Break the Waste Cycle - Producer Responsibility Policies to Move the U.S. Toward Zero Waste - Frontier Group
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Break the Waste Cycle
Producer Responsibility Policies to Move
the U.S. Toward Zero Waste
Break the Waste Cycle
Producer Responsibility Policies to Move the U.S.
Toward Zero Waste
WRITTEN BY:
ADRIAN PFORZHEIMER, FRONTIER GROUP
ALEXANDER TRUELOVE, U.S. PIRG EDUCATION FUND
Revised November 2020
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
U.S. PIRG Education Fund and Environment America Research & Policy Center wish to thank
Sydney Harris and Scott Cassel of the Product Stewardship Institute and Heather Trim of
Zero Waste Washington for providing review and insights for this report. Thanks also to Tony
Dutzik, Jamie Friedman, Gideon Weissman and Susan Rakov of Frontier Group for editorial
support, and James Horrox of Frontier Group and Abi Bradford, formerly of Frontier Group,
for work on early drafts of this report.
The authors bear responsibility for any factual errors. Policy recommendations are those of
U.S. PIRG Education Fund and Environment America Research & Policy Center. The views
expressed in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of our
funders or those who provided review.
2020 U.S. PIRG Education Fund. Some rights reserved. This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives 3.0 Unported License. To
view the terms of this license, visit creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0.
With public debate around important issues often dominated by special
interests pursuing their own narrow agendas, U.S. PIRG Education Fund
offers an independent voice that works on behalf of the public interest. U.S. PIRG Education
Fund, a 501(c)(3) organization, works to protect consumers and promote good government.
We investigate problems, craft solutions, educate the public, and offer meaningful
opportunities for civic participation. For more information about U.S. PIRG Education Fund
or for additional copies of this report, please visit uspirgedfund.org.
Environment America Research & Policy Center is a 501(c)(3)
organization. We are dedicated to protecting our air, water and open
spaces. We investigate problems, craft solutions, educate the public and
decision-makers, and help the public make their voices heard in local,
state and national debates over the quality of our environment and our lives. For more
information about Environment America Research & Policy Center or for additional copies
of this report, please visit www.environmentamericacenter.org.
Frontier Group provides information and ideas
to help citizens build a cleaner, healthier, and
more democratic America. We address issues that will define our nation’s course in the
21st century – from fracking to solar energy, global warming to transportation, clean water
to clean elections. Our experts and writers deliver timely research and analysis that is
accessible to the public, applying insights gleaned from a variety of disciplines to arrive at
new ideas for solving pressing problems. For more information about Frontier Group, please
visit www.frontiergroup.org.
Layout: To the Point Collaborative, tothepointcollaborative.com
Cover photo: Scharfsinn via ShutterstockContents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................................................................................................4
INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................................7
THE PROBLEM WITH AMERICA’S CONSUMPTION SYSTEM...........................................................9
THE LINEAR MATERIALS ECONOMY IS AT THE ROOT OF ENVIRONMENTAL
CHALLENGES................................................................................................................................9
A GROWING RECYCLING CRISIS............................................................................................... 10
PRODUCER RESPONSIBILITY PROGRAMS INCENTIVIZE A SHIFT
TO A CIRCULAR ECONOMY...............................................................................................................13
PRODUCER RESPONSIBILITY PROGRAMS HAVE A TRACK RECORD OF SUCCESS........... 14
CALIFORNIA’S USED MATTRESS RECOVERY AND RECYCLING ACT....................................14
FRANCE’S TEXTILE AND CLOTHING RECOVERY PROGRAM................................................. 15
U.S. PAINT RECOVERY AND RECYCLING PROGRAMS............................................................ 16
PRODUCER RESPONSIBILITY IS PARTICULARLY URGENT FOR PACKAGING WASTE........ 17
BRITISH COLUMBIA’S PROGRAM FOR PACKAGING AND PAPER..........................................17
PROPOSED U.S. PROGRAMS FOR PACKAGING WASTE................................................................19
POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS...........................................................................................................22
NOTES.................................................................................................................................................25Executive summary
THE U.S. THROWS OUT enough plastic have successfully increased collection
every 16 hours to fill the Cowboys football and recycling rates for the products they
stadium, and that amount is increasing.1 cover. With the growing urgency of the
Our society continually produces goods climate crisis, the rising impact of plastic
designed to be used once or temporarily pollution, and the continuing impacts of
and then thrown away. Most discarded China’s waste import ban on America’s
materials are then landfilled or inciner- recycling system, U.S. cities and states, as
ated, creating pollution and requiring pro- well as the federal government, should
ducers to extract more natural resources to adopt thoughtfully designed producer
make new materials.2 responsibility programs – especially for
packaging and printed products.
This waste is by design. Producers have
the ability to make products that are Producer responsibility is a proven
more durable and more easily fixed when approach to reducing waste and improv-
they break, as well as packaging that is ing recycling.
less wasteful and more readily reused or
recycled. They simply choose not to. The Under producer responsibility programs,
reason is clear: As long as individuals, manufacturers – not individuals or taxpay-
governments, our environment and future ers – are responsible for the waste their
generations – not producers – bear the products create, and bear responsibility
costs of our throwaway society, those who for the collection and proper recycling of
design and make the products we buy those products at the end of their useful
have no incentive to change. lives. This incentivizes producers to design
their products to be more environmentally
Holding producers responsible for the friendly throughout their lifecycle.3
waste they create can incentivize a shift
to a circular economy – one in which less Programs that make producers responsible
waste is produced, products are built to for waste typically cover products that are
last and easy to repair, and remaining hazardous, hard to recycle or compost, or
materials are recycled or composted. Such that generate a lot of waste. These include
a system would create zero waste, elimi- batteries, paint, mercury thermostats, car-
nating the need for landfills and trash pet, pesticides, tires, and pharmaceuticals.
incinerators, conserving natural resources Many states have programs in place for
and reducing pollution. these items.
Producer responsibility programs around Responsibility for disposal may take the
the world have existed for decades and form of producers physically collecting
PAGE 4their products at the end of their lives, or • Producer responsibility has been a
supporting the collection and disposal pro- success in boosting recycling rates for
cess financially through payments to a pro- containers and packaging. In British
ducer responsibility organization (PRO) that Columbia, for example, where producer
funds and sometimes operates the collection responsibility legislation for packaging
and processing of material on producers’ and printed paper (PPP) came into effect
behalf. It can also be a combination of both. in 2011, the stewardship organization
Recycle British Columbia collected 78
Producer responsibility programs in the percent of the PPP material producers
United States have made a difference in sold in 2018, and recycled 90 percent of
encouraging recycling and reducing waste. the amount collected.8 In contrast, an
• California’s Used Mattress Recovery estimated 50 to 57 percent of material was
and Recycling Act requires mattress recovered before the law went into effect.9
manufacturers that sell their products in Several U.S. jurisdictions are consider-
California to create an effective system ing producer responsibility programs
to collect and refurbish or recycle used for packaging. These proposals are often
mattresses. Manufacturers and retail- augmented by other policies – such as
ers are required to register with the minimum recycled content standards for
Mattress Recycling Council (MRC), the packaging – that support and enhance the
nonprofit stewardship organization value of producer responsibility. Some
that implements the program.4 Retailers examples include:
must also offer to pick up consumers’
old mattresses when they purchase new • Washington: In May 2019, Washing-
ones and transport the old mattresses to a ton adopted legislation directing the
recycling facility. Since it came into being drafting of a study on how to reduce the
in 2016, the MRC’s “Bye Bye Mattress” volume of plastic packaging sold in the
program in California has recycled more state; make it all recyclable, reusable or
than 5 million mattresses.5 compostable; and make it with at least 20
percent recycled content by 2025.10 A plan
Producer responsibility is particularly with recommendations for a producer
important when it comes to addressing responsibility policy framework was
waste from packaging, paper and single- submitted to the State Department of
use plastics. Ecology in September 2020.11
• Containers and packaging account for • Maine: A bill introduced in January 2020
roughly 30 percent of municipal solid requires the establishment of a steward-
waste (MSW), with 80.1 million tons of ship organization that will collect fees
these materials thrown away in 2017.6 from producers of packaging material,
These materials clog landfills and incin- calculated according to the toxic-
erators, especially following the recent ity and percentage of recycled content
decision by several foreign countries – in the material. The fees will be used
most notably China – to stop accepting to reimburse municipalities for costs
most U.S. waste exports, dramatically incurred in recycling and waste manage-
increasing the cost of recycling for many ment.12 The bill did not pass this year, but
U.S. communities.7 is expected to be reintroduced in 2021.
PAGE 5• California: In December 2018, the Califor- • Require producers to bear all of the
nia Circular Economy and Plastic Pollution end-of-life costs of their products, includ-
Reduction Act was introduced, requir- ing waste collection, hauling, recycling,
ing manufacturers of single-use plastic composting, landfilling, incineration and
packaging and food-ware to reduce or litter cleanup costs.
recycle these materials by 75 percent, and
to make them all recyclable or compostable • Adjust any fees to incentivize producers
by 2030.13 The act narrowly failed to pass to use recycled content in their products
during California’s latest two-year legisla- and design products that last and are
tive session. A ballot initiative requiring easy and economical to repair, recycle or
producers to pay a fee on single-use plastic compost.
packaging has collected enough signatures • Incentivize the repair or reuse of
for the 2022 ballot.14 products where possible, and the
• Federal: February 2020 saw the introduc- recycling or composting of products that
tion of federal legislation to hold produc- have reached the end of their useful lives.
ers accountable for wasteful products, • Set high standards for oversight and
reduce packaging, and phase out single- transparency at every stage of the process
use plastic products. The Break Free From to ensure that producers are complying
Plastic Pollution Act would place the with requirements.
financial burden of waste management
and the clean-up of plastic pollution on
the companies that manufacture and sell
those products, and require producers to
design their products in such a way as to
minimize their environmental impacts,
among other requirements.15
Effective producer responsibility programs
can play an important role in moving the
United States toward a circular, zero-waste
economy. In adopting those programs, states
and the federal government should:
• Integrate producer responsibility programs
into an overall approach to waste reduction
that:
º First and foremost, reduces the amount
of waste generated;
º Encourages the reuse, repair and refur-
bishment of products whenever possible;
º Recycles or composts all remaining
materials, and;
º Landfills or incinerates as little material
as possible.
PAGE 6Introduction
WATER SOLD in disposable plastic bottles is lution. If the bottle is landfilled or littered, it
cheap. Should it be? will break down into microplastic particles
over tens to hundreds of years. Those micro-
To produce a disposable water bottle, oil plastics will persist and accumulate in the
and gas are drilled or fracked. Fracking can environment, some finding their way into
cause earthquakes, oil drilling can cause the food we eat and the water we drink.19
spills, and both can contaminate water.16 The
oil or gas is then transported to a refinery Even the small amount of plastic that is
– perhaps through a pipeline or on an oil recycled will likely be recycled into a less-
tanker that may leak or spill along the way. durable product like insulation or fabric, so
Oil and gas refineries are highly polluting the process will need to start again to cre-
facilities and a major source of air pollution, ate new bottles that will eventually become
releasing particulate pollution, nitrogen waste.
oxides and volatile organic compounds that
are major contributors to smog.17 Byproducts
from the refinery are then shipped to a plas-
tic manufacturing plant, which also releases The growing challenges of
toxic air pollution.18
plastic pollution, climate
The plastic is then likely transported to
another factory to be manufactured into change and rising recycling
a plastic bottle, and then to another to be costs demand new solutions to
filled with water. The bottle of water is then
packaged up with others (often in more America’s waste problems.
plastic) and shipped – often over long dis-
tances – to a distributor and finally to a con-
venience store. Someone will buy the bottle Producers can change this model. They
of water and after drinking it, will toss the can make products out of more durable or
bottle. The environmental and public health recyclable materials and provide consumers
costs resulting from the production of the with better options for returning and recy-
bottle will not be factored into its price. cling those products before they become
waste.
Nor will the cost of disposing of the waste
the bottle has become. A local municipal- Why don’t they do it? Because currently,
ity will likely have to pay to collect and producers can offload the costs of poor
transport the bottle to a waste management product design decisions onto taxpayers, the
facility. Unless the bottle is made of a high- environment and future generations, leav-
value plastic, it will likely be landfilled or ing them with no incentive to make more
incinerated, creating toxic air and water pol- sustainable decisions.
PAGE 7Thankfully, there is a solution: a concept
called “extended producer responsibility,”
or simply “producer responsibility.” Numer-
ous successful programs in the United
States and around the world hold produc-
ers fully or partially responsible for the
waste their products become – and, in many
cases, hold producers to higher standards
for the sustainability of the things they
make and sell. These producer responsibil-
ity programs, if well-designed, can play an
important role in shifting from a one-way to
a circular materials economy – one charac-
terized by zero waste.
This paper reviews the experience with pro-
ducer responsibility programs in the United
States and around the world, highlighting
programs that work as well as the ways in
which those programs can be more effective
in reducing waste.
The growing challenges of plastic pollution,
climate change and rising recycling costs
demand new solutions to America’s waste
problems. Producer responsibility programs
can be part of the solution.
PAGE 8The problem with America’s
consumption system
THE U.S. THROWS OUT immense amounts way street that converts natural resources
of stuff – nearly 1.5 million pounds every into waste and pollution.
day. Most material is landfilled or inciner-
ated.20 To fill the continuous demand for The linear materials economy is at the root
new throwaway products, industries extract of environmental challenges
more and more natural resources. Extract, The linear consumption and throwaway
produce, consume, landfill or incinerate, system contributes to many of the world’s
and repeat. This system is called a “linear most important environmental problems.
materials economy” and is essentially a one- The activities it perpetuates – extracting
Figure 1. In a linear materials economy, resources are extracted and
ultimately landfilled or incinerated
PAGE 9resources, producing goods, disposing of These countries became increasingly con-
waste, and transporting materials at every cerned about the environmental impacts of
stage of the process – collectively produce this practice. Facing widespread pollution
42 percent of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions, and a backlog of 60-70 billion tons of waste,
contributing significantly to the climate China announced that it would no longer
crisis.21 Our linear economy also creates air, accept most imported scrap and recy-
water and ocean pollution, contributes to clable materials starting in 2018.27 China’s
the loss of natural areas and habitats, and announcement was followed by similar pol-
depletes natural resources.22 icies in Malaysia, Vietnam and Thailand.28
Many products and materials are hard or Since these countries began enforcing their
impossible – or even hazardous – to recycle waste import restrictions, U.S. recyclers
or compost, making them difficult and have been left to deal with huge quantities
costly for municipalities to manage safely.23 of materials that are lacking domestic end-
Plastics have especially high environmental markets or for which commodity values
costs, due to the pollution from producing have plummeted. As a result, many recy-
oil and gas and processing petrochemical clers have significantly increased how much
feedstocks. they charge municipalities to take their
recycling. This has caused many munici-
Since this system is so harmful to our palities across the country to start to limit
health, environment and future – why does their recycling programs or to stop them all
the U.S. produce, consume and throw out together.29 The COVID-19 pandemic exacer-
more and more materials in this manner bated this trend, shifting patterns of waste
every year?24 The core reason is that the generation from the commercial to residen-
producers and consumers that drive this tial sector while further straining municipal
system do not bear the full cost or respon- budgets. From March to April of 2020, trash
sibility for the impacts of the products they and recycling collected in U.S. cities was up
make or buy, so they have no direct, finan- an average of 20 percent even as nearly 90
cial incentives to conserve or to shift to less curbside recycling programs were cut.30
harmful practices.
China shutting its doors to waste and scrap
A growing recycling crisis was a major disruption that heightened
In a linear economy, after a product’s value awareness of the core problems with the
has been extracted, the costs of its dis- nation’s recycling system. First, the U.S.
posal are usually offloaded. Until a few generates far too much waste. Second, too
years ago, U.S. recyclers would sort out the much of that waste is impossible or uneco-
most valuable materials from the recycling nomic to recycle. This is partly due to the
stream and ship the remaining mixed, U.S. having limited recycling infrastruc-
lower-value bales of recyclables to other ture and partly due to the lack of markets
countries. About one third of collected U.S. for recycled material.31 Too much of our
recyclables were exported, with half of that waste is low-quality plastic that cannot be
material going to China – 700,000 tons of recycled or can only be recycled once or a
plastic in 2016 alone.25 The U.S. counted this few times before it becomes too degraded.32
exported material as recycled, but in reality, Lastly, in single-stream recycling, where
China and other countries were extracting paper, plastic, glass and metal are com-
the materials that they could economically ingled, much of the material that might
recycle and landfilling and incinerating the be economically recycled is contaminated
rest.26 with non-recyclable material.33
PAGE 10ELECTRONIC DEVICES, E-WASTE, AND PRODUCER RESPONSIBILITY
Producer responsibility must be a core prin- dealers have the necessary materials to do
ciple guiding the design of all products. But many repairs.39 This can be expensive and
producer responsibility may look different inconvenient, and is helping create an alarming
for different types of products. Electronics, trend where consumers choose the path of least
durable goods, and single-use packaging resistance and simply replace their devices.
may require different programs and policy
approaches to best achieve zero waste. Defending consumers’ right to right to repair
the devices they own, including by third-party
Electronics are highly complex objects. Each fixers not authorized by the manufacturer,
iPhone contains 75 elements, harvested at sub- would go a long way towards extending the
stantial environmental cost from all over the lives of many devices. Another sustainable
world.34 Recycling these back into recoverable option is encouraging and empowering the
materials is a highly energy intensive and pol- refurbishing of electronics for resale in sec-
luting process.35 The most sustainable option is ondary markets.
therefore to focus on repairing and retaining
electronic devices to extend their useful life as Without requirements for reuse, mandatory
long as possible. This benefits consumers and take-back programs for electronics – an effec-
has a doubly beneficial effect on the environ- tive tool for addressing waste from single-use
ment, avoiding waste in both manufacturing and limited-use products, as well as hazard-
and the disposal process. If Americans held ous materials – can have the perverse effect of
onto our phones one year longer on average, helping manufacturers to accelerate the cycle
the emissions reductions would be equivalent of planned obsolescence by removing usable
to taking 636,000 cars off the road each year.36 electronics from the market.
Producers contribute to this waste through The best producer responsibility programs for
planned obsolescence that encourages replace- electronics will prioritize repair and reuse,
ment of electronic devices every year or two. while also encouraging the recycling of elec-
Planned obsolescence is often baked into prod- tronics that have reached the end of their
uct design – for example, where screws or snap useful lives.40 This is particularly important
covers used to be, now there is glue. Many because e-waste makes up 70 percent of all
products are impossible to fix without destroy- hazardous material in landfills despite being
ing them.37 Throwaway tech culture has led to just 2 percent of the solid waste stream.41 23
electronics waste becoming the world’s fastest- states have producer responsibility laws for
growing solid-waste stream.38 electronic products, facilitating their diver-
sion to specialized recycling facilities.42 Pair-
To reduce their impact on the environment ing these requirements with explicit policies
and the public, producers should be held guaranteeing the right to repair electronics
responsible for ending the cycle of planned and encouraging refurbishment and reuse can
obsolescence by designing products that can provide the most effective strategy to reduce
be used as long as possible and fixed when pollution from the production and use of
they break. Unfortunately, many electronics electronics. Producer responsibility programs
manufacturers do the opposite, restricting should be designed with the specific risks,
access to parts, diagnostic software or repair characteristics and needs of every type of
documentation, so that only their authorized product in mind.
PAGE 11Rebuilding the old recycling system is not
the solution to the nation’s waste problems.
More fundamental system solutions are
needed that encourage waste reduction,
reuse, repair and genuine recycling.
PAGE 12Producer responsibility programs
incentivize a shift to a circular economy
PROGRAMS HAVE EXISTED for decades in cally collect their products at the end of
the U.S. and elsewhere that seek to make their life, requiring them to pay for the
producers responsible for waste. These collection and disposal process through
producer responsibility programs shift fees paid to a producer responsibility
responsibility for disposal of waste prod- organization that collects and processes
ucts from municipalities to producers, materials on the producers’ behalf, or a
either by requiring producers to physi- combination of both.
Figure 2. In a circular economy all materials are reduced, reused,
repaired, recycled or composted – replacing the need for extraction,
landfilling and incineration
PAGE 13Making producers responsible for the full been put in place across the European
costs and impacts of their products – from Union, Japan, Korea, Chile, Canada and
extraction to disposal – can incentivize elsewhere.46
them to shift to less harmful and costly
practices. Doing so can help create a “circu- Programs that make producers responsible
lar” or “closed-loop” economy. In a circular for waste have successfully diverted waste
economy, zero waste is landfilled or incin- from landfills and have shifted certain
erated – all materials are reused, replacing waste costs from municipalities to produc-
the need for extraction activities. ers.47 Some programs have been even more
impactful – incentivizing producers to
The decisions producers make in design- make their products longer-lasting and easy
ing products determine the degree to to reuse, and their packaging lightweight
which those products are able to be reused and recyclable.48 These successes demon-
or recycled, and help shape the impact on strate that expanding such policies to more
the environment when those products are regions and products can help instigate the
disposed of. shift to a circular economy.
Currently, municipalities – using tax dol- The following examples show how producer
lars – bear most of the costs of waste col- responsibility programs work in practice
lection and disposal.43 Making producers and illustrate the benefits they can deliver
responsible for the full environmental for the environment, public health, consum-
and public health costs of their products – ers and communities.
from extraction to production to disposal
– can incentivize them to redesign their California’s Used Mattress Recovery and
products. They will be more likely to use Recycling Act
recycled instead of virgin materials and
to create less wasteful and less hazardous Bulky furniture and appliances can be dif-
products. This shift would move America ficult for consumers to recycle and ideal
toward a circular economy that conserves for producer responsibility programs.
natural resources and natural areas; mini- Legislation in California requiring mat-
mizes air, water and global warming pollu- tress manufacturers to take responsibility
tion; and produces zero waste. for refurbishing or recycling their products
has successfully increased recycling of used
Producer responsibility programs have a mattresses.49
track record of success Every year, almost 4.5 million mattresses
Producer responsibility programs have and 4.5 million box springs are landfilled or
typically covered products that are haz- incinerated in the U.S., equating to around
ardous, hard to recycle or compost, or 250 million pounds of mattress material.50
that generate a lot of waste. These include This creates pollution and necessitates
batteries, mattresses, mercury thermo- further extraction activities to produce new
stats, carpet, pesticides, tires, pharmaceu- mattresses. Mattresses are also heavy and
ticals, paint, electronics, packaging and bulky, making them difficult and expen-
textiles.44 Across the U.S., 119 producer sive to collect, transport, and pay to drop at
responsibility laws have been adopted in landfills and incinerators. Because of this,
33 states, addressing 14 types of consumer people often illegally dump their mat-
products.45 Internationally, a wide range tresses, creating an additional cleanup cost
of producer responsibility programs have for municipalities.51 But more than 80 per-
PAGE 14cent of a mattress can be recycled into new into waste or biofuel – an increase of 6
consumer products and industrial parts.52 percentage points over the 2017 recycling
rate.60 The program also expanded its infra-
To address this problem, in 2014, Califor- structure across California, increasing the
nia passed its Used Mattress Recovery and number of no-cost collection sites from 163
Recycling Act. Under this act, mattress to 190.61 There are now permanent collection
manufacturers were required to “develop, sites or collection events in all of California’s
finance, and implement a convenient and 58 counties.62
cost-effective program to recover and recy-
cle used mattresses.”53 This requirement has Other states and the U.S. as a whole can
resulted in increased recycling rates.54 adopt programs similar to California’s and
divert mattresses from landfills and inciner-
To comply with this requirement, mattress ators to refurbishment and recycling facili-
manufacturers established a program oper- ties. Such programs could also be adopted
ated by the nonprofit Mattress Recycling for other bulky items such as furniture,
Council (MRC), which also operates pro- carpets and major appliances. Future poli-
grams in Connecticut and Rhode Island.55 cies should continue to require retailers
MRC establishes sites where consumers can to collect used products when consumers
return their old mattresses and works to are buying new ones, and should consider
increase public awareness of the service.56 ways to incentivize producers to incorporate
Manufacturers and retailers are required to waste reduction into the design process.
register with MRC and collect a recycling fee
from consumers when they purchase a new
mattress or box spring. Retailers must offer France’s textile and clothing recovery
to pick up consumers’ old mattresses when program
they purchase new ones and transport them France’s producer responsibility program
to a recycling facility. If a retailer has accu- for clothing and textile waste has led to an
mulated at least 100 units, MRC will provide increase in the collection and recycling of
the additional service of transporting them used clothing and could be a model for the
to a recycling facility. MRC then contracts U.S.
with facilities to refurbish and recycle the
mattresses. The organization also cooperates Textile waste is increasing due to the grow-
with CalRecycle, a branch of the California ing “fast fashion” model, which encourages
Environmental Protection Agency that helps consumers to buy cheap, trendy clothing
enforce the program’s requirements and hold that does not last very long.63 Textile pro-
producers accountable.57 duction is highly toxic due in part to the
pesticides used to grow cotton and the
California requires MRC to submit an plastic microfibers that wash out of syn-
annual report on the program’s effective- thetic fabrics and into the water system.64
ness. The most recent report shows that the The industry is responsible for an estimated
program has successfully increased mat- 10 percent of global carbon emissions and
tress recycling.58 In 2018, MRC collected is one of the world’s worst industrial pol-
1.4 million mattresses in California – a 10 luters.65 Furthermore, most textile waste is
percent increase from the previous year.59 landfilled and incinerated – necessitating
MRC also diverted 47 million pounds of further extraction and production activities
mattress material from landfills, 65 percent when clothing could be reused or recycled
of which was recycled, rather than turned instead.66
PAGE 15To tackle this problem, in 2007 France resold or exported in 2015, but this may not
instituted the first program that makes continue because the quality of clothing is
producers responsible for clothing and decreasing and markets for used clothing
textile waste.67 This program makes all are shrinking.74 African and Asian countries
manufacturers of new clothing and textiles are demanding better quality clothing and
responsible for recycling or proper dis- want to build their own textile economies.
posal.68 Textile and clothing producers can Some have banned or are considering ban-
meet France’s requirement either by paying ning used clothing imports altogether.75
fees to the nonprofit producer responsibility This demonstrates the need to reduce the
organization (PRO) that manages materials amount of clothing being produced and
for many producers, or by establishing their wasted in the first place. Recycling textiles
own take-back program, which must be into new textiles is difficult and expen-
approved by the French government.69 sive, and technology is limited.76 France’s
program seeks to address this by funding
The PRO assesses producer fees every year projects that innovate new textile recycling
based on the amount of clothing each pro- methods, reducing the costs of working
ducer sells, with discounted rates for prod- with recovered material.77
ucts that use recycled content. The PRO has
used the collected fees to increase collection U.S. paint recovery and recycling programs
points for used clothing and textiles, dou-
Most people buy more paint than they
bling the number of on-street collection bins
need to ensure that they have enough for
between 2011 and 2016.70 Part of its program
their project, and as a result, approximately
is to increase consumer awareness – for
10 percent of house paint sold in the U.S.
example by creating a website and app that
each year is not used.78 Most communities
show consumers the nearest collection point.
do not have effective programs to collect
The PRO also subsidizes charities and other
and recycle this paint, however, so many
organizations that collect and sort used tex-
instruct residents to dry out the paint and
tiles and funds innovative projects that seek
throw it in the trash. This can be hazard-
to create a closed-loop textile industry.71
ous because if done improperly, paint can
France’s program has increased the amount be toxic to the environment and harmful to
of material collected – three times as much fish and wildlife.79 Reusing and recycling
material was collected nationwide in 2016 paint instead can reduce potential pollution,
as compared with 2006.72 In 2015, around 65 as well as the need to extract resources and
percent of all textiles collected were reused produce new paint.80
(for example as second-hand clothing) – the
majority of them exported to the second- To address this problem, 10 states and the
hand market in Africa and the remainder District of Columbia have passed producer
resold in France. The remainder of the responsibility laws that make paint pro-
materials were down-cycled (9 percent to ducers responsible for paint waste.81 Under
produce rags and 24 percent to produce these programs, consumers pay a recycling
insulation materials) and about 6 percent fee when they buy new paint, which funds
either incinerated or sent to landfill.73 the nonprofit PaintCare. Instead of return-
ing these fees to the consumer when they
France’s program has successfully increased recycle paint, PaintCare uses them as fund-
the collection of used clothing, but it faces ing to manage the recycling process and
challenges. Most of France’s textiles were promote leftover paint collection sites.82
PAGE 16In PaintCare locations, individuals, house-
holds and businesses can take unwanted left-
over paint to one of the nonprofit’s more than Germany recycled 97 percent of
1,750 drop-off sites, where it is sorted and all packaging waste in 2015.
processed for reuse, recycling or safe dis-
posal.83 In its first decade, PaintCare reports
that they have collected more than 38 million
to reducing waste and revamping recycling.
gallons of leftover paint (80 percent of it latex
Packaging waste has increased during the
paint and 20 percent oil-based) and provided
COVID-19 pandemic, underscoring the need
more than 3,500 direct large-volume pick-ups
for proven policy strategies. 87
from painting contractors and other busi-
nesses disposing of 200 gallons or more.84 In Programs that make producers respon-
doing so, the program has saved millions of sible for packaging waste have existed for
dollars in local government spending on col- decades and have successfully increased
lection and processing of leftover paint and collection and recycling rates. These pro-
provided a more convenient recycling experi- grams have been around since the 1980s
ence for consumers.85 and are now widespread in all European
Union member states, as well as South
PaintCare provides a glimpse of what a Korea and several Canadian provinces.88
comprehensive household hazardous waste These programs have helped achieve high
program could achieve. Critical to the suc- collection and recycling rates, with “signifi-
cess of any such program would be to set cant tonnages” of materials being recov-
increasing requirements for the percentage ered for recycling instead of being sent to
of the collected waste that must be recycled. landfill.89 In Germany, which has a separate
For example, less than 5 percent of collected collection system for household packaging
oil-based paint is reused. Classified as a waste, around 97 percent of all packaging
hazardous waste in the U.S., and extremely waste was recycled in 2015.90
expensive to recycle, most is converted to
fuel or incinerated, which are both toxic British Columbia’s program for packaging
processes.86 Such a requirement could incen- and paper
tivize producers to switch to or develop
safer alternatives. British Columbia has consistently been at the
forefront of Canada’s efforts to hold producers
Producer responsibility is particularly responsible, with a current total of 22 prod-
urgent for packaging waste uct stewardship programs for the collection
and disposal of waste.91 In May 2011, British
Producers of all products should be respon- Columbia added packaging and printed paper
sible for the waste that their products create, (PPP) to the list, making businesses distribut-
but there is a particularly urgent need to ing these materials responsible for their col-
shift responsibility for single-use packaging, lection and recycling. This shifted the cost of
paper products and foodware waste to pro- recycling from taxpayers to producers and has
ducers. Waste from packaging and dispos- increased recycling rates.
able products is a growing environmental
problem. The recent challenges to the U.S. Recycle BC (RBC), a non-profit organiza-
recycling system following China’s decision tion representing many different producers,
to ban the importation of most waste mean began operating in May 2014. This steward-
that the nation must take a new approach ship agency now runs the only program in
PAGE 17Canada under which producers bear full
financial and managerial responsibility for
residential recycling of PPP products.92 RBC
has a target program recycling rate of 75
percent, which it has consistently reached.93
RBC is funded by nearly 1,200 packaging
and paper producers.94 Those producers are
required to report the volume of PPP mate-
rial they sell each year and pay a fee based
on weight to cover the cost of collection and
processing of PPP, which RBC coordinates.
RBC currently manages residential recy-
cling for 98 percent of British Columbia’s
population, with collection programs in 176
communities.95 Most packaging – includ-
ing paper, cardboard, plastic containers and
paper cups – is picked up through curbside
service. Plastic bags and polystyrene foam
(what most of us call Styrofoam) packag-
ing are collected at recycling depots run
by private companies contracted by RBC.
Glass containers are either taken to depots
or placed in a separate bin for collection
to avoid broken glass contaminating other
recyclables.96
British Columbia’s producer responsibil-
ity program for packaging and printed
paper has expanded coverage and increased
recycling collection. In 2019, RBC reported
recovering 78 percent of the PPP material
producers sold and recycling 90 percent of
that collected material.97 That’s an improve-
ment to the recycling system before pro-
ducer responsibility for PPP went into effect,
when an estimated 50 to 57 percent of pack-
aging and paper materials were recovered.98
PAGE 18Proposed U.S. programs for
packaging waste
THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT and several compostable; and make it with at least 20
states have begun to consider policies that percent recycled content by 2025. The plan
make producers responsible for packaging, and recommendations were submitted to
paper, and single-use product waste. In 2019, the Department of Ecology in September
Washington and Maine passed the first laws 2020.102
on the issue, outlining frameworks, require-
The report lays out three primary recom-
ments and deadlines to develop or study
mendations, the first of which is estab-
state producer responsibility programs.99
lishing a producer responsibility policy
Legislators in California, other states, and
framework for all consumer packaging and
the U.S. Congress are also currently pursu-
paper.103 The framework should make “pro-
ing bills that aim to make producers respon-
ducers responsible for achieving specific
sible for packaging waste.
management and environmental outcomes
More than a dozen states have seen some for the consumer packaging they supply
legislative activity around producer respon- into Washington State.” The report also rec-
sibility for paper and packaging.100 This ommends a deposit return system, or bottle
momentum has been stalled by the corona- bill, for all beverage containers, as well as
virus pandemic, which has sent many state recycled content requirements for all plas-
legislatures into extended recesses. Still, tic packaging. Ideally, all of these policies
several states are in a strong position to pro- would be implemented together, helping
pose and pass well-studied and practicable create a supply and market for recycled
producer responsibility legislation in the materials that would support the entire
near future. recycling system.104
The report also calls for manufactur-
WASHINGTON ers to have full financial and operational
On May 21, 2019, Governor Jay Inslee of responsibility for meeting state standards
Washington signed a law aiming to reduce for managing packaging waste, whether
plastic packaging in the state and to require individually or through a collaborative
a study of ways to reduce plastic waste.101 producer responsibility organization.
The law directs Washington’s Department Although the report was charged with the
of Ecology to commission a report on cur- management of plastic packaging, it recom-
rent plastic packaging waste amounts, mends applying producer responsibility to
types, and management practices in the all types of packaging, to avoid unintended
state. The report must also lay out a plan market distortions. Furthermore, the report
with recommendations for how to reduce suggests a system that drives innovation
the quantity of plastic packaging sold in by setting strong performance targets that
the state; make it all recyclable, reusable or increase over time.105
PAGE 19MAINE tives for producers to meet performance
goals for toxicity and recyclability, and
In May 2019, Governor Janet Mills of stipulates that the stewardship agency
Maine signed a law that directed the state’s would cover the costs of data collection and
Department of Environmental Protection reporting to determine whether they have
(DEP) to draft a template bill that would done so. The law excludes small producers
make producers pay for all packaging of packaging, as well as containers that are
materials sold in the state.106 This draft was already covered by the state’s bottle bill.
submitted to a legislative committee and
This bill lays the foundation for the DEP to
formed the basis of a bill introduced in
develop an effective stewardship program.
January 2020.107
It is key that the program will charge
producers more for hard-to-recycle items
and less for valuable recyclables to encour-
Producer responsibility age them to redesign their packaging. The
bill has not yet passed a delayed legislative
systems can drive session.
innovation by setting strong CALIFORNIA
performance targets that In December 2018 and February 2019,
increase over time. Senator Ben Allen and Assemblywoman
Lorena Gonzalez introduced the California
Circular Economy and Plastic Pollution
The original bill included provisions to Reduction Act. The bills aimed to establish
establish a nonprofit stewardship organi- a statewide framework and set goals to
zation to collect fees from packaging pro- reduce waste from single-use products and
ducers based on the amount by weight of packaging, and to ensure that products are
packaging materials they sell or distribute effectively recycled.109 In the final hours
in Maine. In addition to weight, these fees of the state’s 2020 legislative session on
would be calculated to reflect the use of August 31, the Senate version fell four votes
recycled content in packaging material and short of clearing the Assembly.110 In August
toxicity of the material, with higher fees 2020, several organizations submitted sig-
for materials that are toxic or otherwise not natures for a ballot initiative similar to the
easily recyclable. It’s important to note that bills that would appear on the November
fees based solely on weight don’t actually 2022 ballot.111
discourage plastic packaging.108 Ideally, fee
design will reward lightweight packaging The bills would have required a 75 per-
that is both easy to recycle and made from cent reduction of the waste generated
recycled materials. from single-use packaging and single-use
products sold or distributed in California
The fees collected from producers would be by 2030. From that year onward, all single-
used to reimburse municipalities for costs use packaging and products would have
incurred in the process of recycling and to be made from recyclable or composta-
waste management, as well as to invest in ble material. They would have required
waste reduction and recycling education the California Department of Resources
and infrastructure. The bill includes incen- Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle) to
PAGE 20develop incentives and policies to encour- commonly littered single-use plastics such
age in-state manufacturing of these prod- as bags, cups, straws, utensils and polysty-
ucts using recycled material generated in rene foam (what most of us call Styrofoam),
California. Manufacturers of single-use and establish a national-level bottle bill.
plastic packaging or single-use plastic Any non-refunded money from the latter,
foodware, such as plates, bowls and uten- as well as proceeds from fees on paper and
sils, would have been required to demon- non-reusable carry-out bags, would go into
strate a recycling rate of at least 30 percent a federal fund for projects and research
by 2026, 40 percent by 2028 and 75 percent to increase collection infrastructure and
by 2030.112 reduce pollution. This bill would also estab-
lish a standardized labeling system for
California’s proposed program would plastic products that informs consumers on
have been another strong step for producer how to dispose of them properly.
responsibility in the U.S. The bills priori-
tized reducing packaging and single-use This proposal is the most comprehensive
plastics and set ambitious and swift targets plan to tackle single-use plastic and packag-
to increase recycling rates. They would also ing waste of any discussed here. In addition
have incentivized producers to use recycled to making producers responsible for waste,
material in their products, helping to close it seeks to directly reduce waste by ban-
the loop in the circular economy. ning the least-recyclable single-use plastics.
It also proposes a national bottle bill – the
FEDERAL most recognizable recycling model for pack-
aging in the U.S. This proposal also sets
In February 2020, U.S. Senator Tom Udall (D
goals to make plastics recyclable and made
– N.M.) and U.S. Representative Alan Lowen-
from recycled content – helping to support
thal (D – Calif.) unveiled federal legislation
the overall recycling system.
that would hold corporations accountable
for wasteful products, reduce wasteful pack-
aging, phase out unnecessary single-use
plastic products altogether and reform the
waste and recycling collection system. The
Break Free From Plastic Pollution Act would,
among other things, place the financial bur-
den of waste management and the cleanup
of plastic pollution on the companies that
manufacture and sell those products, and
require producers to design their products in
such a way as to minimize the environmen-
tal impacts of extraction, manufacture, use
and end-of-life management.113
The bill would make producers responsible
for the full end-of-life costs of some types of
packaging and single-use products. It would
also establish minimum recycled content
requirements for drink containers, packag-
ing and food-service products, ban the most
PAGE 21Policy recommendations
MAKING PRODUCERS RESPONSIBLE for 1. Establish a waste hierarchy and make
waste is an important step toward a circular sure that policies prioritize the more-
economy. Effective policies can incentivize desired outcomes over the less-desired.
producers to reduce their use of packaging
a. First and foremost, reduce the
and build products that are less hazardous,
amount of waste generated;
built to last, and are easy to repair, recycle
or compost. b. Reuse, repair and refurbish prod-
ucts whenever possible;
To be successful, programs should make
producers responsible for all waste costs c. Recycle or compost all remaining
associated with their products – includ- materials;
ing waste collection, transportation and
management, and litter clean-up costs. Fees d. Landfill and incinerate as little as
charged to producers should be adjusted possible.
based on how long a product is designed Following this waste hierarchy is impor-
to last, how easy it is to repair, recycle or tant to ensure that producer responsibil-
compost, and how hazardous it is. Such eco- ity programs avoid unintended conse-
modulated fees, widespread in Europe and quences. For example, California’s initial
Canada, encourage producers to design less policy to make producers responsible for
harmful products. carpet waste enabled too much incinera-
The federal government and individual tion and did not result in a meaningful
states should implement policies that make increase in recycling. Because of this,
producers responsible for the waste cre- California updated the policy in 2017 to
ated by their products. Such policies are discourage incineration and to set goals
particularly important for products that are for how much carpet is recycled, which
hazardous, difficult to recycle or compost, increases over time.114
or that generate a lot of waste. These include 2. Pair programs that make producers
batteries, mattresses, mercury thermostats, responsible for waste with other waste-
carpet, pesticides, tires, pharmaceuticals, reduction strategies.
paint, electronics, packaging and textiles.
a. Bottle bills and other deposit-based
To establish effective policies that make pro- programs are among the most widely
ducers responsible for waste, policymakers deployed forms of producer respon-
should follow these best practices: sibility, and new laws should comple-
ment rather than replace them.
PAGE 22b. Push forward with bans on the least b. Charge producers less for products
recyclable and compostable and most that are proven to be reused or re-
hazardous products. cycled.
3. Require producers to establish effective c. Charge producers more if their prod-
collection, recycling and composting ucts enter the waste stream more
systems for products that do not cur- quickly than other manufacturers’
rently have them. products in that category.
a. Set increasing requirements for the 7. Make it easy for consumers to properly
percentage of distributed products dispose of their products. Make collec-
that must be collected. tion sites accessible and available year-
round. Educate consumers about how to
b. Set increasing requirements for the properly dispose of their products and
percentage of collected materials consider simplified labeling.
that must be reused, repaired, refur-
bished, recycled or composted. This 8. Avoid reinventing the wheel. If effec-
can necessitate that producers rede- tive systems or secondary markets do
sign products that are not readily exist to collect, repair, refurbish, recycle
repairable, recyclable or compostable. or compost materials, keep them in place
and simply require producers to start
4. Require producers to pay fees that funding them.
cover all of their products’ end-of-life
costs, including waste collection, haul- 9. Incentivize consumers to return their
ing, recycling, composting, landfilling, products for recycling or composting
incineration and litter cleanup costs. instead of throwing them in the trash.
The fees should also cover the operating This can be achieved in a variety of
costs of the entity that sets, collects and ways, including the following:
distributes these fees and the full costs
of the oversight agencies. a. Ban products covered by producer
responsibility programs from land-
5. Require producers to use recycled con- fills and trash incinerators, or attach
tent in their products to make sure that heavy penalties.
recycled materials are reused. Increas-
ing the collection and recycling of mate- b. Charge consumers more for trash
rials only reduces waste if the recycled disposal than for alternatives
materials are used. Utilizing recycled through “save money and reduce
materials reduces the need to extract trash” (SMART) programs, which
new materials and closes the loop in the charge consumers less if they throw
circular economy. out less trash.
6. Adjust fees to encourage producers to c. Charge consumers a deposit when
design products that last and are easy they buy a product that can be re-
and economical to reuse, repair, recycle turned for recycling, as bottle bills
or compost. do.
a. Charge producers more for products d. Offer a reward if consumers return a
that are hazardous or hard to repair, product for recycling, as some states
recycle or compost, to avoid landfill- currently do for mercury thermostats.
ing and incineration.
PAGE 2310. Support the right to reuse, repair, and
reprogram. Allowing third-party repair
of products to extend their lifespan is
good for consumers, and reduces waste
from throwing away fixable devices and
manufacturing new ones.
a. Support transparency requirements
about obsolescence timelines. Soft-
ware support should be designed to
last the likely lifespan of the hard-
ware, and its duration should be
disclosed.
b. Enable reuse of internet-connected
devices. Third-party tools that add
to or convert an old, unsupported
device should be protected.
11. Set high standards for oversight and
transparency at every stage of the pro-
cess to ensure that producers are com-
plying with requirements and reporting
accurately, and to ensure that fees are
assessed correctly.
Producer responsibility laws can be com-
plex. State and national organizations such
as the California Product Stewardship
Council and the Product Stewardship Insti-
tute have resources and services available
that can help policymakers enact effective
policies that make producers responsible
for waste.
PAGE 24You can also read
