|
The End Game: Recycling Useless Cartridges
by Art Diamond, DRC, and Alwin Morgenstern,
freerecycling.com, LLC
THE PROBLEM
Environmentalists advocate three basic rules:
Reduce, Reuse, Recycle. In
the toner and ink jet cartridge remanufacturing industry, however,
compliance with the third “R” varies from country to country, from
region to region and from original equipment makers (OEMs) to rechargers
and aftermarket suppliers.
After one or more end-user cycles, some cartridges cannot be effectively
remanufactured and put back into service. In some cases, parts can be
cannibalized, sorted, and re-used when needed in the remanufacturing of
“virgin” (used one time), or usable, cartridge cores. This reuse depends
upon the set-up and capabilities of a particular remanufacturing
operation.
However, many spent cartridges are damaged or broken and cannot be
remanufactured. Others, especially ink jet cartridges, are often glued
or welded together by the OEM. These, too, are useless as they cannot be
disassembled without serious damage. It is estimated that 30% to 40% of
all returned or collected toner cartridge cores fall into the category
of being at an “end-of-life” condition.
There is also a huge oversupply of collected cartridges that have been
overstocked for certain machine models (e.g., the HP LaserJet IIISi)
that will likely never be sold.
The recharging industry must find a solution for the disposal of these
waste cartridges before it becomes a target for environmentalists and
possible government regulation. While partial solutions abound, none of
them—incineration, landfill, or recycling—completely solves the problem.
Although heroic attempts by Australia’s Corporate Recycling have led to
an effective collection and reuse of mixed waste from plastic bottles,
bags, toys, pipe, etc., they fall short of a scheme to dispose of
useless toner and ink jet cartridges.
This article provides a brief overview of the options and opportunities
for pre-emptive action by the cartridge remanufacturing industry to come
to grips with the problem.
CARTRIDGE COMPONENTS
In 2006, some 257 million toner cartridges were shipped to end-users
worldwide, according to estimates by Lyra Research, Inc. a market
research and consulting firm headquartered in Newtonville,
Massachusetts. Of this total, 188 million were monochrome and the rest
color (the color category includes all CMYK cartridges for color laser
printers, copiers, and MFPs). Approximately 32% of the monochrome
(roughly 60 million) and 10% of the color cartridges (some 7 million)
were remanufactured by aftermarket sources. Therefore, the total number
of recharged toner cartridges sold in 2006 is estimated at 67 million.
Figure 1 lists the components of an SX cartridge by estimated weight.
Aftermarket drums weigh about 65 grams while OEM drums range from 25 to
30 grams. The significant difference in weight is due to the need for a
heavier drum to ensure that it spins true without wobbling or runout due
to poor circularity. OEM drums, as a rule, use thinner walled aluminum
substrate tubing, hence the lighter weight.
Using the Figure 1 estimates, the total weight of a remanufactured SX
cartridge is then 1,401 grams or 3.09 pounds. Based upon the Lyra
figures, this gives us a rough estimate of at least 207 million pounds
of end-of-life cartridges to be generated this year. This new waste is
separate and apart from the untold thousands of cartridges currently
stored in plants, warehouses, offices, and recharge shops.
SX cartridges are comprised of at least three different plastics:
polypropylene, styrene-butadiene, and ABS (acrylonitrile butadiene
styrene). In addition, a minor amount of nylon and certain acetal resins
are found in the gears that drive these assemblies.
Figure 1
Estimated Component Breakdown
For an SX Cartridge
COMPONENT Weight, Grams
Black Poly Bag 17
Shipping Carton & Pkg. 293
Magnet 125
Mag Roller 28
Misc. Metal 382
OPC Drum (Aftermarket) 65
Paper Instruction Sheets 11
Shell & Triangle 196
Shutter 20
Shutter Covers (2) 13
Toner Hopper 63
Toner Hopper Cover 58
Waste Hopper 130
TOTAL WEIGHT 1,401 grams
Disassembling, or dismantling, and sorting cartridge components, a
process called “downcycling,” is a labor intensive task that is being
practiced in China, Vietnam, and certain other countries where low cost
labor is readily available. But, without the resources to accumulate
truckload quantities by an individual recharger, and without any viable,
sustainable collection network, many independent rechargers might stop
at the removal and recycling of the OPC drum. That component is worth
from 10 to 15 cents, depending upon the scrap price of aluminum metal.
THE RECHARGER SOLUTION
“More and more companies are learning to extract value from spent
cartridges, “ says Charlie Brewer, managing editor of Lyra Research's
Hard Copy Supplies Journal. “Beyond harvesting OPC drums, OEMs and
remanufacturers are learning techniques for salvaging useful components
and other materials from used cartridges. I recently toured a factory in
China, for example, where virtually all of the waste toner retrieved
from cartridges is recycled into usable toner. Both OEMs and
remanufacturers are actively exploring how they can wring more out of
spent SKUs. However, plenty more can be done to prevent unusable waste
from going to the landfill."
Assisting rechargers in finding a solution, Static Control Components,
Inc. supplies more than 12,000 laser printer cartridge components. These
new parts can be used to restore, rebuild, repair, or rehabilitate
waste, damaged, or broken cartridges. Is this a practical solution? We
asked Chad Golden, Marketing/Strategic Planning Director at SCC, “Do you
think it is reasonable to put new parts into a waste cartridge to bring
it back to life?”
“It’s primarily a matter of economics,” answered Golden “and it is being
done more frequently today for certain waste cartridges, especially
those that are extremely scarce. In the past, rechargers would use
nothing but a virgin OEM core, but today the largest remanufacturers are
setting up unique production lines for specific models. It makes
economic sense for them to do so when the availability of cores is
limited, or core prices are too high.”
Explaining further, Golden said “What they do is use a broader component
set to achieve a performance level of the cartridge that they need in
order to sell a quality product. In the past, they might not have
replaced a doctor blade, a wiper blade, a developer roller, or some
other component, but a more costly cartridge will justify higher parts
utilization. The benefit of SCC’s vast storehouse of components for the
mainstream, high volume cartridges is that rechargers now have virtually
every part and piece they need to sustain the operability and
performance of most cartridges for multiple cycles.”
THE OEM SOLUTION
Here’s what we know about how OEMs are dealing with this dilemma. HP,
for one, claims that in their Planet Partners Program© they disassemble
and sort each returned cartridge in recycling facilities located “within
the same region/country” of collection. This statement implies that with
low cost labor, robotic dismantling equipment, the economies of scale,
and a waste stream limited to cartridges that they originally built, it
is possible to retrieve metal and plastic parts economically and make
them available for sale or reuse.
Discussing the dismantling of returned laser cartridges, HP claims most
materials are recycled and some are also used in energy recovery,
offsetting fossil fuel consumption. This certainly sounds like the
perfect solution. The implication here is that some portion of the
shredded plastic and paper materials are incinerated by HP contractors
to recover their energy value, a “waste-to-energy” conversion.
INCINERATION
There was a time, many years ago, when burning was the common solution
to trash disposal. Up until the mid-1900s or thereabouts, many homes had
an incinerator in the backyard. That practice was eventually outlawed as
it brought fire dangerously close to every home, the smoke was a
neighborhood nuisance, and the public became more concerned with air
quality and the toxic substances those incinerators were capable of
discharging.
Today, commercial and industrial incinerators are the subject of
contention, controversy and close regulation. Environmental groups have
succeeded in having laws enacted that govern what can and cannot be
burned. Global warming is a major issue driving the battle against
carbon dioxide generation. In compliance with the necessary controls,
instruments and equipment, operating incinerators now charge a fee for
the disposal of acceptable trash that is typically from $25 to $40 per
short ton (2,000 pounds).
Combustion of waste materials as a fuel, however, creates energy in a
state-of-the-art incinerator at a time when oil prices are soaring and
alternative fuels are being sought. Also, if the effluent stack gases
are passed through a scrubbing tower, incineration serves as a safe,
efficient means of waste disposal.
If a sustained waste stream is of sufficient volume, if the material has
a reasonably high heating value (coal, for example is rated between
8,000 and 14,000 Btu/lb. compared to wood at 6,500, and hydrogen at
61,100 Btu/lb.), and if the combustion products are non-toxic, the waste
becomes valuable as a fuel for energy generation. If these conditions
are satisfied, it is possible to negotiate disposal under attractive
economic terms, such as swapping fuel for electrical energy from a
nearby power plant.
Incineration of waste toner by a power plant is a rare but viable
solution, especially if the plant is nearby, coal-fired, and equipped
with slurry-fed burners. These devices consume a slurry of finely
pulverized coal suspended in water—a feedstock that can easily be
combined with waste toner.
Today, incineration using state-of-the-art burners, effective stack gas
scrubbers and effluent monitoring instruments and controls is the most
desirable solution for waste management.
Incineration creates steam for electricity to power homes, business and
factories, and for space heating. While incineration is also an
important solution to waste disposal in China and India, effluent
monitoring and control seriously lags US and European standards, we have
been told.
In summary, the choice of a proper destination for useless cartridges as
a mixed plastic regrind for recycling, versus a waste-to-energy fuel for
incineration, or as solid waste for landfill, must be analyzed on a
case-by-case basis.
Incinerator operators, as a rule, will not deal with individual sources
but prefer organized groups that can guarantee a sustained flow of
material. Further, they require assurance that the waste substances will
not produce a toxic effluent.
Perhaps the single, most important issue is whether an effective
cartridge collection network can be put in place to ensure the steady
delivery of a sustainable stream of waste cartridges. At present, OEMs
are the only collectors who can meet this requirement. Past experience
demonstrates that collection efforts among independent rechargers is, at
best, a rag tag program.
LANDFILL
Environmentally speaking, dumping and burying waste in landfills is the
least desirable means of waste management. It creates the risk of ground
water pollution, and in the case of toner and ink jet cartridges, the
waste material does not readily decompose. A closed landfill may be
deemed unsuitable for construction, farming, or recreation for as long
as 50 years!
For many independent rechargers, sending end-of-life cartridges to a
landfill is an undesirable solution to freeing up plant and warehouse
space. Rates are still reasonable, but the stigma of compromising the
land does not sit well with any responsible citizen.
In Southern California, solid waste disposal rates range from about $25
to $60 per short ton (2,000 pounds), or about 3.5 to 9.0 cents per
cartridge.
A common practice is moving waste from state to state, but new laws will
likely ban shipping waste across state lines to a more receptive
location.
REGULATION AHEAD?
What is looming on the horizon is regulation, rules that are similar to
what is already in place for electronic waste. This means a periodic
waste material balance around each plant operation. Documents will
likely be required to show the input, out-put and accumulation of waste
plastic, cardboard, and metallic materials at each installation.
In European Union countries, tight recycling and waste stream
regulations are in place. In some American states, such as California,
there are laws that ban the dumping into landfills of electronic waste
materials, household appliances, consumer electronics and batteries.
A SOLUTION FOR ALL
Let’s look at existing conditions:
1. Collection networks among rechargers and cartridge core brokers are
seriously flawed
2. Reports indicate the best of these programs, one managed by Corporate
Recycling in Carrum Downs, Victoria, Australia, is doing better with
consumer and industrial plastic waste than with scrap laser and ink jet
cartridges. Plastic is recycled and made into a range of innovative
products. For more details, visit their website:
(www.corporaterecycling.com.au)
3. Viable recycling programs are currently in place by HP and other
leading OEMs (i.e., Canon, Lexmark, Ricoh)
4. European lawmakers and environmentalists are leaning toward the
principle that whoever built a product should also be responsible for
its ultimate disposal
5. Such a takeback program is in place for used electronic products and
would logically fit the used cartridge industry as well
6. OEMs are in favor of controlling the collection of used toner and ink
jet cartridges because it thwarts competition by keeping refillable
virgin cores
out of the hands of refillers
7. Some independent rechargers are already using OEM furnished ARS
labels to send end-of-life cartridges back to their maker. This may be
in violation of HP’s Planet Partners takeback program
8. Costly warehouse space held by rechargers and core brokers is
overloaded with useless cartridges awaiting a solution to the disposal
problem
9. Downcycling is not a viable solution without low cost labor,
automated
disassembly equipment, and a homogeneous (same or similar machine
models) waste cartridge stream
10. Shredding, or granulating, plastic parts to be sold as regrind is
not a viable solution unless performed on a large scale with a sustained
output
SHORT TERM: TAKEBACK
Considering these 10 conditions, the ARS label packed with every new
cartridge, or available from HP by ordering online, is the best short
term solution. In our view, this takeback program should be expanded, if
HP would permit. Nobody—recharger, core broker, or end-user—wants to
hold onto a useless cartridge. They are a nuisance today that could turn
into a liability tomorrow. The big question is whether rechargers will
be permitted to take advantage of the OEM’s established disassembly and
recycling operations.
More specifically, HP’s Planet Partners program clearly states that they
will only accept cartridges that, 1) were originally built by HP for its
own printer models, and 2) cartridges that were not remanufactured by
aftermarket rechargers.
If it can be worked out with HP and other OEMs, the takeback approach
would benefit the rechargers by clearing out valuable storage space. It
will benefit the OEMs by providing a significant increase in the volume
of cartridge waste they can add to their existing processing operations.
It will benefit the small package delivery firms—notably UPS and
FedEx—who would welcome the surge in business nationwide, and, it will
benefit the environment by a secondary reduction in landfill waste. The
first reduction came, of course, as a result of the recharging
industry’s remanufacture of virgin cartridges.
One question is how will a takeback program affect core brokers?
Recognizing that the program applies not to virgin spent cartridges
(apart from those that are overstocked), hence it should have no effect.
Core brokers make a market in reusable, not useless, cartridges.
Therefore, all takeback cores fall outside the domain of the core
brokers.
LONG TERM: RECYCLING
A long term solution is less obvious owing to the complexity of core
collection, disassembly, sorting, and recycling certain components. One
of the key problems lies in automating the disassembly and sorting tasks
for products from not a single OEM, but a variety of cartridge makes and
models. Another is the difficulty of organizing a collection network
based upon the fragmented nature of the recharging community.
The incentive to create a central collection unit equipped with
automatic disassembly machines and staffed with minimum wage workers, is
profit, if it exists. Ideally, such an operation should yield enough
profit to compensate contributors for each cartridge they return.
Focusing on the disassembly operation, Uninet President Nestor Saporiti
said, “This step is labor intensive and therefore expensive if performed
in the United States. Perhaps it should be done in Mexico or in Asia.
Someone asked me how many times can a cartridge be recycled. I said
“Many times, because we have all of the necessary parts. The problem is
that price of a cartridge core is typically so low that it does not seem
worthwhile to replace a mag roller, a PCR, or other costly key
component.”
“Nevertheless,” Saporiti added, “I think it’s a good idea to have a
company serving our industry that is able to profitably disassemble,
sort, and recycle waste cartridges.”
One interesting suggestion, by Terry Mehan of Cartridge Conservation
(Soldiers Point, NSW, Australia) is that rechargers and toner bottlers
switch from paper to plastic film labels on their products. This avoids
contaminating the plastic material with paper. “Waste plastics, when
pure, can be sold in the same manner as waste metal,” Mehan said, “and
for some types of plastic you can realise as much as $400 per metric
tonne (18 cents per pound).”
Indeed, as the world grows greener, government regulation (federal,
state, local) is inevitable. Rechargers have already contributed heavily
to the greening process by keeping millions of pounds of laser and
copier cartridges from burial in landfills around the world.
Nevertheless, both short and long term plans are needed to avoid the
possibility of having their businesses shut down on short notice.
Perhaps the recharging community can form a committee to study short and
long term solutions with recommendations for the ecologically acceptable
disposal of waste toner, ink jet inks, and useless cartridges.
Editor’s Note: If you are interested in obtaining more information
regarding this article, please send an email to Mr. Alwin Morgenstern at
mail@freerecycling.com; or, Mr. Art Diamond at drc@west.net
All rights reserved© Diamond Research Corporation 2007
CAPTIONS
Photo 1. BULLDOZER BURYING PLANET EARTH
Waste toner and ink jet cartridges sent to landfills are starting to
bury Planet Earth
Photo 2. CUTTING WASTE CARTRIDGES DOWN TO SIZE
As an alternative to landfill burial, plastic cartridges can be
granulated for use in extrusion molding operations for toys, plastic
lumber, fuel for power generating plants, appliance housings, and many
other applications
Photo 3. NEW USES FOR OLD PLASTIC
Granulated toner cartridge plastic is used to mold gears and other
products, such as the correction tape dispenser pictured here
Photo 4. RETURNED CARTRIDGES—A MIXED BAG
Returned cartridges typically include a variety of makes and models for
copiers and printers, many of which are now obsolete
Photo 5. RECEIVING LINE
Warehouse workers separate and sort returned toner and ink jet
cartridges
Photo 6. CLEANING LINE
Workers remove toner from waste cartridges prior to the disassembly
operation |
