The government deciding a format of labels and what wordings qualify as being understandable and adequately explanatory of the facts. This can either be in the form of predefinining the wordings (which wont be easy as there are limitless possibility of disposals that can cause healthcare issues) or approving the wordings to be printed on the packaging.
Earlier wording in drafts of revisions of China RoHS connected this label specifically to outlining health consequences of improper handling of e-waste (caveat - or at least the translations I saw made this connection - I don't know if the language changed or not in the latest because I can't read Chinese), and India E-waste followed with language for this label that looked similar.
I don't think producers are qualified to write up something equivalent to a health warning label. Just trying to think of what you would put on that label escapes me. "Unsafe dismantling and handling of this product in lieu of proper disposal for purposes of precious metal extraction can lead to lung damage"? Most warning labels have a format. I think there is some assumption that "industry will come up with a label" similar to the assumption on the EUP (orange marking) that somehow industry would come up with a number of years for the EUP for each product - China ended up setting up guidelines that everyone uses.
"Any ideas on how industry can fulfil this new labeling requirement? Or is this going to be a problem? "
I think this is going to be a problem at first as the manufacturers wont be fully willing to disclose the actual facts completely. What will happen is that manufacturers will try to figure out what level of truth is acceptable to the masses and will not affect their sales. Disclosing beyond that cannot be expected unless strict audit is performed to ensure the compliance which itself will be a headache for the regulators.
There is a similar clause in India's E-Waste Handling rules. This has to do with board cooking for precious metal extraction and other unsafe e-waste handling (and has to do indirectly with dumping, redirection, or exporting of e-wastes). Any ideas on how industry can fulfil this new labeling requirement? Or is this going to be a problem?
@Ariella: well, I agree with the possibilities you have mentioned, at the end the issue will be still present in the future, definitely, until a worldwide recognized organism will be in charge of rules, controls and financial penalties in case of rules are not respected, isn't it?
I agree that there's still a lot of uncertainty regarding China RoHS. The clause that Ariella points to requires exporters to identify and discuss the hazardous substances, yet another part of the law requires products be sent to China-certified authorities for testing. Why take the word of an organization such as the EPA when you are going to test it anyway?
The new proposals require that manufacturers and importers of electrical and electronic products provide information about the impact of a product on the environment and human health when the product is misused or disposed of in addition to the name and concentration of hazardous, the name of parts that contain hazardous substances, and whether a part or product can be recycled.
Though that sounds progressive, I am sure that such notices can be hidden and obscured in very unclear language. Would there be regulations about the notice, like say, food labels that have to identify key nutrional facts in a certain size font, etc.?
EBN Dialogue enables and encourages you to participate in live chats with notable leaders and luminaries. Not only editors and journalists, but the entire EBN community is able to comment and ask questions. Listed below are upcoming and archived chats.
Thailand Stages a Comeback Join EBN contributor Jennifer Baljko on Thursday August 23, 2012, at 11:00 a.m. EST for a live chat on how electronic manufacturers in Thailand have shored up their supply chain to reduce the impact of future natural disasters.
Microsoft Surface: Potential Winners & Losers What are the implications for the electronics industry supply chain of Microsoft Corp.'s decision to launch its own tablet PC? Join industry veteran and EE Times' systems and OEM expert Rick Merritt on Tuesday, July 3, at 12:00 pm EDT for a Live Chat on this subject.
Join EBN contributor Jennifer Baljko on Thursday August 23, 2012, at 11:00 a.m. EST for a live chat on how electronic manufacturers in Thailand have shored up their supply chain to reduce the impact of future natural disasters.
Peter Drucker famously said "Trying to predict the future is like trying to drive down a country road at night with no lights while looking out the back window." Yet in the razor's-edge world of electronics—with a lean supply chain and just-in-time demands—the need to know the future is vital.
While no one really can accurately predict the future, we can take guidance from another Drucker saying which is the best way to predict the future is to create it.
You've heard the saying "the No. 1 supply chain risk is your people." That hasn't always been the case. But today's complex global supply chain requires a new type of multitalented employee. It's one who understands, finance, marketing, economics, is savvy with technology, graceful with relationships and can think analytically.
Where are these people? Are universities properly preparing the next generation supply chain professionals? How do train your existing workforce for these new, demanding positions?
Brian Fuller, editor-in-chief of EBN, will lead a 60-minute Avnet Velocity panel discussion that will ask and answer these and other questions swirling around today's supply-chain talent challenges.