Você está na página 1de 16

Abstract Proper management of end-of-life electronics is a tremendous concern that has prompted various actions among legislature figures

and electronic marketing companies. Implementing an effective system for the collection of e scrap would be highly beneficial; environmentally, toxins in the atmosphere would be decreased and economically, the process results provide feasible profit. Developing an infrastructure for an e-scrap reverse production system entails a considerable degree of uncertainty, therefore causing its effectiveness to be questionable. Using a mixed integerprogramming model, this uncertainty is addressed and the optimum solution for the situation can be determined. The objective is to design an infrastructure that effectively plans collection of end of life televisions, monitors, central processing units (CPUs), printers, and peripherals from residential Georgia. Through research analysis, it is revealed that middle aged women with a high income are the most likely to actively participate in recycling promotions, which provides the bases for the projected e scrap recycling location. The model incorporates various strategically selected shopping mall locations throughout the state of Georgia and determines which sites should be opened as a oneday collection site. The resulting solution proves that an e-scrap reverse production system is a beneficial investment.

Introduction The purpose of this project is to design and develop a system for recycling electronics across the state of Georgia. The overall objectives in designing this system are to minimize collection cost, while maximizing the materials collected. Electronic products surround us in our daily lives. Electronic products ranging in size from computers to cell phones are virtually harmless while in use by a consumer. As technology advances, the demand for new and up to date electronics increases tremendously. While electronic production continues to increase, the life span of common electronics continues to dwindle. Although the majority of electronics, such as televisions, cellular phones, and computers have the ability to function properly for several years, their potential life span is often cut short for faster and more efficient electronics. According to the National Safety Council, approximately 40 million televisions and computers are discarded annually. Alongside other electronics, computers and televisions are very toxic and hazardous if not recycled, reused, or discarded properly. In fact, televisions and computers are two electronics known to contain large amounts of mercury, cadmium, and lead. The cathode ray tube (CRT) present in computer monitors and televisions may have as much as three kilograms of lead. Cathode ray tubes pose such a threat to consumers that they have recently been banned from landfills in the state of Massachusetts. Properly recycling hazardous electronics is essential in reducing the toxic chemicals in landfills. Promotion of recycling electronics is beneficial in several ways. Recycling electronics will reduce the chance of televisions, and computers ending up in stockpile around homes and businesses. Recycling large quantities of electronics normally

stockpiled will ensure that electronic equipment will serve a longer period than normally. It will also allow for large businesses to network with smaller companies who may benefit from the electronics being recycled. Recycling at one-day collection events across the state of Georgia is ideal for anyone who desires to participate. Consumers are encouraged to bring in as many electronics as they desire. Although their will be constraints on what is being recycled, any thing that is being recycled can be brought in regardless of the amount. One-day recycling event will be convenient and free to the general public. Finally, the decision regarding the location of the collection events was based on numerous factors. Through studying the demographics of a typical recycler, it was discovered that women were the main driving force behind encouraging recycling in their homes and workplace. More specifically, women in their middle ages who are homeowners and have middle to high income were among the top to participate in environmentally sound behavior. As a result, malls appear to be an ideal location to target the women recyclers who have used electronics to recycle. Furthermore, the mall proves to possess many advantages, including no charge to utilize parking area of event. Also, there is significant recompense for advertising because thousands of consumers visit the malls daily and conveniently leverage the idea of recycling into consumers minds with major electronic store such as Best Buy and Circuit City. This concept serves as base for the entire project that will change the way electronic recycling is carried out.

Literature Review Electronics are ever-present in todays society. The variety and quantity make it unavoidable to inherit challenges regarding end of life management. It is predicted that over 7,500,000 lbs of used televisions, computer monitors, and CPUs could be collected and processed in the state of Georgia each year, provided that 30% of Georgia households participate in the accumulation of the used electronics. In 1998 alone, an estimated 35 million personal computers were sold in the United States. Electronic wastes are an important increasing issue for state and local governments, especially because the Environmental Protection Agency estimates that over 250 million computer monitors will become obsolete over the next three years. The electronic products are toxic and contain many hazardous materials. Computer monitors and televisions contain significant amounts of lead. Printed circuit boards contain chromium, cadmium, and mercury. Lead, for example, a hazardous component in cathode ray tubes, printed circuit boards, and fluorescent tubes, are beneficial to serve as radiation shields and lower melting temperatures of glass. However, the hazardous components could leak into the landfills and potentially pollute the water supply. Additionally, Cadmium, Beryllium, and Mercury offer beneficial properties to electronics such as excellent thermal conductivity and good corrosion resistance, but the negative environmental effects are far greater than the attractive properties of the toxic components. Nationwide, there have

been many attempts to recycle and refurbish the used electronics, including the Basel Convention. In Minnesota, for example, The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency requires people to manage electronic devices and components consistent with state and federal laws. Florida is also making great strides in collecting electronic scrap. Over

60,000 lbs of e-scrap was collected to date after sorting 6 loads of e-scrap by Florida county programs and some small business sources. Office Depot has joined the companies becoming involved with targeting consumers in an attempt to collect e-scrap. For a two month trial period, consumers could bring in used electronics to any of their 850 stores in the continental U.S.. Rapid movements in technology mean that electronic products become obsolete at a rapid pace. Obsolete computers often stockpile in warehouses and homes around the state. The lack of collection infrastructure and the complicated e-scrap process also make it difficult to efficiently recycle e-scrap. There are many approaches taken to recycling the used electronics. Product stewardship is an alternative that has been strongly examined. Product stewardship is a productcentered approach to environmental protection. Also known as extended producer responsibility (EPR), product stewardship requires manufacturers, retailers, users, and disposers to share responsibility for reducing the environmental impacts of products. Manufactures probe innovative methods to produce high value products that have less harmful effects on the environment. A current effort is under way at Nokia, the worlds largest maker of cell phones. The company is developing biodegradable plastics that would allow each cell phone part to be reused or recycled. The new materials have been tested in clip-on covers for cell phones, but so far they have not passed performance tests. Presently, consumers are often unaware of what to do with their obsolete computers or are unwilling to pay costs associated with responsibly recycling electronics. Focusing on statistics of the groups that generally participate in the basic recycling of paper products,

aluminum, and plastics will assist in highlighting groups beneficial to the formula for successful collection of obsolete and damaged computer equipment. Generally, 62% of women are responsible for recycling in their households. Furthermore, homeowners are more likely to recycle (59%) versus renters (34%). Storage issues play a large role in the recycling behavior. Consequently, there is a pattern of recycling habits among various age groups. The younger age groups (Age 18-25) recycle the least while residents over 65 years of age recycling the most. Patterns of living reveal a great deal about the results. Younger residents live in apartments and do not settle in the communities for extended periods of time. Older residents are more driven by their investment in their respective communities. Also, it is observed that women take a more active role in promoting environmentally sound behavior. This carries on to the households, in which women encourage their husbands to be the final participant of the whole recycling process. Outlining the supporting methodology of basic mixed integer programming also proves beneficial. This form of optimization simply allows for good infrastructure decisions and viability of a certain design. The model, however, does not incorporate the uncertainty associated with the given scenario. The model does incorporate constraints, objective functions, and decisions and decision variables.

Methodology An ideal design solution for Georgias e scrap reverse production system is determined by using a mixed integer programming (MIP) model. This model produces an optimal design based upon a desired objective and a defined set of constraints. The intent is to minimize the cost associated with holding collection events, while maximizing the input flow. Explicitly defined factors in the model include the total potential material flow (determined with respect to projected participation rate and the percentage of households possessing e scrap), potential collection sites (selected based upon the population density of Georgia counties) and cost associated with each potential site. Various aspects must be taken into consideration due to the uncertainty associated with designing a reverse production system. Therefore, certain constraints must be implemented to make the solution viable. The constraints imposed are traveling limits, event capacity, and truck capacity. Convenience is a major factor that drastically affects participation. The distance in which a recycler is willing to travel to attend the event potentially limits the productivity of the event. Secondly, the frequency in which participants complete the collection process must remain efficient. Therefore a maximum number of cars per event is introduced. Lastly, the volume of flow that can be readily prepared for transport limits the event. The number of trucks available at an event introduces a maximum yield supply that can be efficiently collected.

Minimize:

Total Cost Advertisement at each site

Such that: 1. Maximum Event Collection Capacity Supply restriction for each source based upon the maximum number of cars able to be managed effectively at each event 2. Travel Limit Logical constraints regarding the relationship among source and site. (Assuming a maximum driving distance of 120 mile, this sets the constraint for travel distances.) 3. Participation One day collection events may limit amount collected during one day period. 4. Transportation Capacity. Palette limitations and truck availability for allotted space The model itself is fairly generic and incorporates the key features of reverse production systems without needing to deviate from the above structure. Tasks include only collection. A single site can accommodate collections task that have a fixed and a variable cost. The mathematical representation of the RPS model is presented below using the following notation for indices, super scripts, parameters and decision variables. Table 1 contains the indices and Table 2 contains the super scripts used in the RPS model. Table 3 contains all parameters and Table 4 contains all decision variables in the RPS model.

Table 1 RPS Model Indices s i j m t Supplier Sites material type transportation mode time period

Table 2 RPS Model Superscripts Co Tr Su Si Collection transportation Supplier Site Table 3 RPS Model Parameters
(S Ssjtu) = Amount of material j that is supplied at supplier s at time period t

(Tr) Vsimt = Transportation cost per standard unit per distance from supplier s to site i

using transportation mode m at time period t dsim = Distance from supplier s to site i by transportation mode m = Fixed site operating cost if site i is opened at time period t

Fit(Si)

(Tr) Fsimt = Fixed cost for transportation from supplier s to site i using

transportation mode m at time period t


(C C ijt o) = Maximum collection capacity to collect material type j at site i at time

period t
(Tr) C simt = Maximum amount of material that can be shipped for supplier s to site i using

transportation mode m at time period t

(Si) it

= 1 if site i is allowed to be opened at time period t, 0 otherwise = 1 if shipment by transportation mode m is allowed between supplier s and site i at time period t, 0 otherwise

(Tr) a simt

(Co) aijt

= 1 if collection of material j is allowed at site i at time period t, 0 otherwise

(Si) m it = 1 if site i must be opened at time period t, 0 otherwise (Tr) m simt = 1 if shipment by transportation mode m must be used between supplier s

and site i at time period t, 0 otherwise


(C m ijt o) = 1 if collection of material j must be done at site i at time period t, 0 otherwise

Table 4 RPS Model Decision Variables


(C x ijt o) = Amount of material collected of type j at site i at time period t (Tr) x sjimt = Amount of material shipped from supplier s to site i of type j using

transportation mode m at time period t


(C y ijt o) = 1 if collection of material type j is to be performed at site i at time period t,

0 otherwise
(Tr) y simt = 1 if shipment is to be used between supplier s and site i using

transportation mode m at time period t, 0 otherwise

(Si) it

= 1 if site i is operated at time period t, 0 otherwise

Table 5 RPS Mathematical Model

Minimize (Objective)

Minimize total cost


- Fixed Costs to Open the Sites - Fixed Transportation Costs Fixed

F y + F y + V
( Si ) ( Si ) it it t i (Tr ) simt t m s i t m i j s

(Tr ) simt

(Tr ) ( Tr ) simt sjimt

d sim

- VVariable Transportation Costs

Subject to:

( Su (Tr S sjt ) = xsjimt) ( (Tr xijtCo ) = xsjimt) s m i m

, j , t s j, t i,

(1) (2)

Supply at s = flow out to all sites i Collecting flow to site i = flow in from all sources If sites i collects type j, operate

(Co) ijt

y y

(Si) it (Si) it

i, j , t s, i, j, m, t

(Tr) ysjimt

(3)

If theres a shipment, operate Can open site i if its allowed

( ( yitSi ) aitSi ) ( ( yijtCo ) aijtCo ) (Tr ) (Tr ysjimt asimt)

i, t i, j , t s, i, j, m , t
(4)

Can collect, if its allowed Can ship from source, if its allowed

( ( yitSi ) mitSi ) ( ( yijtCo ) mijtCo ) (Tr ) (Tr ysjimt msimt) ( ( (Co xijtCo ) CijtCo ) yijt )

i, t i, j , t s, i, j, m , t
(5)

Must open at site i (if m is 1) Must collect at site i of type j Must ship from source to site i Amt collected

i, j , t s, i, j, m , t
s, i, j , m, t s, i, j , m, t

sites capacity

x
j

(Tr ) sjimt

(Tr (Tr Csimt) ysimt)

(6)

Transportation capacity

( (Tr ) xijtCo ) , xsjimt 0 (Co) (Tr) (Si) yijt , ysimt , yit

(7) (8)

{0 , 1 }

Based upon numerous one day collection events in the state of Georgia, the events are limited by the frequency in which the workers could completely unload and sort the electronics. Estimations and assumptions used predict supply and information used in the mathematical model are based on the following: On average 6.2% of the households have an electronic item ready for recycling. (Pasco County Pilot Program, April 2000) On average 20%-30% of the population are assumed to participate in collection program. (assumption) Proportion (in lbs.) of television : computer monitor : CPU collected is 50 : 23 : 27. (Alachua County Florida, Summary Report October 1999) On average, one television weights 51.5 lbs. (Alachua County Florida, Summary Report October 1999) On average, one computer monitor weights 27.2 lbs. (Alachua County Florida, Summary Report October 1999) On average, one CPU weights 29.2 lbs. (Alachua County Florida, Summary Report October 1999)

(.8 cars/min per line * 360 min)(4 lines) 1152 cars Maximum capacity per event Served as the base for the supply and projected input flow of electronic scrap. Projected Supply: 80,000 lbs 600 cars 60,000 300 cars 6 hours 4 lines

4 hours 2 lines

150 lbs per car projected supply. Therefore 172,800 lbs is the maximum incoming supply for a single collection event Truck Capacity Based on maximum supply collected, it will require 8 trucks to transport collected materials. There is limited space in the allotted mall parking area. Therefore, 4 trailers per event, reducing each collection event capacity to 86,000 lbs (172,000lbs *.5 half the # of trucks)

Supply information
The State of Georgia is separated into 12 different regions based on service delivery regions of Department of Community Affairs (DCA). This information can be found in the Department of Community Affairs home page (http://www.dca.state.ga.us/regions/).

The divisions of the region, however, are based upon a geographical approach. This would not be the optimal target areas for a collection model at malls. Malls are normally centered around the major cities of certain counties. This creates a better approach to maximizing coverage and participation. We targeted the most densely populated counties to hold collection events at malls, allowing for travel and advertising convenience for the consumer.

Source Counties: Chatam Dougherty Whitfield Catoosa Columia Rockdale Richmond Gwinnett Muscogee Fulton Houston DeKalb Bibb Cobb Clayton Clarke Mall Sites (Cities)

Si1 Si2 Si3 Si4 Si5 Si6 Si7 Si8 Si9 Si10 Si11 Si12 Si13 Si14 Si15 Si16 Si17 Si18 Si19 Si20 Si21 Si22 Si23 Si24 Si25 Si26

Arbor Place (Douglasville) Southlake Mall (Morrow) Stone Crest Mall (Lithonia) North/South Dekalb (Decatur) North Point (Alpharetta) Venture Mall (Duluth) Valdosta Mall (Lawrenceville) Cumberland Mall (Atlanta) Mall of Georgia (Buford) Georgia Square Mall Perimeter Square Colonial Mall Lakeshore Watson Central Mall Colonial Mall Macon Augusta Mall Regency Mall Peachtree Mall Galleria Mall Dublin Mall Kaolin Tanger Mall (Dalton) Trion Triangle Shopping Center (Trion) Mount Berry Square (Rome) Alpine Village (Helen) Mall@Newnan Crossing (Newnan) La Grange Mall (La Grange)

These are the malls that were put into the model. Based upon the defined constraints of travel distance from source county and population of surrounding county, the model selected the optimal output.

Results The mixed integer programming model concluded the optimal design to entail opening 14 of the 26 (54%) of the malls input into the model. Collection events would be held twice (once every six months), creating a greater influx of electronic scrap. Due to limited space for trailers in the mall parking lot, four trailers would be used at each event. The objective function was determined to be $35,000 resulting from the assumed advertising cost of $1,250 per event. The selected malls allow for 100% of Georgias population to conveniently participate in a collection event.

Mall Sites Opened 26. La Grange Mall 17. Peachtree Mall (Columbus) 2. Southlake Mall 3. Stone Crest Mall 4. North DeKalb 5. North point 21.Tanger Mall (Dalton) 6. Venture Mall (Duluth) 14. Colonial Mall 1. Arbor Place Mall 11. Perimeter Mall 16. Regency Mall 18. Galleria 8. Cumberland Mall

Conclusion: In this report, a potential solution has been developed that creates an optimal design for collection of used electronics for the state of Georgia. The model meets the following objectives: Minimized cost Optimal geographic coverage Maximized model input of electronics

To meet the objectives, 14 optimal collection sites have been established with consideration to travel distance for recyclers. Additionally, an objective value has been established to determine the cost to run the model. Finally, for optimal results, the model is designed to operate on a 12-month period; each site, holding an event every 6 months to capitalize on incoming supply. Key extensions to this work include integrating in more e-scrap materials. Also, inputting incentives to observe behavior of expected participation rates. Several other aspects of the model could be extensively evaluated, including pending legislation, and uncertainties associated with transportation and advertising costs.