1 / 31

Collection, transport and treatment (chain) of LCD displays

Collection, transport and treatment (chain) of LCD displays. 03 May 2011 Nico Krukenberg Chairman of the LCD Working Group Take Back 2011 – Prague. 26-9-2014. EERA - QVKE. 2. Table of content: Introduction Estimation of LCD arising and collection volumes

freya
Download Presentation

Collection, transport and treatment (chain) of LCD displays

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Collection, transport and treatment (chain) of LCD displays 03 May 2011 Nico Krukenberg Chairman of the LCD Working Group Take Back 2011 – Prague

  2. 26-9-2014 EERA - QVKE 2

  3. Table of content: • Introduction • Estimation of LCD arising and collection volumes • Context and condition for the LCD take back chain • Studies and test in EERA LCD working group • Standard development

  4. Main focus of the working group Where we find LCDs today • TV-sets • Monitors • Laptops • Mobiles • GPS • Tablet-PCs like iPad etc • ...

  5. Estimated displays arising as waste 2005-2020 in ktons EU27* Summary for 2011: CRT: 1 238 800 tons 70% LCD: 490 900 tons 28% PDP: 32 900 tons 2% Total: 1 762 600 tons *Environmental analysis of CRT-glass processing options Jaco Huisman,Osevenfortytwo BV, July,10, 2008

  6. Collected volumes today: • only ~ 1-2% in the general waste flow of category 3 and 4 from public collection points (B2C) • Main collections are done in B2B and service centers and warranty returns • Total LCD rate only < 1%-2% of the total amount of displays • Possible reasons: • Lifetime is larger than expected? • Storage is easy • Reuse within the family (living room  master bed room)? • To expensive for fast waste process  service on return products • Second hand market? • …

  7. Mercury content in lamps*: 36 inch LCD 16 lamps 16–80 mg of Hg 32 inch LCD 17 lamps 17–85 mg of Hg • Mercury content in LCD back-lights (CCFL):(used in LCD larger than 10 inch)1-5 mg / lamp**(depending on diameter) 16 inch LCD 8 lamps 8–40 mg of Hg Mercury content in LCDsComparison of FL/CLF/HID and CCFL from LCDs *ZVEI Light / Branch Association Lightings in Germany **http://www.saesgetters.com/default.aspx?idPage=282

  8. What says the WEEE Directive?

  9. Collection imposes high risk of mercury release in the take back chain release of mercury vapour during collection of LCD displays Step 1: • October 2008 • test by 6 EERA members: Breakage of lamps test (LCD displays dropped in container) Procedure: • Conduct the test on 10 LCD displays. 5 displays < 17 inch and 5 displays > 17 inch. • Drop the LCD displays one by one in an empty 40 foot container (height approximately 2.80 m). • Take the displays out and by dismantling determine the following parameters: • If the LCD panel is broken (glass substrate). Yes/No. • If Liquid Crystal Fluid is released. Yes/No. • For each display: How many back lighting tubes are broken. • Note any other interesting observation

  10. release of mercury vapour during collection of LCD displays Results step 1 • Glass substrate: 54% broken 46% unbroken Remark: broken glass substrates are normally found when other e-scrap parts hit the LCD • Liquid crystal fluid leaking: 16% broken 84% unbroken Remark: only a one member site the LCD leaked • Lamps broken: Average: 18.9% Min: 8.6% Max: 27.5%

  11. Each member set up its own conditions for the test release of mercury vapour during collection of LCD displays Findings: • No scientific approach … but general findings • Backlighting units are partly broken • More detailed study is necessary  Decision to make a study with a research centre on the release of mercury vapour during collection

  12. Collection imposes high risk of mercury release in the take back chain release of mercury vapour during collection of LCD displays Step 2: • July 2009 • test by the research centre TNO at SRS site in Eindhoven/NL. Main objectives: • The determination of the airborne mercury concentration when the backlights of the LCD displays are broken and the displays are being stored for a period of 48 hours. • The determination of the amount of broken backlights in each of the LCD displays. • Evaluation of the measured airborne mercury concentrations by comparison to the Standard for occupational exposure and non-occupational exposure.

  13. release of mercury vapour during collection of LCD displays Results step 1 preparations: • Airtight 35 cbm container • Temperature control • Ventilation control • LCD from waste flow procedure: • Test run: 1 LCD (check installation) and analyse Hg per lamp • Worst case 1: 1+2 crates of LCDs • Worst case 2: 3rd crate LCDs Remark • missing knowledge in the exact amounts of mercury in the different types of the backlights • To set up a complete mass balance is not possible

  14. release of mercury vapour during collection of LCD displays

  15. release of mercury vapour during collection of LCD displaysFindings: Graphic representation of the mercury concentration in the air during the first experiment with one LCD display

  16. Graphic representation of the mercury concentration in the air during the second experiment with 1 + 2 crates of LCD displays 2 other crates First carte release of mercury vapour during collection of LCD displaysFindings:

  17. release of mercury vapour during collection of LCD displaysFindings: Graphic representation of the mercury concentration in the air during the second experiment with 3 crates of LCD displays Temperature has an influence to the airborne mercury concentration!

  18. In approximately 30% of the LCD displays one or more backlights were broken, so 70% of the displays remained intact during the experiments release of mercury vapour during collection of LCD displaysFindings: 2. The average amount of backlights per LCD display is approximately 5 and the number of broken backlights per LCD display is 1. The percentage of broken backlights is approximately 20%. 3. All the ‘worst case’ experiments the airborne mercury concentration reaches a “maximum” after approximately 1 – 1.5 hours. The maximum concentration is 10 μg/m3. It takes approximately 16 hours to reduce the concentration to a level below 1 µg/m3 4. In all experiments the airborne mercury concentrations never exceed the indicative occupational exposure limit of 20 μg/m3 (8 hour time weighted average)

  19. release of mercury vapour during collection of LCD displaysFurther findings: 5. The evaporation of mercury from the backlights is a slow process and will increase with the number of fracture surfaces 6. Approximately 50% of the mercury originally in the backlights could be accounted for. Most likely, the missing part is still inside the broken backlights

  20. release of mercury vapour during collection of LCD displaysFindings: Weak points of the study: • Usually no crates are put in container for collection, only device by device but mixed (heavy e-scrap like CRT TV on top of LCD-TV?) • Are the LCDs used representative? (age, time/hours of usage are unknown, numbers of lamps per LCD) • Is the sampled backlight representative for other (all?) LCD devices? … further knowledge & information is necessary. Also form the other Stakeholders, e. g. producer and take-back-schemes!

  21. skip container in bulk for unloading … unloading … • decrease recycling rate • Increase dismantling cost • Increase risk of material pollution • Increase cost for heath & safety for worker • increase recycling rate • decrease dismantling cost • decrease risk of material pollution • decrease cost for heath & safety for worker Collection, transport and treatment chain: Bulk handlingpotential risks ... dedicated handlingpotential risks ... collection Conclusion: through LCD in container …… more heavy products broker LCDs increase collection cost for separate collection and/or special collection in appropriated receptacles Advantages for depollution and recyclingvs.Disadvantages for cost and economies of scale Whatever is released during collection and transport can not be utilized in appropriated treatment and recycling operations! reloading in bulk … increase transport volume … no special handling necessary increase transport cost …… lower volume in transport… special handling necessary Potential release of mercury vapours in the complete take back chain … but usually the tendency is only give certain focus on the recycler and disregard the other links of the chain transport Everything at the beginning of the chain has consequences for the next steps Treatment

  22. collection transport treatment Collection, transport and treatment chain:Summary That is: • 80% of the unbroken lamps • Does this mean:mercury emissions of 40 to 50 µg per cbm are still in the LCDs? • Put container in “warm” recycling plant can double the • Breakages in the test of 20% of the backlight lamps in bulk collection processes. • Measured mercury vapours of 8-10 µg per cbm • within the indicative exposure limit of 20 µg per cbm (8 hour time weighted average) • 100% to 150% more than the the indicative exposure limit of 20 µg per cbm (8 hour time weighted average)

  23. collection transport treatment Collection, transport and treatment chain:Summary That is: • 80% of the unbroken lamps • Does this mean:mercury emissions of 40 to 50 µg per cbm are still in the LCDs? • Put container in “warm” recycling plant can double the • Breakages in the test of 20% of the backlight lamps in bulk collection processes. • Measured mercury vapours of 8-10 µg per cbm • within the indicative exposure limit of 20 µg per cbm (8 hour time weighted average) • 100% to 150% more than the the indicative exposure limit of 20 µg per cbm (8 hour time weighted average)

  24. collection transport treatment Collection, transport and treatment chain:Summary That is: • 80% of the unbroken lamps • Does this mean:mercury emissions of 40 to 50 µg per cbm are still in the LCDs? • Put container in “warm” recycling plant can double the • Breakages in the test of 20% of the backlight lamps in bulk collection processes. • Measured mercury vapours of 8-10 µg per cbm • within the indicative exposure limit of 20 µg per cbm (8 hour time weighted average) • 100% to 150% more than the the indicative exposure limit of 20 µg per cbm (8 hour time weighted average)

  25. collection transport treatment Collection, transport and treatment chain:Summary That is: • 80% of the unbroken lamps • Does this mean:mercury emissions of 40 to 50 µg / cbm are still in the LCDs? • Put container in “warm” recycling plant can double the Hg-emissions • Breakages in the test of 20% of the backlight lamps in bulk collection processes. • Measured mercury vapours of 8-10 µg per cbm • within the indicative exposure limit of 20 µg per cbm (8 hour time weighted average) • 100% to 150% more than the the indicative exposure limit of 20 µg per cbm (8 hour time weighted average)

  26. collection transport treatment Collection, transport and treatment chain:Summary That is: • 80% of the unbroken lamps • Does this mean:mercury emissions of 40 to 50 µg / cbm are still in the LCDs? • Put container in “warm” recycling plant can double the Hg-emissions • Breakages in the test of 20% of the backlight lamps in bulk collection processes. • Measured mercury vapours of 8-10 µg per cbm • within the indicative exposure limit of 20 µg per cbm (8 hour time weighted average) • 100% to 150% more than the indicative exposure limit of 20 µg per cbm (8 hour time weighted average)

  27. collection transport treatment Collection, transport and treatment chain:Summary That is: • 80% of the unbroken lamps • Does this mean:mercury emissions of 40 to 50 µg / cbm are still in the LCDs? • Put container in “warm” recycling plant can double the Hg-emissions • Breakages in the test of 20% of the backlight lamps in bulk collection processes. • Measured mercury vapours of 8-10 µg per cbm • within the indicative exposure limit of 20 µg per cbm (8 hour time weighted average) • 100% to 150% more than the indicative exposure limit of 20 µg per cbm (8 hour time weighted average)

  28. Collection, transport and treatment chain • Not treatment as main focus, since • LCDs are fragile products • LCDs have a significant mercury content • Today even display waste products (CRT) are handled to rough (breakage of the tubes) • Necessary to make standards on the complete return chain for LCD displays • Not only to focus on treatment & recycling of LCD • C2C – Cradle to Cradle – is the approach we need!

  29. Outlook …. • PDP remain as site technology … market share approx. 10% • Is CCDL-LCD only a bridge technology but there is no marking of either “CCFL” or “LED” on the LCDs • What´s next: • LED – available today • OLED • FED • … • Display technologies for recycling remain the most challenging product area for the recycling industry

  30. Thanks for your attention Nico Krukenberg Phone +49 23 06 106-907 nico.krukenberg@remondis.de secretariat@eera-recyclers.com

More Related