ARTICLE IN PRESS

+ MODEL

Journal of Cleaner Production xx (2005) 1e7

www.elsevier.com/locate/jclepro

A decomposition of the end of life process

P. Tanskanen*, R. Takala 1
Nokia Research Center, Nokia Group, P.O. Box 407, Helsinki FIN 00045, Finland
Accepted 11 November 2005

Abstract

New legislation on electronics waste in Europe will set formal requirements for product end of life (EOL) processes. These include producer
responsibility for obsolete product take-back, pre-treatment and recycling. A structure is needed for the complex interactions between technical,
environmental, socio-economic and legislative factors in product take-back and EOL treatment. EOL process can be divided into three distinct
stages with different characteristics and stakeholders. The first stage is the organization of an effective take-back process. The second is the
structural pre-treatment and fragmentation of the product. The third stage is the recycling and disposal processes of the product material content.
In this paper we propose a simplified economic model for an EOL process for mobile terminals. We use the model to create a step-by-step EOL
process. Furthermore, we present through examples, technical as well as engineering process solutions in promoting economic implementation
of the EOL processes.
Ó 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: End of life; Recycling; Life cycle; Economics

1. From the system level to an EOL process
In order to be able to solve a complex multifaceted problem
of end of life (EOL) management, the problem must first be
defined and partitioned into meaningful parts. A model of
the EOL is presented based on the work in the area of mobile
phone EOL treatment and it is shown in a larger context. The
problem is also decomposed so that specific solutions can be
found [1e4].
The EOL is the last phase in the lifespan of a product. It has
been one of the primary topics of environmental discussions
during the past few years. This topic is at the source of
much activity as familiar waste treatment issues now also con-
cern electrical products. However, the EOL stage represents
only a part of the product life cycle and environmental im-
pacts, as seen from the distribution of the environmental
* Corresponding author. Tel.: þ358 7180 37628; fax: þ358 7180 37128.
E-mail addresses: pia.tanskanen@nokia.com (P. Tanskanen), roope.
takala@nokia.com (R. Takala).
1
Tel.: þ358 7180 20860.
effects of a mobile terminal during its life cycle, in Fig. 1.
This is relevant when the product ends up into proper end of
life treatment and is not landfilled or incinerated.
Even if the EOL is only a part of the whole picture the ac-
tivities within the EOL phase need to be clarified and parti-
tioned in more detail. This has to be done to allow concrete
implementation of a sound EOL process and to enable the de-
velopment of technologies to promote these processes. Fig. 2
describes how the EOL can be shown in a larger context.
The figure shows how the EOL is related to the overall envi-
ronmental thinking regarding electronic products and shows
the levels of abstraction from a general view to concrete engi-
neering solutions. This is drawn in the shape of a funnel, to
show the shift from large abstraction to more defined and lim-
ited views and to concrete solutions.
The levels of abstraction shown are: the system, process,
technology, and individual solution levels. The system level
describes the whole environmental impact of the product.
We have opted to use the term system as there is a network
of actors and a product’s environmental impacts can be viewed
from many different angles, such as energy consumption,

0959-6526/$ - see front matter Ó 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2005.11.016
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
+ MODEL
2 P. Tanskanen, R. Takala / Journal of Cleaner Production xx (2005) 1e7
Fig. 1. Environmental impacts of a mobile terminal during its life cycle. The
number of x’s signifies the amount of impact [5].
packaging material, manufacturing, and so on. Tools for these
are, for example, supplier network management, design for en-
vironment (DfE), environmental management systems, material
data management, and guidelines for end of life practices.
The process level describes the processes and interaction ac-
tivities of the different parts of the system, which in this exam-
ple is EOL. The third level concentrates on the technologies
and methods needed for implementing one process, such as
take-back or fractioning. The fourth level looks at individual
design solutions for products that can help achieve environ-
mental targets for a certain technology. A similar leveling
down could be done also for other environmental processes
at the system level.
In this paper we concentrate on the last three levels of
abstraction as the highest level of abstraction is already well
covered in literature [6e9]. We show a model of the end of
life activities for an electronic appliance, a mobile phone.
From the process model we derive technologies that can be
used to target individual technical solutions in a meaningful
way so that the whole environmental framework can be
addressed by tackling individual parts of it separately. This
paper concentrates on the final treatment of obsolete electron-
ics products. Reuse, upgradeability, refurbishment and other
means to extend a products live are not considered here as
these are seen as activities that are done prior to the EOL
treatment [10].
2. A model of the EOL process
The process view of EOL can be modeled into three distinct
phases: take-back, pre-treatment, and material content recy-
cling and disposal of the products. Take-back involves the lo-
gistics, systems, and technologies for the collection of
obsolete products and transferring these products to recycling
facilities. In this phase the user of the product plays a crucial
role, as he initiates the whole EOL process. The take-back is
critical to the EOL process, as its success determines to
what detail the subsequent EOL processes can be tailored.
The take-back phase can be characterized as an organizational
issue. Pre-treatment includes sorting of the products and their
disassembly or shredding. This is done by recycling compa-
nies utilizing different technologies, from manual treatment
to more automated systems. The ease of this phase depends
on the mechanical structure of the product. Content recycling
and material disposal include the sale or disposal of the mate-
rials/components according to what is appropriate for each
fraction. In this phase the value of the material is defined by
the global material markets.
An economic model for the EOL process of mobile termi-
nals can be presented based on these three phases. The model
describing the three phases is shown in Fig. 3. The costs of the
different phases are normally combined and shown only as one
figure. In the model the cost of each phase can be separated,
and therefore the transparency of the system is greater. The
model shows the financial bottlenecks in the EOL phase and
enables identification of key issues where action needs to be
taken.
In the model, the individual cash flows of the whole EOL
process can be identified. By separating the three phases
and identifying the roots for positive and negative cash flows,
it is possible to find ways for maximizing system efficiency.
The cost of EOL is related to the two first stages, take-back
and pre-treatment, and to the treatment of hazardous substan-
ces in the product. Revenues in the process come from the
sales of recyclable material and reusable components. The
amount of revenues therefore depends on the amount of pre-
cious and recyclable materials in the product. The final bottom
line is from the sum of the relations of four factors: the frac-
tions suitable for sale, hazardous materials, and the complexity
of the product structure and the efficiency of the take-back
system. In mobile phones the precious metal content is typically
quite high and therefore recycling shows positive value when
logistical costs are not taken into account. The model can
therefore be used as a tool for pinpointing the expenses and
revenues from the EOL process. After this it is easier to decide
on the necessary improvements to be made in the process,
whether they are related to product design, take-back or
recycling activities.
The two first phases, take-back and pre-treatment, offer no
direct economic benefits, but rather require investments in sys-
tems and facilities. Controlling cost formation in these phases is
important as only the sale of recyclable materials and reusable
components offers economic benefits. The incineration of plas-
tics is considered to be a zero sum activity. The financial bene-
fits are evident only in the last phase, which means that the
earlier, costly, phases must take place before the benefits can
be collected. In order to obtain a sustainable comprehensive so-
lution it is therefore desirable to build up enterprises, which can
include both expenses and profitable activities in their portfolio.
The model also describes the logistical network of the prod-
uct EOL. The organization of take-back is the main logistical
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
+ MODEL
P. Tanskanen, R. Takala / Journal of Cleaner Production xx (2005) 1e7
Fig. 2. The context and levels of abstraction of EOL.
challenge, as the products must be collected from widely dis-
persed customers around the world. Products need to be trans-
ported from the collection points to predefined recycling
facilities. Material fractions are further transported to different
material companies from the recycling facilities. For total sys-
tem efficiency, an optimization of EOL logistics is important.
By building up a process from the different phases it is pos-
sible to start searching for various solutions to the issues in
each phase. We can then move down one level of abstraction
and start to look at technologies and methods for the processes.
We have derived a simple step-by-step process from the
model to describe the activities that need to take place in the
EOL. The process, shown in Fig. 4, consists of six phases.
The initiator of the take-back process is the user. Mobile
phones enter into the EOL phase when the user (owner) de-
cides not to use the product anymore and returns the product
to a collection point. It is extremely important to motivate
the user to do this in order to get back the products and route
them for proper EOL treatment. The second phase is the activ-
ity that takes place during the take-back processes. This starts
when the terminal is returned to the collection point [11].
Take-back systems and routes currently depend very much
on the location; different systems have been described in sev-
eral publications [12e16].
After the appliance/terminal is returned to the collection
point it is moved to sorting, which is the third phase. Products
3
are sorted according to their economical value and according
to their different material compositions. The following phase
is product disassembly, for example batteries are disassembled
from the product. The fifth phase is separation of different ma-
terial fractions, for example separation of glass displays from
the circuit boards and plastics. These three phases (sorting,
disassembly, and fractioning) represent the pre-treatment
phase in the EOL process (Fig. 3). The last process phase is
the sale or disposal of materials, and it forms the recycling
and disposal phase in the EOL model.
3. Technological and design solutions for disassembly
In order to further explain the need for structuring the pre-
treatment phase of the EOL process, it is necessary to look at it
more closely. The purpose of pre-treatment (sorting, disassem-
bly, and fractioning) is to separate different material fractions
as efficiently as possible from the obsolete products. This is
done in order to be able to sell as much material as possible
to be used as raw material for new products and at the same
time safely remove hazardous and other duly disposable mate-
rial fractions.
Different technologies can be used for pre-treatment. Pre-
treatment can be done manually (Fig. 5), by shredding
(Fig. 6) or by various automated processes (Fig. 7). All of
these methods have their benefits and limitations. General
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
+ MODEL

4 P. Tanskanen, R. Takala / Journal of Cleaner Production xx (2005) 1e7

User

Take-back

Sorting

Disassembly

Separation fractions
and components

Sale/disposal
of fractions

Fig. 4. EOL process.

Specific technologies and solutions for issues arising during

the process phases can be addressed from understanding of the
problem partitioning gained from the process view of the EOL
model. It is possible to create technological solutions for
streamlining activity related to these process phases. The
take-back, sorting, and disassembly phases described earlier
have been studied. In order to illustrate how specific technol-
ogies can be used to solve EOL problems, a closer look is

Fig. 3. Economic model of EOL process.

goals for the processes are cost-efficiency, product diversity,

and flexibility, high product flow, safety, and good separation
capability.
We can view EOL solutions in more detail by studying
more closely the newest disassembly technology, automated
disassembly. We have introduced examples of active disassem-
bly [2e4] and induction heating [17].
After moving from the abstract level to a specified EOL
technology using a process model, specific design guidelines
can finally be drafted to provide a real solution for a coherent
EOL practice. Fig. 5. Manual disassembly.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
+ MODEL

P. Tanskanen, R. Takala / Journal of Cleaner Production xx (2005) 1e7 5

Fig. 6. Shredding plant.

taken at automatic disassembly as one solution for the disas-
sembly of electronics. Currently two lines are being pursued
to gain efficiency in mobile phone disassembly. The first is
to generate more sophisticated and effective disassembly pro-
cesses. The second is to design a disassembly function into the
products themselves. In the next section some solutions to
these specific problems are presented; they are examples of
solutions that address EOL problems step-by-step. Several op-
tions have been developed to solve a specific problem. The na-
ture of these options may vary significantly, and they cannot in
all cases be implemented in parallel. This means, that in order
to solve a problem, one option must be selected.

Fig. 7. Automated disassembly technologies (robotics, induction heating [17], mechanical impact, and active disassembly [3]).
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
+ MODEL
6 P. Tanskanen, R. Takala / Journal of Cleaner Production xx (2005) 1e7
3.1. Process related solutions for disassembly
Several cases of improved disassembly processes have been
demonstrated. Fig. 7 shows different automated disassembly
processes for mobile phones. The problem with the most auto-
mated technologies is that they are quite product specific and
require positioning of the product.
3.2. Product related solutions for disassembly
In order to be able to go to the product design level one op-
tion must be selected from the different technologies. Here
built-in disassembly is taken as an example and one technical
solution is shown.
A built-in disassembly system is a feature or component
that can be triggered by a simple outside force to open the
phone structure. Several designs that accomplish this task
have been presented [2e4] in previous works. Common trig-
gering forces for self-disassembly (or active disassembly)
are heat and a magnetic field, or even chemical or biological
agents.
The mechanism called ‘‘Fall apart’’ is shown in Fig. 8. The
device is based on the magnetic triggering of the fastening el-
ement. A magnetic field will unfasten the element, disassem-
ble the product and allow the separate treatment of different
parts as separate fractions. The mechanism was realized by de-
signing a screw-like discrete component that resembles the anti-
theft tags used in clothing stores. This mechanism, however, was
designed so that manual disassembly is also possible, enabling
mobile terminal disassembly also without a strong magnet.
The development of this solution is on prototype level where
implementation to mass-production has not yet been done.
4. Factors restricting EOL implementation
When taking any EOL solution into use participation and
buy-in are required among all the players involved. As in
the example shown earlier, the built-in disassembly mecha-
nism has no use, if the pre-treatment facilities for using it
are not in place.
Fig. 8. Built-in active-disassembly system, which can be triggered by a strong
magnetic field.
Decision-making concerning the example presented is at the
moment rather difficult. The end of life treatment of electronics
is a rapidly changing and developing area where new technol-
ogies and practices are constantly being created. Therefore the
feedback information from the end of the life processes to
product design is not up-to-date. The delay between the design
of a product and its recycling is several years, which affects the
compatibility of these two ends of the products’ life cycle.
Recycling can be approached from two directions: how to
design a product that can be easily recycled, and how to build
a recycling process that works in an efficient way. The chal-
lenge is to approach the same solution from both of these di-
rections, and this hampers decision-making significantly. The
products’ design has to be optimized to facilitate a manual
sorting process. However, if an automatic take-back machine
sorts the product automatically, it is bound to be sub-optimal
with such a design.
Decision-making is also slowed down by overly general
design guidelines. Gradually DfE has been included in the de-
sign guidelines within the electronics industry. In practice at
the beginning, this means the use of lists and guidelines, e.g.,
using only one type of screw, minimizing the number of screws,
not combining metal and plastic materials. These instructions
are effective for manual disassembly but not necessarily for
automated processes. However, as we have shown here, the
end of life processes for disassembly and material separation
are developing very fast. The recycling industry cannot rely
on manual work in the future. For this reason general guidelines
result in ‘‘good compromises’’. In these compromises a product
is designed to have some favorable characteristics for diverse
processes but is not optimized for any processes. The difficulty
at the moment is to design for practices that are not yet estab-
lished. This uncertainty prevents radically new thinking in end
of life design, and so companies only make minor amendments.
At the moment it is not clear what material fractions need to
be separated in the electronics products. As an example, the
plastic covers of the phone can be separated and recycled, but
it is not eco-efficient at the moment [18]. This is because the
total benefit is negligible when the small weight of the received
material is compared to the energy required for receiving it.
5. Conclusions
Both new environmental legislation and discussions related
to electronics products have been concentrating to a large ex-
tent on recycling and hazardous material issues. This happens
even though the recycling phase accounts for only a fraction of
the environmental impacts of the product life cycle [5]. Much
attention is paid to the EOL because of the large amount of
electronic goods in use that should not end up in landfills,
and because of the risk of hazardous substances leaching
into the soil and water systems. With this in mind, a closer
look was taken at the EOL, and a detailed model was created
for this phase. The model describes the EOL against the gen-
eral background of environmental issues, having regard to
problems and options as well as detailed technical solutions.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
+ MODEL
P. Tanskanen, R. Takala / Journal of Cleaner Production xx (2005) 1e7
An important way to lessen negative impacts is to educate
and guide consumers so that they are aware of the separate col-
lection of electronics products. In addition, removing potentially
hazardous substances from the products is an important
design effort, because some products may end up in landfills
even though they are collected separately. These two issues
are handled by organizational agreements, information sharing,
and material selection processes. The phase in the middle of the
EOL model is still very immature, and it was taken under closer
scrutiny in this example. After the goods have been collected
and transported to the treatment plants, an efficient process
should be in place so that as much as possible of the material
content will be collected in way that is safe for the workers
and the environment. Designing an easily recyclable product
and/or better treatment processes in cooperation with partners
can enhance this process. There exist a great number of solu-
tions for this phase; but the state-of-the art solutions in use to-
day are manual disassembly and shredding. Of the new
technologies, a promising one is active disassembly; to high-
light this, one detailed product concept was presented.
In order to be able to concentrate on a specific issue in the
EOL, a model was described through an example. Decompo-
sition of the process leads to specific problems, for which
practical solutions can be found. Before a radical change
can happen in the EOL decisions must be made on which op-
tions to select from the constantly increasing number of avail-
able options must be made.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the students of Helsinki
University of Technology who helped realize many of the ac-
tive-disassembly prototypes, as well as EU 5FP ADSM project
collaborators for their valuable input in developing the ideas.
References
[1] Tanskanen P, Takala R. Engineering paradigms for sustainable design of
mobile terminals. 14th International conference on engineering design,
ICED, Stockholm; 2003.
7
[2] Tanskanen P, Takala R. Integrierte Demontagemechanismen für Tragbare
Elektrogeräte. Z. Konstruktion 2003;1/2.
[3] Arnaiz S, Bodenhoefer K, Constantin H, Hussein H, Irasarri L,
Schnecke D, et al. Active disassembly using smart materials (ADSM),
a status report of the ongoing EU project. Proceedings of care innovation,
Vienna; 2002.
[4] Tanskanen P, Takala R. Concept of a mobile terminal with an active dis-
assembly mechanism. Proceedings of international electronics recycling
congress, ICM, Davos; 2002.
[5] Nokia Corporation. Environmental report 2002. p. 8.
[6] Yim HJ, Lee K. Environmental benchmarking mythology for the identi-
fication of key environmental aspects of a product. Proceedings of inter-
national symposium on electronics & environment, IEEE, San Francisco;
2002.
[7] Weinschenk K. Getting the math right: accurate costing through product
life cycles. In: Goldberg L, editor. Green electronics/green bottom line.
USA: Newnes; 2000.
[8] Schlatter A, Zust R. Evaluation method for the economic benefit of cor-
porate environmental activities. 6th International seminar on life cycle
engineering, CIRP, Kingston, Canada; 1999.
[9] Frankel C. In earths company, business, environment and the challenge
of sustainability. USA: New Society Publishers; 1998.
[10] Pongracz E, Pohjola VJ. Re-defining waste, the concept of ownership and
the role of waste management. Resources Conservation and Recycling
2004;40:141e53. Elsevier.
[11] Nokia Corporation website, recycling map, <http://www.nokia.com/
nokia/0,8764,27142,00.html>; 2004.
[12] Visser J. Quality recycling costs money. Proceedings of the international
electronics recycling congress, ICM, Basel; 2004.
[13] Theusner H. A new approach for the organisation and control of the take-
back obligations. Proceedings of the international electronics recycling
congress, ICM, Basel; 2004.
[14] Eckerth G. State-of-the-art of collection logistics, Green Electronics, 10
years of CARE electronics, workshop & proceedings, Budapest; March
1e2, 2004.
[15] Röthlisberger A, Werder R, Hediger R. Compulsory take-back and
voluntary financing systems for WEEE-recycling in Switzerland, Green
Electronics, 10 years of CARE electronics, workshop & proceedings,
Budapest; March 1e2, 2004.
[16] Geerts F. The Belgian take-back system: RECUPEL. Proceedings of the
international electronics recycling congress, ICM, Davos; 2002.
[17] Leskinen K, Tanskanen P, Takala R, Ahonen H. Disassembly of mobile
terminals with induction heating. Proceedings of international electronics
recycling congress, ICM, Basel; 2003.
[18] Huisman J. The QWERTY/EE concept, quantifying recyclability and
eco-efficiency for end-of-life treatment of consumer electronics products.
Dissertation, Delft University of Technology, Design for Sustainability
Program, publication no. 8, 2003. p. 275.