Doubts over RoHS restrictions

This is a contribution by Farnell's Gary Nevison.

UK: The benefits of restricting further hazardous chemicals under the RoHS Directive has been questioned in an impact assessment published by the European Parliament.

For example the report suggests that the costs of banning PVC in electronic equipment “far outweigh the benefits” to human health and also adds that the environmental benefits are also unlikely to justify the costs.

The report goes on to say that restricting all halogenated flame retardants under RoHS would lead to “potentially large” health benefits but the environmental impact is hard to quantify.

There had been a call for all halogenated flame retardants and PVC to be banned as part of the RoHS recast but the report calls for a more detailed study stating that quantifying the health, economic and environmental impacts of such bans is difficult.

The report seems to reaffirm the European Commissions position that there is insufficient information to justify new restrictions. However, the International Chemicals Secretariat believes that greater emphasis should be placed on the environmental benefits also stating that brominated flame retardants and PVC transform into dioxins and furans at end of life.

The parliament’s environment committee will vote on proposals to revise RoHS on 3 June.