accident reporting and investigation
Fire training / fire drill
Number of recovery facilities involved
Sa
fety
an
d h
ealt
h p
rog
ram
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
67
legal requirement is high. There are companies that do not have any problems or
obstacles in managing recovery facilities.
Figure 4.6: Obstacles faced by recovery facilities involved
4.1.2.7 Types of e-waste collected
Figure 4.7 shows the types of e-waste collected by recovery facilities. Five types of e-
waste are commonly collected by recovery facilities. Personal computer (PC) or
notebook / laptop is the most collected e-waste at recovery facilities with 42%. This
parallel to a study done by Ahluwalia and Nema (2007), that computer devices are
among the most common types of e-waste generated, which constitute to one-third of
the total e-waste. The high usage of PC and notebook/laptop nowadays has led to the
increase of its waste. Other than that, the lifespan of these devices are normally short as
compared to other devices. Home appliance is the second highest e-waste collected at
recovery facilities with 21%. The examples of home appliances are ‘white’ goods such
as refrigerators, washing machines, microwaves, ovens, etc. (Khetriwal et al., 2009).
White goods contribute a large amount of e-waste by weight (Darby and Obara, 2005);
even the number of unit collected is smaller compared to other electrical items (Balde et
5
3
2
2
1
5
0 2 4 6
High price of e-waste
Low amount of e-waste
Lack of awareness from public
High competition from other recovery facilities
High cost in complying with legal requirement
None
Number of recovery facilities involved
Ob
sta
cles
fa
ced
by
rec
ov
ery
fa
cili
ties
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
68
al., 2015). Hence, it shows in the results that home appliances contribute high
percentage of e-waste collected, by weight (Figure 4.7).
Figure 4.7: Amount of different types of e-waste collected
4.1.2.8 Sources of e-waste collected
Different types of e-waste were collected from different sources. The sources of e-waste
were generalized into seven categories which are households, private companies,
government agencies, factories, public, other recovery facilities and others. From the
results shown in Figure 4.8, most of e-waste collected comes from private company and
the second highest is from government agency. Both of these organizations often
separate their waste accordingly. Wastes that can be recovered mostly will be sold to
recovery facilities to generate side income. Factories also have a lot of e-waste,
specifically, secondary scraps and semi-conductor materials. Only 12% of e-waste
comes from households. It shows that Malaysian citizen do not separate their e-waste to
be send to recovery facilities. The e-waste generated by households and public that are
not sent to facilities will end up in landfills.
1000 1000 2000 5000 7120 8000
30053
42955
56220
110190
0
20000
40000
60000
80000
100000
120000 A
mo
un
t o
f e-w
ast
e co
llec
ted
(k
g/m
on
th)
Type of e-waste
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
69
Figure 4.8: Amount of e-waste generated by different sources
4.1.2.9 Methods to process e-waste
Recovery facilities have different kinds of techniques for recovering and processing of
e-wastes. These technologies are shown in Figure 4.9. Crushing method is the most
popular method among the recovery facilities. By using a specialized crushing machine,
several types of e-waste can be crushed to produce finer materials. The products
generated by crushing process can be sorted using metal separation process. This
process is to assist in obtaining valuable metals. Dismantling method is a process that
separates different components of e-waste. Dismantling method only involve manual
human workforce without any advance technology. In Guiyu, China, recycling
operations consist of toner sweeping, dismantling electronic equipment, selling
computer monitor yokes to copper recovery operations, plastic chipping and melting,
burning wires to recover copper, heating circuit boards over honeycombed coal blocks,
and using acid chemical strippers to recover gold and other metals (Leung et al., 2006).
7134 8000
24630
32084 34108
55437
102144
0
20000
40000
60000
80000
100000
120000
Importers Dealer
collector
Other RF Government
agencies
Households Private
companies
Factories
Am
ou
nt
of
e-w
ast
e g
ener
ate
d (
kg
/mo
nth
)
E-waste generator
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
70
Kang and Schoenung (2005) state the typical process steps at material recovery facilities
in the US, starting from sorting, size reduction, vibrating screen, magnetic separation,
eddy current separation, density separation and finally disposal. Eddy current separation
is to separate nonferrous metals while density separation is to separate plastics (Kang
and Schoenung, 2005).
Figure 4.9: Amount of e-waste being processed by different methods
4.1.2.10 Destination of e-waste from recovery facilities
After e-wastes are collected, repaired, dismantled, or processed in recovery facilities,
remaining residues will be disposed. If there is nothing to be recovered, the products
will be sold to other entity. As displayed in Figure 4.10, 30% of recyclers sell their e-
waste to entity that buys recyclable materials. The end products that can be sold are
plastics, metals, glass and others. Some recovery facilities that have limited technology
in recovering e-waste will sell it to other recovery facilities that have more advanced
technology. 15% of the recyclers disposed their e-waste residue to Kualiti Alam and
1000 5176
16200
27000
42000 42562
129600
0
20000
40000
60000
80000
100000
120000
140000
Pakaging Data
cleanup
Palletizing Electrolysis Melting Dismantling Crushing
Am
ou
nt
of
E-w
ast
e B
ein
g P
roce
ssed
(k
g/m
on
th)
Methods to Process E-waste
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
71
another 15% disposed their e-waste residue to landfill. Findings from the E-waste
Inventory Project in Malaysia show that dismantling process generates some residues
which can be either hazardous or non-hazardous (Perunding Good Earth Sdn. Bhd.,
2008). They listed some items which were generated from recycling process in recovery
facilities, such as plastics, mixed metals, glass with CRT, CFCs, rechargeable batteries
and dry batteries, mixture of different types of discarded parts, and box cartons /wooden
pallets (Perunding Earth Sdn. Bhd., 2008).
Figure 4.10: Amount of e-waste sent to different destination
4.1.2.11 Generalized process flow of all recovery facilities
Figure 4.11 shows the generalized process flow from the 15 recovery facilities. Most of
the recovery facilities follow the same flow. Firstly, it starts from on-site weighing of e-
waste for price determination. The purchased items were then collected and transported
to recovery facilities. At the recovery facilities, the collected e-waste was weighed again
2894 14550
19341 21850
204901
0
50000
100000
150000
200000
250000
Other RF Landfill Exporters Kualiti Alam Recyclable
markets
Am
ou
nt
of
E-w
ast
e D
istr
ibu
ted
/Dis
po
sed
(k
g/m
on
th)
Output Destination
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
72
for documentation purpose. Then, segregation process takes place to identify the
processable and unprocessable e-waste. The methods of e-waste processing were
different, depending on their scope of business and availability of technology. The
process flow observed in these 15 recovery facilities is similar to the process flow
studied by Kang and Schoenung (2006) on the e-waste material recovery facilities in the
US. From their study, collection is the first step in e-waste recycling and subsequently,
e-waste will be transported to MRF. Then, sorting process will be done to isolate
reusable items, while non-functional equipment will be dismantled to undergo further
process for recovery. The resale of reusable devices in MRF will increase the profit
making of the facilities. The remaining materials were then shredded and the residues
were separated.
Figure 4.11: Generalized process flow in e-waste recovery facilities in Klang Valley,
Malaysia
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
73
4.1.3 Material Flow Analysis
Data collected from all selected recovery facilities were analysed and from the results,
material flow analysis (MFA) models were developed to investigate the flow of e-waste
throughout all the recovery facilities from its collection to its final destination. The main
objective of the MFA is to increase understanding of a selected system. This will lead to
a better management of the system. MFA was built for all 15 recovery facilities. Each
recovery facility has their own specific sources of e-waste collected, the types of e-
waste, the methods of e-waste processing and the output destination. Therefore, Figure
12 shows the indicator for better visualisation and understanding of the MFA. Each
MFA incorporated the key process namely source of e-waste generation, type of e-
waste, method of e-waste processing and destination of e-waste. The e-waste flow
according to the law of mass conservation in the analysed system is as follows
(Equation 1):
Input (100%) = ∆Stock (0%) + Output (100%) (1)
Figure 4.12: Indicators for the MFA (Refer to Figures 4.14 – 4.29)
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
74
4.1.3.1 Material Flow Analysis for Company A
Company A is a full recovery facility that was first established in Japan in 1951. Up
until now, their business is expanding to global markets, specifically focussed in South
East Asian region. They focus on recycling of precious metals, environment related
business and foodstuff related business (Matsuda, 2015). E-waste collection and
processing has become one of their main expertises. They use high level technology to
recover precious metal by using barrier-metal based materials with wire accumulated on
shields, and finally using ultra-pure water (Matsuda, 2015a).
Figure 4.13 shows the material flow analysis (MFA) of e-waste in Company A. It is
estimated that 10 tonnes of e-waste is collected by Company A in a month. All e-waste
collected by Company A are from factories. Most of e-waste collected (80%) was in the
form of manufacturing defects. The other 20% of e-waste are commonly from
households such as refrigerators, televisions, washing machines and others. All of the
recovered products are exported to various countries including Japan. Japan is one of
the pioneers in e-waste recycling industry (Chung and Murakami-Suzuki, 2008).
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
75
Figure 4.13: MFA of e-waste collected by Company A Univ
ersity
of M
alaya
76
4.1.3.2 Material Flow Analysis for Company B
Company B is a full recovery facility that concentrates on recovery and recycling of
various e-waste materials. They focus on ferrous, non-ferrous metal and electronic
wastes. It was established in 1990 in Malaysia. Their main business includes extensive
waste disposal and environmental services with compliance to all regulations on health,
safety and environment (Ming, 2010). Their services involved collection from clients’
facilities, transportation, sorting and classification, crushing, recycling and raw material
resale (Ming, 2010).
Figure 4.14 shows the e-waste flow analysis of Company B. 50 tonnes of e-waste were
collected by Company B in a month. The collected e-waste is mainly from three
different sources, namely private companies, government agencies and factories. 40%
of e-waste is collected from factories. Most of the e-waste collected (40%) is in the form
of printed circuit board (PCB). PCB is an electronic component that has many useful
wastes that can be recycled (EPA, 2014). Gold, silver and platinum can be found in
PCB (Hageluken, 2008). Other types of e-waste collected are computers, notebooks,
telephones, mobile phones, and home appliances.
At the recovery facility, the e-wastes will be processed using different methods, mostly
by crushing. The other methods used are melting and electrolysis; depending on the
type of e-waste. 80% of e-waste collected becomes the final products to be distributed
to entity that buys recyclable materials. 20% of the end products become residues.
Hazardous residues will be sent to Kualiti Alam and normal waste will be sent to the
landfill.
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
77
Figure 4.14: MFA of e-waste collected by Company B Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
78
4.1.3.3 Material Flow Analysis for Company C
Company C is a multinational company, established in 1974. Since 2002, the company
has evolved throughout the world, focusing on recycling scrap materials and recovering
precious metals from waste. Company C’s core business diversified from recyclable
materials, e-waste management to total waste management, while minimizing the
environmental impact (ALH, 2015). They have over 50 established clients from
international corporation locally and around the world.
As shown in MFA constructed in Figure 4.15, 80 tonnes of e-wastes are collected in a
month. There are four different sources of e-waste collected, which are factories,
households, private companies, and government agencies. Most of e-waste was
collected from factories. The vast usage of electrical and electronic equipments make
factory as one of the largest e-waste generators. Half of the collected e-waste is
processed using crushing method. In some recovery facilities, e-waste will first undergo
mechanical crushing and stripping for several times until it is finely crushed (Tengku
Hamzah, 2011). The other three methods are melting, electrolysis, and palletizing. The
methods used to process e-waste depend on the type of e-waste and their desired
product. 88% of processed e-waste will be sold to entities that buy recyclable materials.
The hazardous residues will be sent to Kualiti Alam, and non-hazardous waste will be
disposed to landfill. Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
79
Figure 4.15: MFA of e-waste collected by Company C Univ
ersity
of M
alaya
80
4.1.3.4 Material Flow Analysis for Company D
Company D is a Malaysian company established in 1993. The company is a full
recovery facility that specialized in ferrous and non-ferrous metal recycling. It was
awarded with ISO 9001:2008 Certification and accredited by the Department of
Standards Malaysia (High Cans, 2015). Their clients include recycling dealers, small
peddlers, manufacturing facilities, government agencies and small private businesses.
Company D collected 10 tonnes of e-waste per month from various entities including
factories, recovery facilities, households, private companies and government agencies
(Figure 4.16). Factories are their main source of e-waste which contributes to 50% of
the influx. Most of the e-wastes collected are obsolete computers and notebooks.
Computers and notebooks have lower lifespan than other devices and have a high
probability to be discarded (Garlapati, 2016). Three main methods were used by
Company D to recover valuable materials from e-waste, which are crushing, melting
and electrolysis. From the processes, 90% of products and 10% of residues were
produced. All of the yielded products were sold to recyclable markets. The generated
residues were either disposed to the landfill (non-hazardous waste) or to Kualiti Alam
(hazardous waste).
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
81
Figure 4.16: MFA of e-waste collected by Company D Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
82
4.1.3.5 Material Flow Analysis for Company E
In 1987, Company E was founded in Kaohsiung County, Taiwan, as scrap metal
facility. This company is involved in recycling of materials from many industries, e.g.
photoelectric devices, semi-conductor devices, and other scrap/bi-products. These
materials come from electronic equipment producers, petrochemical producers and
petroleum refiners. The recovery of precious metals (gold, silver, platinum, palladium
and rhenium) has become their main priority, while still practicing recycling of other
material too, such as ferrous metals, non-ferrous metals and plastics. They obtain
certification for ISO 9001, ISO 14001 and OHSAS 18001. Company E has expanded its
business to China (Suzhou/Shanghai), Hong Kong, Philippines (Laguna/Clark),
Thailand, Singapore and Malaysia. Company E is a full recovery facility that has the
ability to fully recover collected e-waste, with the presence of advance technologies.
The analysis of e-waste flow for Company E is shown in Figure 4.17. Total estimation
of e-waste collected by Company E per month is 45 tonnes. The e-waste is collected
from five different sources namely private companies, government agencies, importers,
factories and from other recovery facilities. The highest contributor of e-waste for
Company E is other recovery facilities with 45% of the whole e-waste collected in a
month. As Company E is a full recovery facility, many partial recovery facility send
their partially recovered e-waste to Company E. Partial recovery facilities that are
lacking advance technology do not have enough ability to fully recover their e-waste
(DOE, 2012a). Therefore, the best way is to sell their partially processed e-waste to full
recovery facilities for further recovery.
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
83
The collected e-waste will be sorted into different types. The largest type of e-waste
collected is personal computer and notebook, with 56%, followed by television,
printer/copier and telephone/hand phone. To recover the valuable materials from e-
waste, three type of processes take place in Company E. Crushing is their main method
in processing e-waste (67%), followed by melting (22%) and electrolysis (11%). The
yielded products will be sold to recyclable markets and exports to other countries.
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
84
Figure 4.17: MFA of e-waste collected by Company E Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
85
4.1.3.6 Material Flow Analysis for Company F
Started in strategic location in the Klang Valley, Malaysia, Company F expanded their
business towards recovery and recycling. Company F assists companies, such as private
company and government agency, in handling their surplus and obsolete metal and non-
metal item. The collected items will either be recovered, recycled or granulated.
3,000 kg of e-waste was collected by company F in a month (Figure 4.18). 60% of e-
wastes are collected from private companies, while the other 40% is collected from
government agencies and importers. The types of e-waste collected are mainly PC,
notebooks, home appliances, and database equipment. The database equipment is a
specialized machine that is used by related companies for their database organizer.
Company F have contract with various private companies to collect their obsolete
database equipment.
All e-waste collected will be dismantled manually by their workers. There is no advance
technology involved in the dismantling process. Manual dismantling is the more
traditional method to generate recyclable materials from e-waste (EMPA, 2009). The
dismantled e-waste will be sent to other recovery facilities for further recovery process,
sold to entity that buys recyclable materials and exported to other countries.
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
86
Figure 4.18: MFA of e-waste collected by Company F Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
87
4.1.3.7 Material Flow Analysis for Company G
Founded in 2007, Company G recycles all type of electronic and electrical scraps, as
well as ferrous and non-ferrous metals. Company G provide customized logistic service
for sensitive Information Technology (IT) equipment, tagging and verification service,
as well as data destruction service through degaussing, shredding or cremating vital
evidence from data storage device to ensure clients total peace of mind during disposal
activity (SCT, 2012).
Company G is a company that focused mainly on computers. They have technicians
who are experts in repairing and modifying computers and other electronic gadgets. By
referring to Figure 4.19, company G collected e-waste from three different sources.
About 90% of the e-waste collected from private companies and government agencies.
The other 10% is imported from other countries. About 80% of e-waste collected is
personal computers (PC), while the others are television, notebooks, printers, and home
appliances.
After collection, the e-waste will be sent to recovery facility for further process. PC and
notebook will undergo data cleaning process, while other waste will be dismantled
manually. The PC and notebook will either be repaired if it is fixable, or it will be
further dismantled to recover recyclable and precious materials. The end product of e-
waste from this recovery facility will either be sold to entity that buy recyclable material
or will be exported to other countries. The amount of e-wastes that are collected per
month by this company is approximately 7.67 tonnes.
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
88
Figure 4.19: MFA of e-waste collected by Company G Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
89
4.1.3.8 Material Flow Analysis for Company H
Company H is a partial recovery facility established on 2001 in Malaysia. Their
business focused on buying, processing and selling recyclable goods. Most of the
collected goods are supplied by industries. Their aim is to recycle valuable scrap waste
while preserving and protecting the environment. To achieve this, the compliance of
legislation related to environment, health and safety are strongly emphasized.
Figure 4.20 shows the constructed MFA of e-waste in Company H. E-waste flow of
Company H starts from four different types of entity, with dealer collectors being the
biggest e-waste supplier (80%). Dealer collector involved in collecting and transporting
e-waste from its generators to recovery facilities. Other e-waste generators are private
companies, government agencies and factories. The e-wastes collected are mainly
personal computers, notebooks, home appliances, printers and televisions. These types
of e-waste are the most produced e-waste globally (Baldé et al., 2015).The only method
applied by this company in processing e-waste is crushing method. The products and
residues yielded are sold to recyclable markets and disposed to Kualiti Alam,
respectively.
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
90
Figure 4.20: MFA of e-waste collected by Company H
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
91
4.1.3.9 Material Flow Analysis for Company I
Company I is a partial recovery facility that focused on recycling electrical and
electronic waste, as well as scrap metals, plastics, and other recyclable items. Company
I is one of the sub-company of a bigger electrical and electronic company in Malaysia.
They assist in collection of e-waste within their mother company and also throughout
many other organizations and institutions across Malaysia.
The material flow analysis of e-waste in Company I is shown in Figure 4.21. The total
amount of e-waste collected by this company is approximately one tonne per month.
Private companies are the largest e-waste supplier for Company I, which contribute to
about 50% of the total e-waste collected. Government agencies contribute to about 350
kg per month. Private institutions and government agencies are listed as one of
committed e-waste generators in Malaysia (Perunding Good Earth, 2008). The highest
types of e-waste collected are personal computers and notebooks with 600 kg per
month. Main technology that is used to process e-waste is crushing method. Other
method used by the company is pelletizing, where the e-waste collected will be
pelletized according to the type of materials recovered. The products and residues
yielded will be sold to recyclable markets and disposed in landfill, respectively.
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
92
Figure 4.21: MFA of e-waste collected by Company I Univ
ersity
of M
alaya
93
4.1.3.10 Material Flow Analysis for Company J
Company J is a Japanese based company established in 1946. They have been
expanding their operations globally through their overseas subsidiaries in Singapore,
Thailand, Malaysia, the Philippines, Hong Kong, Taiwan, China and Vietnam
(Ohgitani, 2007). Their operations in Malaysia focused on processing and exporting
scrap. Their primary businesses are manufacturing metal products (nonferrous metal
materials, such as copper and nickel). They are also collecting, screening, repackaging,
storing and shipping nonferrous metal scrap.
Indicated in Figure 4.22, the amount of e-waste collected by Company J is 10 tonnes per
month. E-waste is collected from the government agencies, importers and mostly from
private companies. The collected e-wastes are mainly PC, notebook, TV, printer, and
home appliances. At the recovery facility, the e-waste will be processed using crushing
method. The process generates 90% products and 10% residues. The products will be
sold to company that buys recyclable materials. The residues will be sent to Kualiti
Alam for disposal.
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
94
Figure 4.22: MFA of e-waste collected by Company J Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
95
4.1.3.11 Material Flow Analysis for Company K
Company K is a Malaysian company established in 2007. The company is an exporter
that sells recyclable metal products. As a partial recovery facility, their end products are
not fully recovered and need to sell it to other recovery facilities for further recovery.
Besides having license from DOE to operate their business as an e-waste contractor,
they also have licensed vehicles to collect e-waste from generators.
Figure 4.23 shows MFA of e-waste in Company K. About 1.80 tonnes of e-waste are
collected in a month. There are four different sources of e-waste being collected. About
90% of e-waste are purchased from private companies, government agencies and
factories. The other 10% are collected from households. Common types of e-waste
collected by Company K are televisions, PC / notebooks, central processing unit (CPU)
and printer / copier. All of the e-waste collected will undergo crushing process. 80% of
final products will be exported to other countries and 20% will be sent to other recovery
facilities for further recovery. Malaysia will only allow the exportation of e-wastes for
recovery overseas if the local recovery facilities do not have the capability and capacity
to carry out such activities. Before the DOE can allow e-waste to be exported, the e-
waste generator/exporter must submit proof. The exportation of e-waste for final
disposal is not allowed (Awang, 2010).
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
96
Figure 4.23: MFA of e-waste collected by Company K Univ
ersity
of M
alaya
97
4.1.3.12 Material Flow Analysis for Company L
Company L started its operations in 2005 and is based in Malaysia. They are specialised
in recycling electrical and electronic waste, especially used computer and its
accessories. Besides being licensed by DOE as a legal e-waste dealer and contractor,
they also have ISO 9001:2008 certification (T-pot, 2014). Company L usually
purchased e-waste from corporate businesses, government agencies or walk-in
individuals. Besides e-waste recycling, they also sell second-hand electrical and
electronic products as a part of their main business.
Figure 4.24 shows MFA of e-waste in Company L. E-wastes are collected from
households and factories, especially factories from electronic industries. The type of e-
waste collected or purchased are computers / laptops, televisions, printers / copiers, and
home appliances. The e-waste collected will undergo dismantling and crushing process.
All of the products yielded are sold to recyclable markets. E-waste is processed for
usable parts which are sent back to market for reuse (Sinha, 2008). Residues are
dumped to the landfill or sent to Kualiti Alam, depending on the type of waste. All
hazardous waste generated from their operation are sent to Kualiti Alam. This is in
compliance with the regulations fixed by DOE.
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
98
Figure 4.24: MFA of e-waste collected by Company L Univ
ersity
of M
alaya
99
4.1.3.13 Material Flow Analysis for Company M
Wholly owned Malaysia company, Company M was established in 2005. They have
obtained the ISO 14001:2004 certification to enhance their standard in recycling e-
waste, ferrous and non-ferrous metals, plastics and used machines. The e-wastes
collected by company M are assemblies containing components such as accumulators,
glass from cathode-ray tube, polychlorinated biphenyl-capacitors, and mercury-switches
(Bayu Quantum, 2008).
From MFA of e-waste shown in Figure 4.25, Company M collected 10 tonnes of e-
waste by either purchasing them from households, factories or other facilities. Most of
their e-wastes collected are from households, which contribute 60% of their total e-
waste collected. Factories and other recovery facilities supply 40% (20% each) of the
total e-waste collected by Company M per month. Their highest type of e-waste
collected is home appliances (50%), followed by personal computers and notebooks
(30%) and televisions (20%). Home appliances which are usually collected from
household are primarily discarded by voluntary drop-off at designated collection
facilities (Bauvier and Wagner, 2011). The collected e-wastes will then be dismantled to
separate the components according to their materials. Crushing method was also used to
obtain finer products to ease the next stage of recovery. The products yielded will be
sold to recyclable markets, while the residues and wastes generated will be sent to
Kualiti Alam (hazardous waste) and landfill (non-hazardous waste). Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
100
Figure 4.25: MFA of e-waste collected by Company M Univ
ersity
of M
alaya
101
4.1.3.14 Material Flow Analysis for Company N
Company N started as a family business was established on 1979. Metal scrap and e-
waste recycling are their main business. They make collections from local scrap dealers,
vendors, producers, electricians and other related suppliers. Company N offers secure
and certified computer disposal service with collections from anywhere in Malaysia.
Items that they collect are monitors, CPU, hard disks, printer, laptops or notebooks,
servers, network routers and firewalls, motherboards and, other related computer parts
and accessories (Thanam, 2014).
Company N collects approximately 5 tonnes of e-waste per month as shown in Figure
4.26. The e-waste collected comes from three different sources, namely 60% from
private companies, 20% from government agencies and another 20% from factories.
Computers and televisions are the main types of e-waste collected. Computers and
notebooks have lower lifespan than other devices and have a high probability to be
discarded (Baldé et al., 2015). Most of the e-wastes collected will undergo dismantling
process (80%). The other 20% of e-wastes are processed using crushing machine. 98%
of e-wastes are yielded as products and sold to recyclable markets. Residues and waste
generated are sent to Kualiti Alam.
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
102
Figure 4.26: MFA of e-waste collected through by N Univ
ersity
of M
alaya
103
4.1.3.15 Material Flow Analysis for Company O
Company O collected the lowest amount of e-waste in this study. This company is a
partial e-waste recovery facility which is also a scrap metal facility. 90% of their
business focused on scrap metal business. Therefore, e-waste collection is just their side
income.
Figure 4.27 shows the MFA of e-waste in Company O. With a total of 58 kg of e-waste
collected per month, 50% of e-waste comes from private companies, 45% collected
from government agencies and 5 % collected from households. At recovery facilities,
the e-waste is dismantled manually. There is no advance technology involved in the
process. The dismantled e-waste, which is the final products, will be sent to other
destination, where 60% of the final products will undergo further recovery using more
advance technology. The other 40% which are the recyclable products will be sold to
entities that buy recyclable materials.
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
104
Figure 4.27: MFA of e-waste collected by Company O
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
105
4.1.3.16 Material Flow Analysis of total e-waste collected through all recovery
facilities involved
By using Substance Flow Analysis (STAN) 2.5 software, a material flow analysis
(MFA) of e-waste through selected recovery facility is generated (Figure 4.28). By
adding all of the data collected, the estimated amount of e-waste generated was 82.43
tons per month. The MFA is divided into four main parts to help better visualization of
the constructed MFA. The four main parts are the sources of e-waste, the types of e-
waste collected, the methods of e-waste processing, and the output destination of e-
waste.
The MFA starts at e-waste generators. The generators are divided into seven different
organizations and institutions, which are factories, private companies, households,
government agencies, other recovery facilities, dealer collector and importers. These
generators are the sources of e-waste that is purchased or collected by the recovery
facilities. Factories were the highest contributor of e-waste supply to the recovery
facilities with 39%. It is followed by private companies with 21%, households with
13%, government agencies with 12%, other recovery facilities with 9%, dealer collector
with 3% and importers with 2%.
The MFA in Figure 4.28 also shows different types of e-waste collected by recovery
facilities, which are personal computer (monitor, CPU, keyboard etc), laptops, home
appliances, televisions, printers, photostat machines, manufacturing defects, telephones,
mobile, printed circuit board (PCB), database equipment and secondary scraps. Personal
computers and laptops are the highest e-waste collected with 42%. Home appliances,
televisions and printer/copier also contribute significant amount with 21%, 16% and
11%, respectively.
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
106
After the collection, various types of e-waste are processed by using seven main
methods; crushing, dismantling, melting, electrolysis, palletizing, data clean-up and
packaging. Crushing is the most popular method used by recovery facilities involved,
with about 49% of e-wastes collected are processed this way. It is followed by 15%
dismantling and 15% melting.
The output will be distributed according to their types (goods or residues). The products
yielded are sold (90%), sent to other recovery facilities for further recovery (2%), or
exported to other countries (8%). The hazardous and non hazardous wastes are disposed
off to Kualiti Alam (60%) and to the landfill (40%), respectively.
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
107
Figure 4.28: MFA of total e-waste collected by recovery facilities involved
Sources of
e-waste Output
destination
Types of e-waste
collected
Methods of e-waste
processing within RF
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
108
4.2 General Discussion
E-waste recycling is a very important industry. Government and other relevant bodies
need to monitor this because of two reasons; to ensure recovery of valuable components
in e-waste which can contribute to significant economic value, and to reduce pollution
caused by improper disposal of e-waste that contain hazardous materials (Sthiannopkao
and Wong, 2013). Within e-waste recycling industry, material recovery facilities play an
important role in recovering valuable materials from e-waste while reducing the
disposal of e-waste to the landfill.
There are many factors that contribute towards the efficiency and success of e-waste
recycling facilities, such as the efficiency of recovery process, availability of suitable
technology, public awareness on the importance of e-waste recycling, recyclers
awareness on potential hazards of e-waste, and specialisation on collection to processing
and disposal process (Tengku Hamzah, 2011; Hageluken, 2008; Kang and Schoenung,
2004).
E-waste recovery facility in Malaysia needs to comply with legal requirements set by
the government to avoid improper management of hazardous waste. Introduction of
EMS is also one of the criteria on hazardous waste management facility in Malaysia
(DOE, 2006). Department of Environment, Malaysia instructed hazardous waste
recovery facilities to record and update their purchasing, storing and disposing activity
in a database called e-consignment note. Recovery facilities are not allowed to store
their hazardous waste more than six months (Abdullah, 2010). These requirement
introduced by Malaysian government will ensure a sound management of e-waste by
recovery facilities.
The study identifies several challenges faced by recovery facilities in managing e-waste.
The most prominent challenge is the high price of e-waste sold by the generators. Many
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
109
consumers think that e-wastes contain valuable materials; hence they are supposed to be
paid and not paying recyclers who collect their e-waste (Awang, 2010). Therefore, the
government must educate the public about their responsibility in e-waste management.
Usually, more educated groups were easier to understand the importance to certain
action as compared to less educated groups (Fauziah, 2009).
Sustainable resources consumption is very important in e-waste management system
(Brunner and Ma, 2009). By using Material Flow Analysis (MFA) model, the
understanding of e-waste management flow in material recovery facility from its
sources to its final destination can be achieved. The results of the study determine the
following advantage of MFA in analysis of e-waste management in recovery facility:
determination of e-waste supplier, identification of types of e-waste collected, methods
of e-waste processing, and the output of recovery facilities, as well as the destination of
the output. MFA is an essential tool for analysis of e-waste management and the
beginning point for improvements (Gurauskienė and Stasiškienė, 2011).
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
110
CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 Conclusion
E-waste recovery facilities in Klang Valley managed their collected e-waste
according to Malaysia’s Department of Environment (DOE) rules and guidelines.
Current e-waste management in the recovery facilities vary significantly in some of
their operating procedure. Less than half of the recyclers have accreditation or
certification by standard-setting bodies. These recovery facilities implemented an
environmentally sound management of e-waste to follow the regulations stipulated
by DOE. All recovery facilities documented their e-waste purchasing in e-
consignment system developed by DOE, for record keeping purpose. All of the
recyclers also complied with DOE regulation to store their hazardous waste not
more than six months.
The research also found that there were several challenges in managing e-waste
recovery facilities. The most prominent challenge faced by these recovery facilities
is the high price of e-waste, followed by low supply of e-waste because of lack of
awareness from public to recycle their e-waste, high competition from other
recovery facilities and high cost in complying with legal requirements.
The MFA model established for e-waste in each recovery facility shows that e-
wastes were collected, processed, sold and disposed in various ways. The amount
and types of e-waste processed also vary significantly. However, most of the
recovery facilities follow similar flow, starting form collection, documentation,
processing, selling and disposal.
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
111
5.2 Recommendations
The recommendations postulated below are generated from the careful analysis of
the research findings and are aimed at suggesting plausible ways to improve e-
waste management in Malaysia.
5.2.1 Awareness Campaign
Relevant authorities and stakeholders can introduce campaign to raise public
awareness on e-waste. Recycling campaigns already exist in Malaysia. However,
the introduction of recycling and management guidelines of hazardous waste,
especially e-waste is still lacking. The term e-waste itself is still unfamiliar to many
people. By enhancing the public’s knowledge on e-waste management will reduce
the amount of e-waste disposed to the landfill. Thus, leachate pollution which
comes from heavy metals, which mostly originated from e-waste, can be reduced.
Preventing e-waste from entering the landfills will shift e-waste disposal
responsibility towards the recyclers. Therefore, e-waste supply for the recyclers
will increase.
5.2.2 E-waste Collection Bins
Malaysia has already introduced e-waste collection bins, which are located at
selected government agencies, universities and shops. However, the lack of staff
and financial support in managing each collection bin has lowered the efficiency of
the program. By increasing the number of staff assigned to monitor and maintain
the program will enhance the performance.
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
112
5.2.3 Extended Producer Responsibility
Extended producer responsibility (EPR) of e-waste has not been complied widely
by electrical and electronic equipment (EEE) manufacturer. The government should
regulate a mandatory requirement of take back scheme towards manufacturer or
producer of EEE. This will shift the responsibility of e-waste collection towards the
producer, and automatically reduce the dumping of e-waste to the landfill. The
producer can collaborate with recovery facility to collect and process e-waste
respectively.
5.3 Areas for Future Research
The research generally focused on e-waste management at recovery facilities in
Klang Valley and thus did not cover the whole of Malaysia. Future research can
include other cities or states that have high number of e-waste recovery facilities
such as Pulau Pinang, Malaysia. Furthermore, including the rest of Malaysia as
research area may provide a holistic view on e-waste recovery facilities
management in Malaysia.
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
113
REFERENCES
Afroz, R., Masud, M. M., Akhtar, R., & Duasa, J. B. (2013). Survey and analysis of
public knowledge, awareness and willingness to pay in Kuala Lumpur,
Malaysia–a case study on household WEEE management. Journal of Cleaner
Production, 52, 185-193.
Agamuthu, P., & Victor, D. (2011). Policy trends of extended producer responsibility in
Malaysia. Waste Management & Research, 29(9), 945-953.
Ahluwalia, P. K., & Nema, A. K. (2007). A life cycle based multi-objective
optimization model for the management of computer waste. Resources,
Conservation and Recycling, 51(4), 792-826.
ALH (2015). Our Background. Retrieved May 20, 2015 from http://alh.com.my/our-
background
Amankwah-Amoah, J. (2016). Global business and emerging economies: Towards a
new perspective on the effects of e-waste. Technological Forecasting and Social
Change, 105, 20-26.
Awang, A. R. (2010). E-waste Management in Malaysia. Retrieved December 5, 2014,
from:http://www.unep.or.jp/ietc/spc/news-jul10/Malaysia_(Dr.RahmanAwang).
Babington, J., Siwar, C., & Ahmad Fariz, M. (2010). Bridging the Gaps: An E-waste
management and recycling assessment of material recycling facilities in
Selangor and Penang. International Journal of environmental Sciences, 1(3),
383-389.
Baldé, C.P., Wang, F., Kuehr, R., Huisman, J. (2015). The global e-waste monitor.
United Nations University, IAS – SCYCLE, Bonn, Germany.
Barnes, A. (2011). New War on E-waste. Retrieved October 24, 2014, from:
http://www.chinadialogue.net/article/show/single/en/4456-New-war-on-e-waste-
Basel Action Network. (2010). The Globally Responsible Way to Recycle your
Electronics. Retrieved September 25, 2014, from: http://www.e-stewards.org/
Basel Convention (2011). Overview. Retrieved April 4, 2015 from
http://www.basel.int/TheConvention/Overview/tabid/1271/Default.aspx
Bayu Quantum (2008). Electronic Scraps. Retrieved June 30, 2015 from
http://www.bq.com.my/e-waste.html
Bouvier, R., & Wagner, T. (2011). The influence of collection facility attributes on
household collection rates of electronic waste: The case of televisions and
computer monitors. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 55(11), 1051-1059.
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
114
Brunner , P. H. (2004). Materials flow analysis and the ultimate sink. Journal of
Industrial Ecology, 8(3), 4-7.
Brunner, P. H. & Ma, H-W. (2009). Substance flow analysis - an indispensable tool for
goal oriented waste management. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 13(1): 11–14.
Bushehri, F. I. (2010). UNEP’s role in promoting environmentally sound management
of e-waste. Paper presented at the 5th ITU Symposium on “ICTs, the
Environment and Climate Change” Cairo, Egypt.
Campbell, M. I., & Hasan, A. (2003). Design evalauation method for the disassembly of
electronic equipment. Paper presented at the DS 31: Proceedings of ICED 03,
the 14th International Conference on Engineering Design, Stockholm.
Castell, A., Clift, R., & Francae, C. (2004). Extended producer responsibility policy in
the European Union: a horse or a camel? Journal of Industrial Ecology, 8(1‐2),
4-7.
Chancerel, P. (2010). Substance flow analysis of the recycling of small waste electrical
and electronic equipment - An assessment of the recovery of gold and palladium.
Institut für Technischen Umweltschutz Band. Berlin. (pp. 8).
Chancerel, P., Meskers, C. E. M., Hagelaken, C., & Rotter, V. S. (2013). Assessment of
precious metal flows during preprocessing of waste electrical and electronic
equipment. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 12(5), 791-810.
Chi, X., Wang, M. Y., & Reuter, M. A. (2014). E-waste collection channels and
household recycling behaviors in Taizhou of China. Journal of Cleaner
Production, 80, 87-95.
Chung, S.-W., & Murakami-Suzuki, R. (2008). A comparative study of e-waste
recycling systems in Japan, South Korea and Taiwan from the EPR perspective:
implications for developing countries. Kojima. Chiba.
Cucchiella, F., D’Adamo, I., Koh, S. L., & Rosa, P. (2015). Recycling of WEEEs: An
economic assessment of present and future e-waste streams. Renewable and
Sustainable Energy Reviews, 51, 263-272.
Cui, J., & Zhang, L. (2008). Metallurgical recovery of metals from electronic waste: A
review. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 158(2), 228-256.
Dalrymple, I., Wright, N., Kellner, R., Bains, N., Geraghty, K., Goosey, M., &
Lightfoot, L. (2007). An integrated approach to electronic waste (WEEE)
recycling. Circuit World, 33(2), 52-58.
Darby, L., & Obara, L. (2005). Household recycling behaviour and attitudes towards the
disposal of small electrical and electronic equipment. Resources, Conservation
and Recycling, 44(1), 17-35.
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
115
Desrochers, P. (2004). Industrial symbiosis: the case for market coordination. Journal of
Cleaner Production, 12(8), 1099-1110.
Dimitrakakis, E., & Gidarakos, E. (2008). Extended producer responsibility: a key tool
for international rules and regulations on e-waste. In Johri, R (Ed), E-waste:
implications, regulations, and management in India and current global best
practices (pp. 189-199). New Delhi, India: The Energy and Resources Institute
(TERI).
Dimitrakakis, E., Janz, A., Bilitewski, B., & Gidarakos, E. (2009). Small WEEE:
determining recyclables and hazardous substances in plastics. Journal of
Hazardous Materials, 161(2), 913-919.
DOE (2006). Malaysia Environmental Quality Report 2006. Department of
Environment, Malaysia.
DOE (2007). Malaysia Environmental Quality Report 2007. Department of
Environment, Malaysia.
DOE (2008). Malaysia Environmental Quality Report 2008. Department of
Environment, Malaysia.
DOE (2009). Malaysia Environmental Quality Report 2009. Department of
Environment, Malaysia.
DOE (2010). Malaysia Environmental Quality Report 2010. Department of
Environment, Malaysia.
DOE (2010a). Guidelines for the Classification of Used Electrical and Electronic
Equipment in Malaysia. Department of Environment, Malaysia.
DOE (2011). Malaysia Environmental Quality Report 2011. Department of
Environment, Malaysia.
DOE (2012). Malaysia Environmental Quality Report 2012. Department of
Environment, Malaysia.
DOE (2012a). Management of Household Hazardous Waste. Paper presented at the 10th
Annual Waste Management Conference & Exhibition ‘Waste To Opportunities’.
Sime Darby Convention Centre, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
DOE (2014). List of Licensed Schedule Waste Facility/Transporter. Retrieved March 3,
2015 from https://eswis.doe.gov.my/facilitylist.aspx
DOSH (2012). Director Bemoans Low Level of Awareness on OSH Among SMEs.
Retrieved May 23, 2014 from http://www.dosh.gov.my/index.php?option=com_
content&view=category&id=449&Itemid=543&lang=en&limitstart=10
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
116
Dwivedy, M., & Mittal, R. (2012). An investigation into e-waste flows in India. Journal
of Cleaner Production, 37, 229-242.
EMPA (2009). Hazardous Technologies. Retrieved November 1, 2014, from:
http://ewasteguide.info/node/10
EPA (2013). Maintaining records at a scheduled waste facility. Retrieved December 5,
2014, from http://www.epa.nsw.gov.au/wasteregulation/records-scheduled-waste
.htm
EPA (2014). Printed Circuit Board Recycling Methods. Retrieved September 5, 2015
from https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2014-05/documents/handout-
10-circuitboards.pdf
EPA (2015). Sustainable Materials Management: Non-Hazardous Materials and Waste
Management Hierarchy. Retrived December 12, 2015 from https://www.epa.gov
/smm/sustainable-materials-management-non-hazardous-materials-and-waste-
management-hierarchy
EU Directive (2012). Directive 2012/19/EU, on Waste Electrical and Electronic
Equipment (WEEE). Retrieved October 8, 2014, from http://ec.europa.eu/enviro
nment/waste/weee/legis_en.htm
Fauziah, S.H.(2009). Municipal Solid Waste Management: A comprehensive Study in
Selangor. PhD Thesis: University of Malaya, Malaysia.
Gaidajis, G., Angelakoglou, K., & Aktsoglou, D. (2010). E-waste: environmental
problems and current management. Journal of Engineering Science and
Technology Review, 3(1), 193-199.
Garlapati, V. K. (2016). E-waste in India and developed countries: Management,
recycling, business and biotechnological initiatives. Renewable and Sustainable
Energy Reviews, 54, 874-881.
Greenpeace (2008). Poisoning the Poor Electronic Waste in Ghana. Retrieved October
28, 2014, from: http://www.greenpeace.org/international/Global/international/
planet-2/report/2008/9/poisoning-the-poor-electonic.pdf
Gurauskienė, I., & Stasiškienė, Ž. (2011). Application of material flow analysis to
estimate the efficiency of e-waste management systems: the case of Lithuania.
Waste Management & Research. 29(7), 763-777.
Hawari, M., & Hassan, M. H. (2010). E-Waste: Ethical Implications for Education and
Research. IIUM Engineering Journal, 9(2), 11-26.
Heacock, M., Kelly, C. B., Asante, K. A., Birnbaum, L. S., Bergman, Å. L., Bruné, M.
N., Buka, I., Carpenter, D.O., Chen, A., Huo, X., & Kamel, M. (2016). E-Waste
and Harm to Vulnerable Populations: A Growing Global Problem.
Environmental Health Perspectives, 124(5), 550-555.
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
117
Herat, S., & Agamuthu, P. (2012). E-waste: a problem or an opportunity? Review of
issues, challenges and solutions in Asian countries. Waste Management &
Research, 30(11), 1113-1129.
High Cans (2015). High Cans Corporation Sdn. Bhd. Retrieved May 24, 2015 from
http://www.highcans.com.my/index.htm
Hischier, R., Wäger, P., & Gauglhofer, J. (2005). Does WEEE recycling make sense
from an environmental perspective?: The environmental impacts of the Swiss
take-back and recycling systems for waste electrical and electronic equipment
(WEEE). Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 25(5), 525-539.
Huisman, J., & Magalini, F. (2007). Where are WEEE now? Lessons from WEEE: Will
EPR work for the US? Paper presented at the Electronics & the Environment,
Proceedings of the 2007 IEEE International Symposium.
ISO (2014). Standard. Retrieved May 3, 2015 from http://www.iso.org/iso/home/standa
rds.htm
Jain, A. (2008). Global e-waste growth. In Johri, R (Ed), E-waste: implications,
regulations, and management in India and current global best practices (pp. 3-
22). New Delhi, India: The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI).
Janz, A., and Bilitewski, B. (2008). Hazardous Substances in Waste Electrical and
Electronic Equipment – Toxicity and Release. In Johri, R (Ed), E-waste:
implications, regulations, and management in India and current global best
practices (pp. 91-120). New Delhi, India: The Energy and Resources Institute
(TERI).
Kahhat, R., & Williams, E. (2012). Materials flow analysis of e-waste: Domestic flows
and exports of used computers from the United States. Resources, Conservation
and Recycling, 67, 67-74.
Kahhat, R., Kim J., Xua M., Allenbya B., Williams E. and Zhang P. (2008). Exploring
e-waste management systems in the United States. Resources, Conservation and
Recycling, 52, 955–964.
Kalana, J. A. (2010). Electrical and electronic waste management practice by
households in Shah Alam, Selangor, Malaysia. International Journal of
Environmental Sciences, 1(2), 132.
Kang, H.-Y., & Schoenung, J. M. (2005). Electronic waste recycling: A review of US
infrastructure and technology options. Resources, Conservation and Recycling,
45(4), 368-400.
Kang, H.-Y., & Schoenung, J. M. (2006). Economic analysis of electronic waste
recycling: modeling the cost and revenue of a materials recovery facility in
California. Environmental Science & Technology, 40(5), 1672-1680.
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
118
Khetriwal, D. S., Kraeuchi, P., & Widmer, R. (2009). Producer responsibility for e-
waste management: key issues for consideration–learning from the Swiss
experience. Journal of Environmental Management, 90(1), 153-165.
Kiddee, P., Naidu, R., & Wong, M. H. (2013). Electronic waste management
approaches: An overview. Waste Management, 33(5), 1237-1250.
Korhonen, J., Von Malmborg, F., Strachan, P. A., & Ehrenfeld, J. R. (2004).
Management and policy aspects of industrial ecology: an emerging research
agenda. Business Strategy and the Environment, 13(5), 289-305.
Kualiti Alam (2016). Profile. Retrieved May 14, 2015 from http://www.kualitialam.com
.my/profile.php
Leung, A., Cai, Z. W., & Wong, M. H. (2006). Environmental contamination from
electronic waste recycling at Guiyu, southeast China. Journal of Material Cycles
and Waste Management, 8(1), 21-33.
Levinson, T., Folman, C., & Lietzmann, J. (2008). E-waste legislation in the European
Union and the Basel Convention. In Johri, R (Ed), E-waste: implications,
regulations, and management in India and current global best practices (pp.
151). New Delhi, India: The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI).
Lim, H. G. (2006). Dirty Material Recovery Facilities. IMPAK, Department of
Environment, 2, 6-7.
Lindhqvist, T. (2000). Extended Producer Responsibility in Cleaner Production Policy
Principle to Promote Environmental Improvements of Product Systems.
International Institute for Industrial Environmental Economics. Lund, Sweden.
(p i-vi).
Liu, X., Tanaka M., Matsui Y. (2006). Generation amount prediction and material flow
analysis of electronic waste: a case study in Beijing, China. Waste Management
Research, 24, 434 – 445.
Lundgren, K. (2012). The global impact of e-waste: Addressing the challenge.
International Labour Organization. Genava.
Matsuda (2015). Our Business Line. Retrieved May 4, 2015 from http://www.matsuda-
sangyo.co.jp/en/business/index.html
Matsuda (2015a). Precious Metal Related Business. Retrieved May 4, 2015 from http://
www.matsuda-sangyo.co.jp/en/business/metal/index.html
Ming (2010). About Us. Retrieved May 20, 2015 from http://www.mepsb.com.my/about
us.php
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
119
Ministry of Environment Japan, (2013). The Asian Network for Prevention of Illegal
Transboundary Movement of Hazardous Wastes. Retrieved September 12, 2014,
from: http://www.env.go.jp/en/recycle/asian_net
Nnorom, I. C., & Osibanjo, O. (2008). Electronic waste (e-waste): Material flows and
management practices in Nigeria. Waste Management, 28(8), 1472-1479.
Ohgitani (2007). Description of Business. Retrieved June 4, 2015 from http://www.ogic
o.co.jp/eng/oversea04.html
Oliveira, C. R. d., Bernardes, A. M., & Gerbase, A. E. (2012). Collection and recycling
of electronic scrap: A worldwide overview and comparison with the Brazilian
situation. Waste Management, 32(8), 1592-1610.
Ongondo, F., & Williams, I. (2011). Mobile phone collection, reuse and recycling in the
UK. Waste Management, 31(6), 1307-1315.
Orlins, S., & Guan, D. (2016). China's toxic informal e-waste recycling: local
approaches to a global environmental problem. Journal of Cleaner Production,
114, 71-80.
OSHA (2013). Sample Safety and Health Program for Small Business. Retrieved April
12, 2014 from https://www.osha.gov/SLTC/etools/safetyhealth/mod2_sample_s
h_program.htm1
Perunding Good Earth Sdn. Bhd. (2008). The E-waste inventory project in Malaysia.
Preparation Report for Department of Environment Malaysia (DOE). Ex-
Corporation Japan & Ministry of Environment Japan.
Puckett, J. (2005). The Digital Dump: Exporting Re-use and Abuse to Africa. Seattle:
Basel Action Network.
Puckett, J. (2011). Draft Technical Guidelines on Transboundary Movements of Used
Electronic and Electrical Equipment and E-Waste, In Particular Regarding the
Distinction between Waste and Non-Waste under the Basel Convention. Basel
Action Network. Seattle, USA. (p 5-17)
Puckett, J., Byster, L., Westervelt, S., Gutierrez, R., Davis, S., Hussain, A., & Dutta, M.
(2002). Exporting Harm: The High-Tech Trashing of Asia. Basel Action
Network and Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition. Toxic link India scope green piece
China, 1, 1-48.
Raina, M. (2010). 3Rs for Green Economy - Country Presentation. Presentation at the
2nd Meeting of the Regional 3R Forum in Asia. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Rajeshwari, K. (2008). Technologies for recovery of resources from electronic waste. In
Johri, R (Ed), E-waste: implications, regulations, and management in India and
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
120
current global best practices (pp. 233-252). New Delhi, India: The Energy and
Resources Institute (TERI).
Robinson, B. H. (2009). E-waste: an assessment of global production and environmental
impacts. Science of the Total Environment, 408(2), 183-191.
Schluep, M., Hagelueken, C., Kuehr, R., Magalini, F., Maurer, C., Meskers, C.,
Mueller, E. and Wang, F. (2009). Sustainable Innovation and Technology
Transfer Industrial Sector Studies: Recycling- From E-Waste to Resources.
Retrieved December 2, 2013, from:http://www.cyrcle.it/resources/090630_UNE
P_eW2R_finalreport_publication_screen_rvsd4-FIN.pdf
SCT (2012). About Us. Retrieved May 30, 2015 from http://www.recycle.my/about-
us.html
Shinkuma, T., & Huong, N. T. M. (2009). The flow of E-waste material in the Asian
region and a reconsideration of international trade policies on E-waste.
Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 29(1), 25-31.
Shinkuma, T., & Managi, S. (2010). On the effectiveness of a license scheme for e-
waste recycling: the challenge of China and India. Environmental Impact
Assessment Review, 30(4), 262-267.
Sinha, S. (2008). Dark Shadows of Digitization on Indian Horizon. In Johri, R (Ed), E-
waste: implications, regulations, and management in India and current global
best practices (pp. 169-188). New Delhi, India: The Energy and Resources
Institute (TERI).
Sinha-Khetriwal, D., Kraeuchi, P., & Schwaninger, M. (2005). A comparison of
electronic waste recycling in Switzerland and in India. Environmental Impact
Assessment Review, 25(5), 492-504.
Steubing, B., Ludwig, C., Böni, H. and Silva, U. (2008). E-waste Generation in Chile:
Analysis of the Generation of Computer Waste using Material Flow Analysis.
Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (EPFL) / Swiss Federal Laboratories for
Materials Testing and Research (EMPA). Switzerland.
Sthiannopkao, S., & Wong, M. H. (2013). Handling e-waste in developed and
developing countries: Initiatives, practices, and consequences. Science of the
Total Environment, 463, 1147-1153.
Streicher-Porte, M., Widmer, R., Jain, A., Bader, H.-P., Scheidegger, R., & Kytzia, S.
(2005). Key drivers of the e-waste recycling system: Assessing and modelling e-
waste processing in the informal sector in Delhi. Environmental Impact
Assessment Review, 25(5), 472-491.
Suja, F., Abdul Rahman, R., Yusof, A., & Masdar, M. S. (2014). e-Waste management
scenarios in Malaysia. Journal of Waste Management, 2014.
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
121
Tanskanen, P. (2013). Management and recycling of electronic waste. Acta materialia,
61(3), 1001-1011.
Tengku Hamzah, T. A. A. (2011). Making sense of environmental governance: a study
of e-waste in Malaysia. Ph.D Thesis: Durham University.
Terazono, A., Murakami, S., Abe, N., Inanc, B., Moriguchi, Y., Sakai, S. I., Kojima,
M., Yoshida, A., Li, J., Yang, J. & Wong, M. H. (2006). Current status and
research on E-waste issues in Asia. Journal of Material Cycles and Waste
Management, 8(1), 1-12.
Thanam (2014). E-waste. Retrieved June 30, 2015 from http://www.thanam.com.my/e-
wastes/
Theng, L.C. (2008). E-waste Management. IMPAK, Department of Environment, 1, 12-
13.
Tong, X., & Wang, J. (2004). Transnational flows of e-waste and spatial patterns of
recycling in China. Eurasian Geography and Economics, 45(8), 608-621.
T-pot (2014). License and Certificate. Retrieved June 20, 2015 from http://www.t-
pot.com.my/recycle/license.htm
Tsydenova, O., & Bengtsson, M. (2011). Chemical hazards associated with treatment of
waste electrical and electronic equipment. Waste Management, 31(1), 45-58.
UNEP (2007). E-waste Management. United Nations Environmental Programme.
Retrieved November 3, 2013, from: http://www.unep.fr/pc/pc/waste/e-
waste_fag.htm0
US Interagency Task Force on Electronics Stewardship. (2011). National Strategy for
Electronics Stewardship. Retrieved September 24, 2014, from: http://www.epa.g
ov/wastes/conserve/materials/ecycling/taskforce/docs/strategy.pdf
Victor, D. & Agamuthu, P. (2013). Policy trends of e-waste management in Asia.
Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management, 15(4), 411-419.
Wagner, T. P. (2009). Shared responsibility for managing electronic waste: A case
study of Maine, USA. Waste Management, 29(12), 3014-3021.
Widmer, R., Oswald-Krapf, H., Sinha-Khetriwal, D., Schnellmann, M., & Böni, H.
(2005). Global perspectives on e-waste. Environmental Impact Assessment
Review, 25(5), 436-458.
Yu, J., Williams, E., Ju, M., & Shao, C. (2010). Managing e-waste in China: Policies,
pilot projects and alternative approaches. Resources, Conservation and
Recycling, 54(11), 991-999.
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
122
Zeng, X., & Li, J. (2016). Measuring the recyclability of e-waste: an innovative method
and its implications. Journal of Cleaner Production, 131, 156-162.
Univers
ity of
Mala
ya
