GreenYes Archives
[GreenYes Archives] - [Thread Index] - [Date Index]
[Date Prev] - [Date Next] - [Thread Prev] - [Thread Next]

Re: [greenyes] Collection and recycling of batteries? (long)
Hi Dan:

Thank you for your reply.  You made the assumption that my categorization of common alkaline batteries being regulated as a haz waste was due to the zinc content.  As adopted by law, and as you referenced, batteries are exempted from being a hazardous waste if
addressing only the zinc content.   However, as you say in your synopsis, and incorporated in 1924:

        (1)(3) It does not contain any constituent, other than zinc or zinc
        oxide, that would cause it to be classified as a hazardous waste
        pursuant to this chapter.

Senate Bill 2146 (McPherson) attempted to amend the shortcomings of SB 1924, by including broader categories of battery constituents that would have allowed the exemption to stand.  But, SB 2146 died and was not signed by the governor (September 2000).

Batteries do not have a free ride in California direct to the local landfill because they are regulated in California due to their corrosivity.   I knew the people who lobbied quite hard to get McPherson to sponsor the bill, and remember their disappointment with a
short -lived victory.

Dan De Grassi wrote:

> In California, Section 25216.3 of the Health and Safety Code deals with dry cell batteries. Senate Bill 2146, enacted in 2000, made changes to that law. Dry cell batteries are not hazardous waste and as such have a free ride to the landfill. A synopsis is below.
> SENATE RULES COMMITTEE            |                  SB 2146|
> Office of Senate Floor Analyses
> 1.  Purpose of Bill  .  SB 1924 (McPherson) in 1998 established
>             the exemption from regulation for dry cell batteries
>             containing zinc that is now in effect.  The bill was
>             sponsored by the Dry Cell Battery Section of the National
>             Electrical Manufacturers Association, the same group that
>             is sponsoring this bill.
>           At the time SB 1924 was being considered, it was believed
>             that the only constituent of dry cell batteries that
>             would cause their classification as hazardous waste in
>             California was zinc and that the exemption enacted by
>             that bill applied to all common dry cell batteries,
>             including alkaline batteries.  It now appears, however,
>             that one of the electrodes in alkaline batteries, a brass
>             nail (brass is a metal alloy made of copper and zinc),
>             and the alkaline electrolyte may also cause dry cell
>             batteries to be classified as hazardous waste when
>             California criteria and testing methods are used.
>           The purpose of this bill is to amend the exemption criteria
>             for dry cell batteries so that the exemption from
>             regulation enacted several years ago will apply to all
>             common household batteries, including alkaline batteries.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Todd R. Coy [mailto:tcoy@no.address]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2004 1:36 PM
> To: Alan Muller
> Cc: Green Eyes
> Subject: Re: [greenyes] Collection and recycling of batteries? (long)
> ".....................................The biggest issue surrounding the recycling of non rechargeable batteries is
> the lack of control laws which require the collection of these batteries.
> Without the infrastructure in place efficient collection cannot occur, thus
> driving cost upward.  Obviously, if commercial facilities cannot reach
> economies of scale then the costs associated with recycling "recyclable"
> batteries remains high, and cost prohibitive for most organizations.
> For instance, in California common household batteries are regulated as a hazardous
> waste......................"

[GreenYes Archives] - [Date Index] - [Thread Index]
[Date Prev] - [Date Next] - [Thread Prev] - [Thread Next]