Target achievement is a legal compliance that currently exists outside of the Waste Management Licence or permit. So having a WML will not mean that an Authorised Treatment Facility (ATF) has achieved target
It is understood that the EC is currently considering prosecuting the UK for its failure to achieve targets in the period 2006-2010. This is likely to mean that the UK Government is embarrassed into doing something about it!
There are currently 20 prosecutions pending for companies that have failed to report on their targets. This is just the first batch. It is entirely possible that once the prosecutions have started, attention will switch to ATFs that have reported, but failed to achieve target.
Target compliance is tied to the number of CODs issued by an ATF, and the number of Category C vehicles being scrapped is also an issue of current debate, particularly in view of the fact that 75% of Category C vehicles do not undergo a Vehicle Identity Check (VIC).
Salvage Wire
Helping Automotive recyclers become leaders in their industry
Monday, 20 June 2011
Premature End of Life Vehicles
By their definition Premature ELV’s are vehicles that have not survived the expected life span of 12-15 years that most vehicle manufacturers build into their vehicles.
The reasons for this can be many, however I suspect that most will be due to accident, fire, flood or other events that result in an insurance claim.
Insurance engineers completing vehicle inspections need to determine if the vehicle could be repaired economically; if repair is not viable, then vehicles need to be dealt with as salvage and the inspecting engineer must determine if the vehicle is safe to repair, or must it be removed from use?
One of the most important decisions that an engineer makes is deciding if the vehicle ‘could’ or ‘should’ be repaired; the Engineer needs to know the extent of damage, potential method of repair and availability of parts.
Knowledge of vehicle construction is very important here, especially as manufacturers try to save weight whilst developing stronger vehicle bodies, the greater use of high strength steel makes repair increasingly difficult and any motor salvage inspection needs to balance repair potential against passenger safety – in other words, can any professional engineer signing a vehicle write-off report confirm that the vehicle could be repaired to a standard that would maintain occupant safety in the event of another accident.
Developed over many years the Association of British Insurers (ABI) Code of Practice for Motor Salvage assists the decision making process when inspecting vehicles in the UK that are written-off.
The ABI code has four categories of salvage that are:
• Category A. Scrap vehicles, good only for the shredder and metal recycling
• Category B. Break only – bolt on parts can be re-used, but the vehicle structure is so badly damaged that this must be removed from use and destroyed.
• Category C. Repairable Salvage – repairs using normal methods of insurance repair (brand new parts, manufacturer labour) exceed the value of the vehicle, however cheaper labour, second hand parts, or ignoring ‘cosmetic’ damage means that the vehicle could be repaired in the salvage industry.
• Category D. Constructive Total Loss – where the repair cost of the vehicle when added to other costs, such as loss of use, or the value of the salvage, exceeds the value of the vehicle, then insurers can decide to treat the vehicle as a write-off and minimise their costs. As an example, a £10,000 vehicle with £8,000 worth of damage may return £3,000 salvage, so a settlement of £10,000 less £3,000 salvage return gives a final outlay of £7,000 against the claim. Less than the assessed repair cost of £8,000.
There are a number of factors that need to be reviewed when inspecting potential write-offs, including type of damage, repair required to maintain occupant protection, and availability of parts; a few examples are detailed below.
Flood Damage.
Factors to consider include type of water – fresh, salt or contaminated (sewage), height of water, and length of time in water.
Current trends towards increasingly complex electronics will mean that any salt water damage will render the vehicle unrepairable, and if a vehicle has been submerged to a significant depth – for example water high enough to contaminate air bags) then the vehicle should be removed from use.
Fire Damage.
Excessive heat removes the strength from High Strength Steel, so fire damage to structural areas of newer vehicles is serious, I would contend that, unless the damage is very localised, all fire damaged vehicles should not be repaired.
Parts Availability.
A vehicle severely structurally damaged where parts are not available should not be repaired, releasing one of these vehicles into the motor salvage market for repair could lead to a substandard repair being completed and the general public being put in danger as an unsafe vehicle is in use. Engineers need to know what parts are available from the vehicle manufacturers and any safeguards they put in place. For example, many manufacturers place controls on the supply of replacement bodyshells that could result in these not being available to the salvage industry, thus compromising a safe repair on motor salvage.
In summary, all motor engineers inspecting vehicles for insurance repair need to be fully aware of current vehicle design and construction, they need to know repair techniques for all types of vehicles, and also decide if a salvage vehicle can be safely repaired and placed back into use.
And we haven’t started on electric vehicles yet!
A copy of the ABI Code of Practice for Motor Salvage can be downloaded from http://www.abi.org.uk/Information/Codes_and_Guidance_Notes/General_Insurance_Codes_and_Guidance_Notes.aspx
The reasons for this can be many, however I suspect that most will be due to accident, fire, flood or other events that result in an insurance claim.
Insurance engineers completing vehicle inspections need to determine if the vehicle could be repaired economically; if repair is not viable, then vehicles need to be dealt with as salvage and the inspecting engineer must determine if the vehicle is safe to repair, or must it be removed from use?
One of the most important decisions that an engineer makes is deciding if the vehicle ‘could’ or ‘should’ be repaired; the Engineer needs to know the extent of damage, potential method of repair and availability of parts.
Knowledge of vehicle construction is very important here, especially as manufacturers try to save weight whilst developing stronger vehicle bodies, the greater use of high strength steel makes repair increasingly difficult and any motor salvage inspection needs to balance repair potential against passenger safety – in other words, can any professional engineer signing a vehicle write-off report confirm that the vehicle could be repaired to a standard that would maintain occupant safety in the event of another accident.
Developed over many years the Association of British Insurers (ABI) Code of Practice for Motor Salvage assists the decision making process when inspecting vehicles in the UK that are written-off.
The ABI code has four categories of salvage that are:
• Category A. Scrap vehicles, good only for the shredder and metal recycling
• Category B. Break only – bolt on parts can be re-used, but the vehicle structure is so badly damaged that this must be removed from use and destroyed.
• Category C. Repairable Salvage – repairs using normal methods of insurance repair (brand new parts, manufacturer labour) exceed the value of the vehicle, however cheaper labour, second hand parts, or ignoring ‘cosmetic’ damage means that the vehicle could be repaired in the salvage industry.
• Category D. Constructive Total Loss – where the repair cost of the vehicle when added to other costs, such as loss of use, or the value of the salvage, exceeds the value of the vehicle, then insurers can decide to treat the vehicle as a write-off and minimise their costs. As an example, a £10,000 vehicle with £8,000 worth of damage may return £3,000 salvage, so a settlement of £10,000 less £3,000 salvage return gives a final outlay of £7,000 against the claim. Less than the assessed repair cost of £8,000.
There are a number of factors that need to be reviewed when inspecting potential write-offs, including type of damage, repair required to maintain occupant protection, and availability of parts; a few examples are detailed below.
Flood Damage.
Factors to consider include type of water – fresh, salt or contaminated (sewage), height of water, and length of time in water.
Current trends towards increasingly complex electronics will mean that any salt water damage will render the vehicle unrepairable, and if a vehicle has been submerged to a significant depth – for example water high enough to contaminate air bags) then the vehicle should be removed from use.
Fire Damage.
Excessive heat removes the strength from High Strength Steel, so fire damage to structural areas of newer vehicles is serious, I would contend that, unless the damage is very localised, all fire damaged vehicles should not be repaired.
Parts Availability.
A vehicle severely structurally damaged where parts are not available should not be repaired, releasing one of these vehicles into the motor salvage market for repair could lead to a substandard repair being completed and the general public being put in danger as an unsafe vehicle is in use. Engineers need to know what parts are available from the vehicle manufacturers and any safeguards they put in place. For example, many manufacturers place controls on the supply of replacement bodyshells that could result in these not being available to the salvage industry, thus compromising a safe repair on motor salvage.
In summary, all motor engineers inspecting vehicles for insurance repair need to be fully aware of current vehicle design and construction, they need to know repair techniques for all types of vehicles, and also decide if a salvage vehicle can be safely repaired and placed back into use.
And we haven’t started on electric vehicles yet!
A copy of the ABI Code of Practice for Motor Salvage can be downloaded from http://www.abi.org.uk/Information/Codes_and_Guidance_Notes/General_Insurance_Codes_and_Guidance_Notes.aspx
Saturday, 11 June 2011
Car Merchandising Recycling
As manufacturers constantly change their sales publicity many car dealers face increasing costs to dispose of obsolete posters, brochures and car display materials.
Salvage Wire are proud to offer a free of charge recycling service for all car posters, brochures and car display materials to car dealers and manufacturer agents.
All you have to do is phone or e-mail Salvage Wire and we will arrange free of charge collection of your unwanted posters, brochures and car display materials, saving you the time and cost of disposal.
Salvage Wire are committed to ethical recycling and will process each item to full environmental standards.
We look forward to your request, and please do not hesitate to contact us if you have any questions.
Salvage Wire are proud to offer a free of charge recycling service for all car posters, brochures and car display materials to car dealers and manufacturer agents.
All you have to do is phone or e-mail Salvage Wire and we will arrange free of charge collection of your unwanted posters, brochures and car display materials, saving you the time and cost of disposal.
Salvage Wire are committed to ethical recycling and will process each item to full environmental standards.
We look forward to your request, and please do not hesitate to contact us if you have any questions.
Monday, 6 June 2011
Certificate of Technical Competency
You have been in the auto recycling business since you finished school, your children have been brought up in the business and their children are of an age where they want to finish school and come and join you, and the Environment Agency are now asking you to take a test to prove your competent to operate a recycling yard.
You are probably thinking what do they know about running a salvage yard that I don’t?
Well, the bad news is that Technical Competency is here to stay; the good news is that it is not too difficult once you know how the testing procedure works and have received a little bit of training.
There are three elements to the test, the generic module and then two activity specific modules that most End of Life Vehicle sites should be taking.
The Generic module looks at three areas:
• The Law – this includes Waste Carriers, Environmental Permitting, Hazardous Waste Controls and so on.
• Health and Safety – Equipment, Manual Handling, People on Site etc.
• Environmental Protection – for example - Drainage, Bunding, Liquid Containment, spillages, etc.
This part of the test is 20 questions with multi-choice answers.
The activity specific modules focus directly into such areas as End of Life Vehicles, Metal Recycling, Waste transfer Station and so-on, and these are 6 questions for each, again with multiple choice answers.
It is best to work with professionals in this area to determine the exact modules required and the training needed to pass the Technical Competency tests, both UK motor salvage federations are offering training to their members, so their web sites would be a good place to start, www.mvda.org.uk and www.bvsf.org.uk , you could also work with your local Environment Agency office to determine what is required, as the modules detailed above are only suitable for members of staff with considerable experience of running auto recycling operations, and newer staff may be required to complete more intensive training and development before being technically competent.
If you are based outside of England and Wales then there is currently no requirement for you to hold this qualification, so you can watch with interest as your colleagues work through these tests, however if you are based in England and Wales you cannot ignore the requirements, without a Certificate of Technical Competence the Environment Agency could revoke your Waste Management Licence or Environmental Permit with major consequences on your business.
You are probably thinking what do they know about running a salvage yard that I don’t?
Well, the bad news is that Technical Competency is here to stay; the good news is that it is not too difficult once you know how the testing procedure works and have received a little bit of training.
There are three elements to the test, the generic module and then two activity specific modules that most End of Life Vehicle sites should be taking.
The Generic module looks at three areas:
• The Law – this includes Waste Carriers, Environmental Permitting, Hazardous Waste Controls and so on.
• Health and Safety – Equipment, Manual Handling, People on Site etc.
• Environmental Protection – for example - Drainage, Bunding, Liquid Containment, spillages, etc.
This part of the test is 20 questions with multi-choice answers.
The activity specific modules focus directly into such areas as End of Life Vehicles, Metal Recycling, Waste transfer Station and so-on, and these are 6 questions for each, again with multiple choice answers.
It is best to work with professionals in this area to determine the exact modules required and the training needed to pass the Technical Competency tests, both UK motor salvage federations are offering training to their members, so their web sites would be a good place to start, www.mvda.org.uk and www.bvsf.org.uk , you could also work with your local Environment Agency office to determine what is required, as the modules detailed above are only suitable for members of staff with considerable experience of running auto recycling operations, and newer staff may be required to complete more intensive training and development before being technically competent.
If you are based outside of England and Wales then there is currently no requirement for you to hold this qualification, so you can watch with interest as your colleagues work through these tests, however if you are based in England and Wales you cannot ignore the requirements, without a Certificate of Technical Competence the Environment Agency could revoke your Waste Management Licence or Environmental Permit with major consequences on your business.
Autonomous Emergency Braking
Or, how to avoid 271,000 crashes each year!
Spent an afternoon at the Motor Industry Research Association (MIRA) establishment recently investigating Autonomous Emergency Braking (AEB) with Thatcham and innovITS Advance.
I was able to try a number of vehicles, both production and prototype models with advanced electronics that are able to take control from the driver and provide braking in emergency situations.
The result of this intervention is either complete avoidance of an impact or much reduced impact speeds with significantly reduced levels of vehicle damage, personal injuries and pedestrian casualties.
Predictions for the UK include: 2,700 fewer pedestrians killed or injured annually, 160,000 fewer whiplash injuries annually, 271,000 crashes will be avoided or reduced in severity annually.
Systems use radar, camera or combinations of both to monitor the road ahead. Potential collisions are identified and warnings may be given by audible, visual or tactile means, if the driver ignores these warnings then the system will apply maximum braking force to either bring the car to a complete standstill and avoid an accident, or reduce the speed of impact as much as possible.
Many systems will only work to best effect below 20mph, above 20mph there could still be retardation - the impact will not be avoided but impact speed will be significantly lower with subsequent reduction in damage and costs.
High speed accidents will still occur and there will be little change from current statistics – for the moment – research and development in this area is ongoing.
AEB technology is currently available in Volvo Cars, some Mercedes Benz models and the new Ford Focus. Fitment in vehicles will be driven by customer demand rather than legislation and it is expected that within the next 10 years the majority of new vehicles will have these systems available as standard fitment in some or all of the range.
What does this mean to the motor salvage and auto recycling marketplace?
The reduction in accident volume will impact total loss volumes and also the opportunities for the use of green parts in vehicle repair – volume of total loss reductions will be difficult to predict but will be greatest on newer vehicles.
With all the technology fitted, and the rapid advance of new technology vehicles will become obsolete much faster than currently so there will be more reaching end of life status at a much younger age – we are heading towards ‘disposable’ vehicles that some consumers will view in much the same way as we currently see computers and other household items.
Spent an afternoon at the Motor Industry Research Association (MIRA) establishment recently investigating Autonomous Emergency Braking (AEB) with Thatcham and innovITS Advance.
I was able to try a number of vehicles, both production and prototype models with advanced electronics that are able to take control from the driver and provide braking in emergency situations.
The result of this intervention is either complete avoidance of an impact or much reduced impact speeds with significantly reduced levels of vehicle damage, personal injuries and pedestrian casualties.
Predictions for the UK include: 2,700 fewer pedestrians killed or injured annually, 160,000 fewer whiplash injuries annually, 271,000 crashes will be avoided or reduced in severity annually.
Systems use radar, camera or combinations of both to monitor the road ahead. Potential collisions are identified and warnings may be given by audible, visual or tactile means, if the driver ignores these warnings then the system will apply maximum braking force to either bring the car to a complete standstill and avoid an accident, or reduce the speed of impact as much as possible.
Many systems will only work to best effect below 20mph, above 20mph there could still be retardation - the impact will not be avoided but impact speed will be significantly lower with subsequent reduction in damage and costs.
High speed accidents will still occur and there will be little change from current statistics – for the moment – research and development in this area is ongoing.
AEB technology is currently available in Volvo Cars, some Mercedes Benz models and the new Ford Focus. Fitment in vehicles will be driven by customer demand rather than legislation and it is expected that within the next 10 years the majority of new vehicles will have these systems available as standard fitment in some or all of the range.
What does this mean to the motor salvage and auto recycling marketplace?
The reduction in accident volume will impact total loss volumes and also the opportunities for the use of green parts in vehicle repair – volume of total loss reductions will be difficult to predict but will be greatest on newer vehicles.
With all the technology fitted, and the rapid advance of new technology vehicles will become obsolete much faster than currently so there will be more reaching end of life status at a much younger age – we are heading towards ‘disposable’ vehicles that some consumers will view in much the same way as we currently see computers and other household items.
Wednesday, 18 May 2011
LKQ Corporation to Acquire Automotive Paint Distribution Business From AkzoNobel
LKQ Corporation (Nasdaq:LKQX) today announced that it has entered into an agreement to acquire AkzoNobel Coatings Inc.'s U.S. paint distribution business consisting of 40 locations.
The acquisition will further LKQ's ability to supply the automotive collision industry with a full line of parts and paint solutions. The acquired locations will supplement LKQ's existing paint distribution business and provide the company with additional expertise to assist its customers with their paint needs.
"We have long admired the body shop solutions offered by AkzoNobel, recognized as a color technology leader and the world's largest coatings company," said LKQ's co-CEO Robert L. Wagman. "This transaction reflects LKQ's commitment to being a one-stop-shop solution to the collision repair industry."
"LKQ Corporation is one of the most recognized and respected names in the automotive industry," said AkzoNobel Americas General Manager AB Ghosh. "We are proud to have them as a part of our growing North American network of distribution partners."
Mr. Wagman continued, "LKQ currently has relationships with thousands of collision repair shops throughout the United States. By adding AkzoNobel's portfolio of brands to our product offerings we believe this transaction, coupled with our experience and extensive distribution network, offers LKQ an opportunity for continued growth and market penetration in the paint distribution business." LKQ will distribute all of AkzoNobel's paint lines including the Sikkens, Lesonal and U-Tech brands.
The transaction is expected to become effective May 27, 2011 subject to customary closing conditions. Financial details were not disclosed.
About LKQ Corporation
LKQ Corporation is the largest nationwide provider of aftermarket and recycled collision replacement parts, refurbished collision replacement products such as wheels, bumper covers and lights, and a leading provider of mechanical replacement parts including remanufactured engines, all in connection with the repair of automobiles and other vehicles. LKQ operates more than 325 facilities, offering its customers a broad range of replacement systems, components and parts to repair automobiles and light, medium and heavy-duty trucks. LKQ's operations include locations in Canada, Mexico and Central America.
The acquisition will further LKQ's ability to supply the automotive collision industry with a full line of parts and paint solutions. The acquired locations will supplement LKQ's existing paint distribution business and provide the company with additional expertise to assist its customers with their paint needs.
"We have long admired the body shop solutions offered by AkzoNobel, recognized as a color technology leader and the world's largest coatings company," said LKQ's co-CEO Robert L. Wagman. "This transaction reflects LKQ's commitment to being a one-stop-shop solution to the collision repair industry."
"LKQ Corporation is one of the most recognized and respected names in the automotive industry," said AkzoNobel Americas General Manager AB Ghosh. "We are proud to have them as a part of our growing North American network of distribution partners."
Mr. Wagman continued, "LKQ currently has relationships with thousands of collision repair shops throughout the United States. By adding AkzoNobel's portfolio of brands to our product offerings we believe this transaction, coupled with our experience and extensive distribution network, offers LKQ an opportunity for continued growth and market penetration in the paint distribution business." LKQ will distribute all of AkzoNobel's paint lines including the Sikkens, Lesonal and U-Tech brands.
The transaction is expected to become effective May 27, 2011 subject to customary closing conditions. Financial details were not disclosed.
About LKQ Corporation
LKQ Corporation is the largest nationwide provider of aftermarket and recycled collision replacement parts, refurbished collision replacement products such as wheels, bumper covers and lights, and a leading provider of mechanical replacement parts including remanufactured engines, all in connection with the repair of automobiles and other vehicles. LKQ operates more than 325 facilities, offering its customers a broad range of replacement systems, components and parts to repair automobiles and light, medium and heavy-duty trucks. LKQ's operations include locations in Canada, Mexico and Central America.
Thursday, 12 May 2011
End of Life Vehicles
Utter the words End of Life Vehicle (ELV), and many will immediately picture a scrap yard full of old cars leaking oil and water, been involved in a heavy impact, or are simply a gutted shell. But this is only part of the story.
The End of Life Vehicle Directive – 2000/53/EC (to give it’s full title) is a Europe-wide directive that was to be enforced in all member states by 21 April 2002. However, some countries failed to implement the legislation by the deadline and many took advantage of flexibility within the directive so that the ‘last owner’ of the vehicle would be responsible for disposal of an ELV until the end of 2006. From 1st January 2007 this responsibility passed to the vehicle manufacturers bringing all member states in line.
The directive includes various targets involving: environmental practices in the motor salvage industry, the prohibition of the use of various heavy metals in vehicles and the removal of various hazardous fluids and components in a safe manner. Additionally the directive seeks to promote and encourage the development of markets for recycled parts.
The target causing most discussion is that 95% of a car (by weight) must be reused, recycled or recovered by 2015.
These, and other regulations in the directive, close the loop, from design and build, through sale, service and use, to disposal and recycling. The vehicle manufacturer is now responsible for the whole life of the vehicle, not just design and sales.
So what has changed in vehicle design and build? Plenty. The directive dictates that the use of Lead, Mercury, Cadmium and Hexavalent Chromium is now prohibited except in certain applications (i.e. batteries) according to a list that will be regularly reviewed. This ensures that these materials do not become shredder residues and are not incinerated or disposed of in landfills.
The European Union recently reported that this section alone has reduced the use of hazardous substances in vehicle production by 90%.
Manufacturers have also had to provide the industry with all requisite dismantling information with particular emphasis on hazardous materials and have to use component and material coding standards established by the European Commission to identify each individual part for recycling purposes.
In the next 5-10 years designers will have to adapt to many issues including:
Greater environmental awareness resulting in lower vehicle weights and the use of alternative construction materials
New Legislation and industry standards, such as:
Pedestrian impact
Reduction of emissions in production and use of the vehicle
Further increased environmental awareness
Lower production costs
Shorter lead times from design to manufacture
Looking closer at the first issue, vehicle weight is a major contributor to emissions, but it’s not all environmental, lighter cars have enhanced dynamics – handling, braking etc. The quest is on for designers to find components that meet all their requirements: are lighter and stronger, relatively inexpensive, environmentally attractive to produce and also recyclable in 2015.
It’s a tough challenge. For example, polymeric glazing (plastic glass) will be in use by a volume manufacturer within the next five years. Yes, it will be lighter than glass, however the plastics recycling market is currently not as advanced as the market for glass, so this has the potential to negatively impact the drive towards the 95% target.
Many manufacturers are already designing plastic components to be built using recycled materials and in many areas this is being achieved. Moreover, developments in shredder technology are starting to separate more of the various vehicle parts, resulting in less shredder residue going to landfill or incineration. Ultimately though the success of these developments rests upon the creation of a suitable marketplace willing to purchase the materials produced.
Outsourced parts are also a concern, as the manufacturer is ultimately responsible for the recyclability of all the components in their vehicles. Therefore they must ensure that all parts are recyclable within the terms of the ELV directive, i.e. do not contain any banned materials, are coded correctly and are also fit for the purpose for which they were designed.
The use of recycled material brings additional issues, including the availability and consistency of the material. It also requires the education of designers who may have little or no experience of working with recycled materials.
Concern remains over a number of areas both within and outside the ELV directive. For example, work must be done to develop effective recycled marketplaces. This has already started in the form of ongoing research, supported by the European Commission and many member states to investigate and develop recycled marketplaces and recycling processes in order to reach the 95% target.
The Commission also reported on the ELV process, specifically completing an impact assessment on the targets contained within the directive. It has concluded that there is no need to change these targets, despite fears that the current target of 95% by 2015 is unattainable.
The report highlights that any reduction in the targets will end the development of technology to treat the waste and that confirmation of the 2015 target will assist in removing current blockages to innovation. The assessment goes on to support the ELV Directive because it has triggered technological development in ELV treatment and stresses that continued development of treatment technologies will bring substantial environmental benefits.
You can find more details at http://ec.europa.eu/environment/waste/elv_index.htm
As the worldwide vehicle market expands over the coming years environmental concerns are only going to increase, leading many areas of the world to follow the example set by the European Commission.
The work already completed in Europe has made this region a world leader in motor vehicle environmental and recycling activities, creating business opportunities by setting high, but in my opinion, achievable standards.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)