Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Why Product Stewardship? THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT PERSPECTIVE Name, date of event Name of presenter.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Why Product Stewardship? THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT PERSPECTIVE Name, date of event Name of presenter."— Presentation transcript:

1 Why Product Stewardship? THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT PERSPECTIVE Name, date of event Name of presenter

2 Overview Introduction - Why Product Stewardship? History: How Waste Became a Local Government Responsibility How Waste Has Changed The Impacts of Products and Packaging The Product Stewardship Approach SWMCB Roles and Activities The Future of Product Stewardship

3 Introduction: Why Product Stewardship? Local government charge for environmental and public health protection – the arm of the State. Environmental impacts – GHG emissions, water, landfills, toxicity. Local government costs, such as recycling and HHW management.

4 HISTORY: HOW WASTE BECAME A LOCAL GOVERNMENT RESPONSIBILITY

5 Rapid urbanization occurred from 1840 – History: How Waste Became a Local Government Responsibility

6

7

8

9 HOW WASTE HAS CHANGED

10 How Waste Has Changed * Grey area includes household ash

11 How Waste Has Changed Disposable By Design

12 THE IMPACTS OF PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING

13 * Use of Appliances and Devices 7% Provision of Food 12% Non-local Passenger Transport 9% Building HVAC and Lighting 21% Local Passenger Transport 13% US Greenhouse Gas Emissions Consumption View – Global © 2009 Product Policy Institute Source: PPI 2009 – Joshua Stolaroff Products & Packaging 44% Use * Provision of Goods 37% Infra- structure 1%

14 Plastic bottles thrown into the Mississippi in Minnesota… Our Waterways - Plastics

15 … flow downriver to the Gulf of Mexico and into the ocean, circulate through ocean currents… Our Waterways - Plastics

16 …and eventually end up here. Our Waterways - Plastics

17 Our Waterways – Plastics

18 Our Waterways - Pharmaceuticals Small concentrations of pharmaceuticals have been found in: –Drinking water supplies of at least 41 million Americans. –Water at landfills, also known as leachate, which can eventually end up in rivers.

19 CO$T All Minnesota solid waste costs are at least $1 billion a year, which is impacted by: –Clean up costs for 112 closed landfills. –Costs to manage Household Hazardous Waste (HHW). Counties in the SWMCB six-county metro area paid a total of $8.6 million in 2008 to manage HHW. –Mounting state budget deficits.

20 MSW Generation and Management Total 2008 MSW Generation: 5,926,951 tons. For the amount of MSW generated in Minnesota decreased by 3.5%, while population increased by 0.5%.

21 So Why Doesnt the Current System Work? Current government waste management programs unwittingly contribute to: –Manufacturer design of wasteful and toxic products. –Consumer acceptance of disposable products. Convenient disposal perpetuates the problem.

22 THE PRODUCT STEWARDSHIP APPROACH

23 Product Stewardship Defined SWMCB Product stewardship means that all parties involved in designing, manufacturing, selling, and using a product share in the financial and physical responsibility for collecting and recycling products at the end of their useful lives.

24 Todays Linear Waste Management System ManufacturersRetailersConsumers © 2009 by the California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB) Recycle & Garbage Bins Local Government Funded Landfill and Waste-to-Energy Processes Recycling

25 Tomorrows Cradle to Cradle System Manufacturers Retailers Consumers Materials are recycled into new products Take Back Programs mail-back, collection sites, haulers, local governments © 2009 by the California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB)

26 Current Minnesota Product Stewardship Efforts Focus on specific products to reduce government costs and remove them from the waste stream. –Includes e-waste, paint, CFLs, carpet, beverage containers, telephone directories, mercury auto switches, and thermostats. Products mostly with hazardous character. Significant investment of time. Some success, some failure.

27 E-Waste SWMCB and MPCA partnerships with manufacturers, retailers and recyclers. Successful passage of legislation in 2007 after several years. SWMCB and MPCA evaluating legislation in 2010.

28 E-Waste: Carver County E-waste recycling costs: –06 - $46,000 pre e-waste law. –07 - $31,000 law in effect 7/1/07. –08 – $broke even. –09 - $forecast to break even again. Due to: –$0.05/lb credit in 08. –$0.05/lb credit 1 st half 09 & 80%. credit agreement for 2 nd half 09. –Balancing revenues with costs. The winners: Residents access to permanent facility & special e-waste collections was free for two years. CRT ban 7/1/06

29 Paint SWMCB and MPCA involvement in national dialogue with industry partners. Minnesota was the site of an industry-led statewide paint management model. Minnesota Paint Stewardship bill passed legislature in 2008 & 2009, later vetoed.

30 Beverage Containers Currently recycling 35%. Collection needs to more than double to reach 80% goal by 2012 (unlikely). Many of the strategies require legislative action.

31 Container Deposit 10 states have Container Deposit Laws. Recycling rates vary: –Lowest (Massachusetts) 72%. –Average 78%. –Highest (Michigan) 95%. Michigan has a 10 cent deposit, the rest have 5 cent deposits. Most laws only include 79% of all beverage containers.

32 SWMCB ROLES AND ACTIVITIES

33 SWMCB Policy Development August 2009 SWMCB meeting - discussion of SWMCB Roles and policy direction: Foundation for waste management policy. A means to increase efficiency (that is, less waste) in business and government. A way for government to reduce its waste management costs.

34 Recommended SWMCB Roles COORDINATION AND REGULATION RESEARCH ADVOCACY EDUCATION AND COMMUNICATION POLICY DEVELOPMENT

35 Minnesota Integrated Solid Waste Management Stakeholder Process Identifies strategies to meet state goals of GHG reduction by 2025, which included Source Reduction, Recycling, Organics, and Waste-to-Energy. Metro Centroid: –3 scenarios – public, incentive based, waste-to- energy, organics, etc. –Final report concludes Extended Producer Responsibility/Product Stewardship is leading method – framework policy.

36 SWMCB Resolution On January 27, 2010 the SWMCB adopted a resolution for product stewardship.

37 THE FUTURE OF PRODUCT STEWARDSHIP

38 Product Stewardship in the Future It could be: –The foundation for waste management policy; –A means to increase efficiency (that is, less waste) in business and government; –A way for government to reduce its waste management costs; and –A movement towards less toxic products (i.e. green chemistry or design for the environment).

39 Action – What You Can Do Lead the way! –Introduce and discuss ideas in your organization. Adopt a product stewardship resolution. Develop product stewardship policies. Advocate for the product stewardship legislative platform. Support local take-back programs. Form a product stewardship committee. Join other efforts underway (e.g. MPSC, SWMCB).

40 Contact Information Presenter information


Download ppt "Why Product Stewardship? THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT PERSPECTIVE Name, date of event Name of presenter."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google