The Environmental Audit Committee held two evidence sessions on Wednesday (17 March) looking into the design and practicalities of a Deposit Return Scheme (DRS) in England.
The debate over which materials should be included in any DRS dominated discussions in both sessions.
In the first session, Rick Hindley, executive director of the Aluminium Packaging Recycling Organisation (Alupro), Barry Turner, director of plastic and flexible packaging at the British Plastics Federation, and Dr Nicholas Kirk, technical director at British Glass were all giving evidence.
Glass
Dr Kirk advocated for glass to not be included in the DRS
Dr Kirk was lobbying for glass to be excluded from the scheme, explaining that its inclusion would lead to an increase in plastic packaging and limit the sector’s ability to recycle glass back into bottles and jars.
He explained: “British Glass does not oppose the introduction of a DRS but put simply it is the wrong solution for glass beverage packaging. It would split glass food and beverage packaging into two waste streams, to the detriment of both.
“It risks increasing emissions in the glass sector and reducing the amount of recycled material available to be used again in the manufacture of glass bottles and jars. And, as international evidence has shown, it could well lead to more, not less, plastic packaging on the market.”
He added that England already has a solution to improving glass recycling in the form of household collections.
Dr Kirk said: “Instead of including glass packaging in a damaging and expensive DRS, we want to see more glass collected through improved household collections under extended producer responsibility, enhanced by consistent collections. Only this will create a truly circular economy for glass packaging.”
Aluminium
Meanwhile, Alupro’s Rick Hindley advocated for an “all in” scheme, saying there is “no beverage packaging we would suggest wouldn’t be included”.
He added: “Equally if there is a material that is excluded, such as glass, the materials should have the same high recycling collection targets as those materials would in the DRS should have. And equally should be faced with the same penalties if they don’t hit those targets.”
Alupro has been calling for an all-in model but with a variable fee based on the size of container rather than a ‘flat-fee’.
Plastics
According to Barry Turner, director at the British Plastics Federation, the main challenge is recycling “on the go”.
He explained: “All local councils now collect PET and the majority of householders participate in it, so it’s all about on the go as far as we are concerned. The main challenge is the lack of recycling facilities out of the home to allow consumers to recycle out and about. And of course if they are not recycled on the go, they are littered.”
Mr Turner advocated a flat fee scheme, and said that as long as the system allows for flexibility, it can correct “unintended consequences” of larger material size.
Veolia
Mr Curtois backed claims that glass should be excluded from the system
Later in the day, Samantha Harding, executive director at Reloop, Lee Marshall, CEO of Larac, and Martin Curtois, external affairs director of Veolia were speaking.
Mr Curtois backed claims that glass should not be included in the final proposals.
He explained: “We should focus on PET bottles, aluminium cans, and I would consult against including glass, as the material collection rate for glass is currently at 76% already.
“I don’t think people would argue the fact that glass recycling is working well. We have an existing successful kerbside system, and we want to avoid a system where collections and DRS are competing against each other. The emphasis should be on those containers you use while consuming on the street and when you’re out and about.”
Lee Marshall also raised concerns that an “all in” scheme would be in danger of competing with local authority kerbside collections.
Quality
However Samantha Harding strongly disagreed with the exclusion of any materials in the DRS, stating that there was an issue of quality to be considered.
She questioned how stringent and “potentially escalating” targets for recycled content could be met, particularly if the plastic tax is placed on post-consumer waste rather on post industrial waste.
Raising concerns around contamination, she added that the industry needs to be making sure it gets the “best possible quality” from its resources.
She argued: “It doesn’t make any sense, if we keep putting these valuable resources into a commingled bin where it gets contaminated. We have the option of a deposit system to remove a huge amount of beverage packaging from the central waste stream and litter, and produce a huge amount of good quality feedstock.”
The post MPs hear sector concerns on DRS appeared first on letsrecycle.com.
Source: letsrecycle.com Plastic
