Global Electronics Summit Highlights

Chemical Watch’s virtual Global Electronics Summit (21–23 September 2021) provided attendees with the latest information and advice on chemicals management and restrictions in electronics, presented by representatives from government organisations, trade associations, industry, service providers and NGOs.

Key topics throughout the day included:

developments in Europe;
the Echa Scip database and electronics;
TSCA and other US regulations;
the circular economy, including the Circular Electronic Partnership initiative;
global electronics waste and recycling issues;
packaging and ecodesign;
flame retardants, and much more.

View the event programme

Speakers

Global Electronics Summit welcomed 40 expert speakers including:

Cindy Wheeler
Attorney-adviser, Existing Chemicals Risk Management Division, Office of Pollution Preventi

Chris Flanders
Technical Program Manager, Google

Carolina Quadri
Latin America Producer Responsibility Sr. Consultant - Global Product Compliance and Environmental Affairs, Dell

Kelly Scanlon
Director, Environmental Policy and Research, IPC

Nathan Williams
CEO, Minespider

Mike Blakeney
Senior Manager - Government and Public Affairs, Cobalt Institute

Marianna Smirnova
Director of Standards and Assurance, Responsible Business Alliance

Adam Schafer
Director of Supply Chain Responsibility, Intel

View all speakers

Live Q&As from the event:

These are the answers to live questions asked by delegates to Adrian Beard during one of our final presentations, ‘The path to sustainable flame retardants’.

With organohalogen flame retardants (OFRs) under increasing scrutiny, and more and more downstream companies adopting policies to phase them out, can suppliers of alternatives meet the demand if all OFRs are eventually banned/restricted?

For a full-fledged replacement of OFRs the manufacturers of alternative flame retardants would need sufficient time (some years) to increase their production capacities. In order to do so, they also need confidence in moving such investments forward. It is important to note that halogen free flame retardants are not simply drop-in replacements for OFRs, but formulations need to be adjusted and sometimes processing equipment and procedures as well. For those few polymers where currently no commercially viable halogen flame retardants exist (e.g. ABS), one needs to switch to a similar base material.

Shouldn't the class of flame retardants of concern be further defined as "nonpolymeric, additive"?

No, that is too simplistic. Oligo- and polymeric flame retardants have some inherent benefits, like lower bioavailability and likelihood for bioaccumulation - for example, there can still be residual monomeric impurities or breakdown products under the thermal stress of processing or unwanted by-products in uncontrolled incineration. Furthermore, there are indeed many non-polymeric and additive flame retardants with good environmental and health properties, like the phosphinates discussed in my presentation or aluminium and magnesium hydroxides.

Phosphorous-based FRs were included in the now scrapped Swedish tax on flame retardants in electronics - did this have any impact on Clariant's phosphorous-based FRs business? Did this affect the reputation of phosphorous-based FRs?

To my knowledge and regret, the Swedish tax on electronics is still in place (see Swedish Tax Authority website). What has been withdrawn is a planned new tax on chemicals in clothing and footwear. Nevertheless, to answer the question: the impact of the Swedish tax on our business has been very limited. Yes, we did get enquiries from customers or end users, but most of them understand that the way the Swedish is set up does not make sense from an environmental point of view. The over-simplistic and in details confusing approach of penalising halogen and phosphorus containing FRs together with the categories “additive” vs. “reactive” neglects the fact that there are several additive phosphorus flame retardants with good marks on environment and health, as documented e.g. by GreenScreen™ assessments. pinfa has been working together with IT Telekomföretagen on a revision of the tax, see more info here.

Phosphorus-based substances can have high ecotoxicity (particularly eutrophication) and the electronics industry has specifically had issues with moisture and red phosphorus (used as a FR in epoxies). Are phosphinate-based FRs subject to any of these types of issues?

Yes, some phosphate ester flame retardants show ecotoxicity – it is not the case for Clariant’s phosphinates [side comment: eutrophication is not the relevant end point for ecotoxicity. Eutrophication means an oversupply of nutrients in rivers or lakes or the sea, which leads to algae blooming and finally deprivation of oxygen. This happens when fertilizing chemicals enter the water, mainly nitrogen or phosphates]. Red phosphorus is a special flame retardant, because it has a high reactivity towards oxygen and water which can lead to the formation of acids and toxic phosphine (PH3) gas. This is not the case for Clariant’s phosphinates which are chemically very stable.

Do your new phosphinate Flame retardants address the issues of proposed bans on phosphate based materials, like TPP, RDPP etc.?

As shown in my presentation, Clariant’s phosphinate flame retardants have been widely assessed, both with studies for the chemical registration process e.g. under REACH, but also by external third parties, demonstrating an excellent environmental and health profile. Therefore, we do not see any of the concerns which have been raised on the phosphate esters you mention.

Related news coverage

Chemical Watch publishes worldwide news on the electronics sector so you never miss important updates. Recent stories include:

Electronics sector alerted to effects of EU enforcement and product policies

Echa’s Rac backs lithium salts classification amid concern about battery supply

Electronics industry comments informed upcoming PIP 3:1 proposal, says US EPA

Bangladesh restricts fewer substances than proposed in final e-waste Rules

You can find more related articles on the Chemical Watch website.

Testimonials

“This event was very useful, it was a compendium of knowledge about regulations related to electronics.”

“The event had a great line-up of presenters who gave actionable advice and information relevant to our industry.”

“The event was very helpful and provided a lot of insights on the electronics industry as a whole. I can take some of that information back to identify areas more specific to my industry.”

“I thoroughly enjoyed the event because it provided me with up-to-date information.”

Upcoming events from Chemical Watch

UK REACH Masterclass
4 October | Online training course – Book here
Toxicology for the Non-Toxicologist
6 October | Online training course – Book here
UK Chemicals Policy & Regulation
7 October | Virtual conference – Book here
Key Regulatory Updates: Europe, Asia and the Americas
12–14 October | Virtual conference – Book here
Chemistry for the Non-Chemist
14 October | Online training course – Book here
The EU Chemicals Strategy for Sustainability: One Year On
20 October | Virtual conference – Book here
China's New Standards on Coatings, Cleaning Agents, Inks and Adhesives
21 October | Online training course – Book here
Global Cosmetics Summit
17–18 November | Virtual summit – Book here

Browse our full calendar of events

Global Electronics Summit

Speaker profile

Mattia Pellegrini