From my Peloton to my growing support of EPR - How did I get here?
I was on my Peloton bike recently and my instructor (Hannah) was leading a 30 minute "vinyl vault" ride playing great music from the 50's, 60's and 70's. Along with the music she'll occasionally offer relevant facts about the year the song was from. We came to the 70's and Hannah asked "in 1976, what company introduced the first disposable plastic beverage bottle". The answer. Coca Cola. Not long after every major beverage company started to package their beverages in these PET bottles in all sizes and shapes with the 2 liter coming in 1978.
Born in 1976
In 1976 this new packaging was born and with it has come a plastic packaging waste problem the U.S. and the world has never seen before.
1976, 46 years, doesn't seem such a long time when you consider the enormous amount of packaging waste filling landfills, oceans, rivers and our streets, creating waste issues the likes of which municipalities never had to deal with before. 46 years to create an environmental crisis that has had many smart people arguing over how to fix it.
The process has always relied on our municipalities and taxpayers to finance the disposal/recycling of packaging waste.
Perhaps we need to challenge this current funding method if it's not working? Perhaps the cost of disposal should be shared by the producer or brand owner of the product's packaging?
Welcome to EPR 101 (Extended Producer Responsibility)
How does it work? Simply, EPR legislation applies a fee to a brand owner or producers packaging. The fee is to cover the cost to dispose/recycle their packaging. Within the framework of EPR there's a PRO (Producer Responsibility Organization). The PRO would be responsible for tracking and collecting the fees for a producers package based upon the packages size, weight, & material. The bigger the package, the higher the fee. If the material is difficult to recycle, the higher the fee.
Therefore, rather than the taxpayer and municipality paying 100% for the costs to recycle/disposal and dispose of a producers packaging, these fees would go directly to the city or municipal solid waste program within the state the products are being shipped.
As a result funding for struggling, underfunded and understaffed solid waste programs will dramatically increase. Studies have shown that most people want to recycle. However they get frustrated when they see the ineffectiveness of local programs. Apathy sets in. EPR could bring renewed success to these programs
Many of us complain when we get a small item from an on-line vendor packaged in a carton 4 times the size. For years, we've been taught the 3 R's - Reduce, Reuse, Recycle. With EPR perhaps consumers can finally have influence over the 3 R's. If the fee is based upon the size and weight and material, perhaps on-line retailers or brand owners will rethink the design and size of packaging?
Greenpeace and others recently declared "Recycling is dead". Folks are arguing that plastics should be banned, plastics need to be reduced. I understand the concern. Studies show perhaps 15-20% of our trash is currently recycled at best. The point often missed or overlooked is the importance of plastics. Plastic helps to keeps our food fresh and safe from processor to the table. As a food packaging specialist for the past 25 years I know the value a highly engineered, plastic film or container provides. Are there opportunities to introduce new materials to replace or reduce plastics? Absolutely!
Let's face facts. The current system is broken. The costs of collection & sortation have made it economically unfeasible and cost prohibitive for municipals and cities to run successful recycling programs. Items that could be recycled, but instead, are thrown into a landfill. Markets for recycled plastics and cardboard have never been greater. (see my blog on Walmart and recycling)
The question we need to answer: Should producers and brand owners contribute to the cost to recycle/dispose of their packaging waste through EPR legislation or should it remain the responsibility of municipal budgets?
Extended Producer Responsibility legislation recently passed in 4 states (California, Oregon, Colorado and Maine) and is being considered in 12 others. Perhaps its time other states consider EPR legislation. Tennessee will be introducing a draft in 2023.
Please the see link below to the Sustainable Packaging Coalition and a state by state EPR guide.
Certain regions in Canada and Europe have also enacted EPR legislation and recycling rates are reported to exceed 50%. The U.S. averages 15% and and that includes paper which is the largest packaging material recycled.
EPR is not a bottle bill, it goes much further and delivers the funds to where they are needed. The link below explains further.
I'm interested in your thoughts. Please for sake of discussion we cannot include incineration or waste to energy solutions as that is not the scope of this article.
Published by
Sustainability Coach/Food Packaging Specialist - LEED AP #sustainablepackaging #plasticrecycling #epr
Published • 1w
Perhaps we need to challenge the current funding method if it's not working? Perhaps the cost of disposal should be shared by the producer or brand owner of the product's packaging?