Aolaid Aivi, Teder Jüri
Institute of Physical Chemistry, University of Tartu, Jakobi 2, 51014 Tartu, Estonia.
Environ Sci Pollut Res Int. 2006 Mar;13(2):140-2. doi: 10.1065/espr2005.08.281.
BACKGROUND, AIMS AND SCOPE: When joining the European Union on 1st May 2004, Estonia had to conform its legislation to the European Union legislation. In relation with that, also the treatment requirements on end-of-life vehicles proceeding from Directive 2000/53/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 September 2000 were established in Estonia for the first time. Since this area was not regulated with law beforehand, there was not any information available about it. The aim of the current survey was to ascertain the condition of scrap yards in mid 2004. In addition to that, also to identify the number of scrap yards operating in Estonia, to classify these by the number of dismantled vehicles and the potential environmental hazard, and to map the locations of car dismantling companies and evaluate their compliance with the valid requirements.
The companies that have been registered in the Commercial Registry under the activity code 503090-end-of-life vehicle dismantling were visited and visually reviewed. During the visits, the compliance of scrap yards with the existing requirements was evaluated and it was also attempted to identify how environmentally sound the dismantling technology of every scrap yard owner is.
Altogether, 63 scrap yards operated in Estonia by mid 2004. Twelve of them dismantled more than 100 vehicles, 13 of them 51-99 vehicles and 38 up to 50 vehicles a year. The total annual market capacity on dismantling of vehicles in Estonia is considered to be approx. 10,000 units. There are very few companies dealing only with car dismantling as the main business. Most scrap-yard owners also offer side services, e.g. haulage, car repair and maintenance. The dismantlers are interested in the selling of second-hand spare parts and scrap metal. Only one company out of 63 complied with all the requirements enacted by the relevant decision of the Estonian Minister of Environment. The rest of the scrap yards did not meet the requirements on the site on storage and treatment nor did they have the hazardous waste handling licence or the waste permit. Of the requirements established for the site for storage of end-of-life vehicles, 97% of the scrap yards were surrounded with a fence, 67% had a 24-hour guard, 45% had covered the areas with waterproof cover, but only 3% had an oil trap. Sites for treatment were in a somewhat better condition, these were mostly situated inside the buildings, where floors were covered with waterproof covers. Most of the dismantlers collected the waste oil and waste fluids into separate vessels, but there were a number of dismantlers who did not know of existence of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB) in car air conditioning systems and the availability of mercury in sensors belonging in passenger safety systems. Proceeding from the general condition of the scrap yard, the rest of 62 scarp yards were distributed between two empirical parameters--'rather environmentally hazardous' or 'rather not environmentally hazardous'. As a matter of fact, 17% of scrap yards turned out 'rather environmentally hazardous'.
Out of the scrap yards operating in Estonia, only one is compliant with the requirements set up by Directive 2000/53/EC. Another 62 appeared during the review to be sites of potential environmental pollution. In order to comply with environmental requirements and get the hazardous waste treatment license, the scrap yard owners have to invest into state-of-the-art dismantling and environment protection equipment. The main obstacle to reach the environmentally sound scrap-yard is the high investment cost and the black market for spare parts.
As the correction of the market in end-of-life vehicle treatment started after the adoption of Directive 2000/53/EC, the environmental authorities have to look after the ongoing correction. It is because there is still a demand for cheap spare parts and it makes it attractive to dismantle the vehicles out of scrap-yards by licensees.
背景、目的与范围:2004年5月1日爱沙尼亚加入欧盟时,必须使其立法与欧盟立法保持一致。与此相关,爱沙尼亚首次根据2000年9月18日欧洲议会和理事会的第2000/53/EC号指令制定了报废车辆的处理要求。由于此前该领域未受法律规范,因此没有任何相关信息。本次调查的目的是确定2004年年中废品场的状况。此外,还要确定爱沙尼亚运营的废品场数量,按拆解车辆数量和潜在环境危害对其进行分类,并绘制汽车拆解公司的位置图,评估它们是否符合现行要求。
走访并实地查看了在商业登记处注册、活动代码为503090(报废车辆拆解)的公司。走访期间,评估了废品场是否符合现有要求,并试图确定每个废品场所有者的拆解技术在环境方面的健全程度。
到2004年年中,爱沙尼亚共有63个废品场运营。其中12个每年拆解超过100辆车,13个每年拆解51 - 99辆车,38个每年拆解至多50辆车。爱沙尼亚每年车辆拆解的总市场容量估计约为10,000辆。仅以汽车拆解为主营业务的公司很少。大多数废品场所有者还提供附带服务,如运输、汽车修理和保养。拆解者对二手零部件和废金属销售感兴趣。63家公司中只有1家符合爱沙尼亚环境部长相关决定颁布的所有要求。其余废品场在场地存储和处理方面不符合要求,也没有危险废物处理许可证或废物许可证。在报废车辆存储场地的要求方面,97%的废品场有围栏,67%有24小时警卫,45%有防水覆盖物,但只有3%有集油池。处理场地状况稍好一些,大多位于建筑物内,地面有防水覆盖物。大多数拆解者将废油和废液收集到单独容器中,但有一些拆解者不知道汽车空调系统中存在多氯联苯(PCB)以及乘客安全系统传感器中含有汞。根据废品场的总体状况,其余62个废品场分布在两个经验参数之间——“环境危害较大”或“环境危害较小”。事实上,17%的废品场被证明“环境危害较大”。
在爱沙尼亚运营的废品场中,只有1家符合第2000/53/EC号指令设定的要求。另外62家在检查中似乎是潜在环境污染源。为了符合环境要求并获得危险废物处理许可证,废品场所有者必须投资购置先进的拆解和环保设备。实现环境健全型废品场的主要障碍是高投资成本和零部件黑市。
由于在第2000/53/EC号指令通过后才开始对报废车辆处理市场进行整顿,环境当局必须关注正在进行的整顿工作。这是因为对廉价零部件仍有需求,这使得持牌人在废品场拆解车辆具有吸引力。