On the Waste Management draft government regulation

Posted by Teez at 4:10 PM | 0 comments

But it seems the main controversy focuses on these five “leaked” clauses:

Article 8 requires manufacturers to prepare a plan and program to reduce waste incurring from its activities and is obliged to produce packaging that is easily biodegradable.

Article 9 requires manufacturers to recycle and use recyclable raw materials. It also requires producers to reclaim rubbish from their own packaging for recycling.

Article 10 allows the appointment of a third party to implement Article 9.

Article 11 stipulates that producers that re-use waste must recall the resulting rubbish and packaging.

Article 12 requires producers to implement a mechanism for withdrawal of their products and packaging from the rubbish pile.

Manufacturers are in an uproar, saying it is financially impossible, ridiculous, unheard of, and will ultimately put them out of business. It is, in fact, none of the above, if they would just calm down and think it through for a bit. Also not sure how the government has been briefing them, but I’m guessing they could have made the unnecessary blunder of ignoring this rule in green advocacy:

Frame it as an opportunity, not a cost.

Granted, extended producer responsibility (EPR), which is what it really is, is at face value a strategy to shift waste management costs from the government to the private sector. By the way I don’t see anything wrong with that. Attractive bright colored plastic packaging for groceries is not a public facility we asked for. I’d like to know my taxes are being used properly to clean up the neighborhood, but not that it is being disproportionately used to process unnecessary waste.

But there are also so many opportunities to be explored in using less packaging or recycling (ie. cutting down packaging costs, less dependency on raw materials, reputational value). It will also be a gradual transition which will allow for adjustment – even if a transition period weren’t regulated, enforcement is always slow anyway especially for new concepts. The regulation should be clear about what types of rubbish the producers must recall. For example, recalling electronic components and bottles would make sense given (i) the sheer toxicity of electronic waste and lack of technology available to deal with it, or (ii) the relatively easy recyclability of glass / plastic bottles (as opposed to soggy plastic bags etc). Perhaps the most harmful rubbish could be prioritized before incrementally “graduating” to other types.

At the end of the day this will force companies to rethink their use of resources for packaging – have they been efficient, is it a sustainable method in the long run, are there less costly alternatives? It’s an opportunity born simply out of the realization that pretty packaging is high maintenance.