Electronics makers say it is impossible to estimate the potential costs of complying with the EU directives but claim the price tag is likely to be substantial. They argue that the directives will not only drive up the cost of their products for consumers but also force producers to divert research money aimed at developing new products to finding alternatives to the banned chemicals.
For example, many of the alternative solders are silver-based, which is more expensive than lead, and less energy-efficient, according to Holly Evans, EIA's director of environmental affairs.
The European Commission has estimated that the price tag for electrical and electronic products could rise by 1 percent, assuming companies pass on their compliance costs to consumers. And that impact could be felt far beyond Europe's borders.
Multinational electronics producers "have facilities all over the world and if the European continent decides to phase out . . . [some] hazardous constituents over several years, I don't see how they can avoid it in the United States," says Bender at the Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition.
Small, at Sony, however, says his company often produces different products for different markets and would not rule out producing products solely aimed at Europe.
Other companies also make different products to adapt to varying regulations, says Michael Alexander, senior research associate at the National Recycling Coalition. "It's a question of cost-effectiveness," he says.
