Bharat Recycling Show, in collaboration with Waste & Recycling Magazine, organized its 2nd roundtable discussion on recycling in Delhi on June 27 – this time bringing E-Scrap and End-of-Life Battery Management to the fore.  

Participants from across India took part in this insightful discussion that focused chiefly on government initiatives, policy implementation, EPR regulations and the practicalities of managing e-scrap and batteries in an environmentally safe manner. The experts at the table included L.Pugazhenthy,  Exec.Director, India Lead Zinc Development Association, Satish Sinha, Associate Director, ToxicsLink, Sanjeev Srivastava - NAMO eWaste, Ashok Kumar Thanikonda, Senior Program Officer, Global Green Growth Institute, Rakesh Mallick, CEO, E-Waste Recyclers India, Gautam Mehra, Chief of Innovation and R&D, OpenGate Global Enterprises, Akshit Jain, Founder -  Recyclify, Preeti Tiwari, Head of Business Development EPR, Landbell GreenForest Solutions,  Pallas Chandel, Climate Change Advisor, GIZ, Mitradev Sahoo, Program Associate, Electric Mobility Sustainable Cities and Transport, WRI India, Arvind Sharma,  Senior Director (IT), Govt. of India, Ministry of Corporate Affairs and Kuldeep Bartariya, Director - Shreeji Academy, Member- Vidyanjali, Ministry of Education, Govt. of India. 

The industry experts acknowledged that India’s rapid growth in consumer electronics, rising adoption of electric vehicles, smartphones, and digital infrastructure, have significantly increased the volume of e-waste and end-of-life batteries and highlighted the urgency for safe, efficient, and sustainable recycling of critical components. 

One issue that repeatedly cropped up in the discussion was the challenge in collection of end-of -life batteries and the dominance of the informal sector, which is seen as a double-edged sword. While the unorganised sector helps in the collection of electronic scrap, it also limits traceability. Lack of awareness among people in safe disposal of such materials was also debated. L. Pugazhenthy highlighted the fragmented state of battery collection in India. “While large lead-acid batteries from vehicles and inverters are somewhat traceable, dry-cell batteries, button cells, and lithium-ion batteries remain largely uncollected and unmanaged. The informal sector dominates, with many batteries ending up in unregulated scrap channels or being discarded improperly.”

He stressed that although India has battery waste regulations — from the 2000 Battery Handling Rules to the 2022 Battery Waste Management Rules — implementation and enforcement remain weak. “A lack of strict monitoring by Pollution Control Boards and poor compliance from small and unregistered battery manufacturers has led to large-scale environmental leakage,” he underscored. Panelists agreed that regulators need to be more proactive and stringent. “There are clear rules, but weak enforcement, lack of deterrents, and ineffective penalties allow non-compliant businesses to thrive,” Satish Sinha noted. The speakers also highlighted the lack of coordination between the Central Pollution Control Board and the State Pollution Control Boards, which continues to hinder effective implementation and enforcement of recycling regulations.

Sinha and Rakesh Mallick drew our attention to how  auctions often allow intermediaries or informal operators to participate, undermining the intent of responsible recycling.

Preeti Tiwari said the Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) framework introduced under the Battery Waste Management Rules 2022 is seen as a critical move. However, its success will depend on proper implementation, monitoring mechanisms, manufacturer responsibility in and collection. The need for a more transparent and traceable reverse supply chain was strongly emphasised by Gautam Mehra. He further underscored that e-waste and batteries involve hazardous components, require complex dismantling, and often lack sufficient collection or processing infrastructure, making traceability and responsible recycling harder to enforce.

Ashok Kumar Thanikonda and Mitradev Sahoo spoke about how accurate data is central to designing interventions. The panelists pointed out that current e-waste statistics are speculative due to a lack of formal reporting mechanisms. “Informal recyclers, who handle a significant volume, do not disclose or document their operations, leading to a blind spot in national data,” pointed out Akshit Jain.  

Pallas Chandel noted how recycling is viewed predominantly as an urban challenge, despite the widespread use of electronic devices in rural and peri-urban areas. She noted that rural areas often lack basic infrastructure and therefore waste is frequently burned, leading to air and water contamination. She called for decentralised collection models, targeted capacity-building for rural informal workers, and the inclusion of rural regions within EPR frameworks. 

The lack of incentives for the recycling sector was highlighted by the panelists as a major bottleneck. Sanjeev Srivastava said that financial incentives for formal players can be a game changer. This will encourage more start-ups and MSME’s to not only embrace new innovations and technologies for critical mineral extraction but also ensure better infrastructure and compliance. 

Pugazhenthy further noted that the main sources for diversion of used lead batteries to the informal sector are the dealers. Battery (Management & Handling) Rules 2001 included “Responsibilities of Dealers” in addition to other stakeholders. “However, it outlines responsibilities for all stakeholders, except dealers, effectively giving them a free hand. ILZDA has flagged this gap to the CPCB, and action on the matter is still awaited,” he said. 

The discussion concluded with a call for integration of the informal sector, strict enforcement of rules and regulations, enforcement of minimum pricing for recyclers and reduction of illegal undercutting, transparency, verification, and real audits of EPR portal and mandating of digital tracking and awareness among all stakeholders, especially consumers.