1. Green Dot summary by Bev Thorpe, Clean Production Action EPR Work Group meeting July 7/8 Buffalo, NY Bev@cleanproduction.org

2. Clean Production Action Why make the producer responsible? Only the product designer can choose material and form/function of the product EPR puts the feedback loop back on the producer to design for disassembly, reuse, and safer recycling Hazardous materials increase the producer’s liability and costs

3. Clean Production Action EPR can make products more recyclable and less wasteful if: Focus is specifically on waste from end of life products Financial responsibility is clear to producers for collection, transport and recycling Meangful targets are established for collection and recycling….

4. Clean Production Action …EPR programs are effective if: Recycling is clearly differentiated from waste to energy conversion/incineration Reporting requirements and enforcement mechanisms established Producers have incentive to design for reuse/recycling Consumers have incentives to return their old products (eg free and easy)

5. Clean Production Action EPR is embodied in: Bottle return/refund programs Product leasing where manufacturer maintains control of product ownership/reuse/repair eg Xerox Providing a Service instead of a product, eg Interface supplying floor covering service and carpet tile replacement versus new carpet

6. Clean Production Action First EPR program: Germany’s Green Dot for packaging Packaging Ordinance 1991 establishes EPR Packaging accounted for 1/3 by weight and ½ by volume of total waste stream and was growing! Would stimulate new recycling technologies Berlin Wall collapse meant new consumerism and waste and decreasing landfill space

7. Clean Production Action Established individual or third party system Fillers are responsible for packaging waste; can deal with it themselves or set up third party system Industry responded by designing the Dual, or Green Dot, system

8. Clean Production Action DSD Non profit company, Duales System Deutschland (DSD) licenses logo for a fee Fees based on the material and weight of the package and paid by filler – usually the owner of the product brand name Households have 2 bins: one for regular trash (municipality responsibility) and one for packaging (DSD picks up for free) DSD also operates drop-off igloos for glass and paper

9. Clean Production Action License fee for Green Dot, Oct 1994 Weight-based Fee: DM/kg

10. Clean Production Action

11. DSD sets clear targets Recycling targets ranging from 64 to 72 percent for various materials Refill rate for beverage containers at 72 percent or higher

12. Clean Production Action Effects of DSD: less packaging Between 1991 and 1995 packaging consumption decreased by one million tons Green Dot packaging decreased 14% from 1991-1995, while total packaging in Germany decreased 7% Comparison in USA (same time) packaging increased 13%

13. Clean Production Action Effects of DSD: product redesign Packaging redesign: lightweighting elimination of unessential packaging (blister packs) increased use of concentrates and refill packs

14. Clean Production Action What about plastics? In 1996 plastic packaging recycling increased to 68% Move away from PVC (difficult to recycle) to better recyclable material (eg paper) Incineration not considered recycling BUT: One third recycling via ‘feedstock recycling’ eg pyrolysis, hydrogenation and substitution of waste plastic for oil in steel production

15. Clean Production Action

19. New recycling targets from 1999 Glass 75% (previously 70%) Tinplate 70% (same) Aluminum 60% (prev 50%) Paper/crdbd) 70% (prev 60%) Composites 60% (prev 50%)

20. Clean Production Action Hazardous contents must decrease concentrations of lead, cadmium, mercury and hexavalent chromium in packaging reduced: 600 ppm (parts per million) by weight from 30 June 1998 250 ppm by weight from 30 June 1999 100 ppm by weight from 30 June 2001

21. Clean Production Action Prognos Assessment of DSD, 2002 The recycling of two million tonnes of lightweight packaging avoids carbon dioxide pollution by the same quantity which arises in the incineration of 28 million tonnes of residual waste Costs of the Green Dot are between 520 and 605 euros per tonne, could drop to 250-370 euros

22. Clean Production Action Greenhouse gas reductions By recycling used sales packaging, a total of 67.5 billion megajoules of primary energy was saved In addition, this saved 1.5 million tonnes of climate-damaging greenhouse gases. (Source: Environmental Success Balance 2002 of Duales System Deutschland AG, www.gruener- punkt.de)

23. Clean Production Action Future predictions for packaging in Germany Predictions of 15% decrease in waste 2000-2005 (Prognos Institute) No untreated waste to landfill in 2005 will lead to more reductions (more reuse and recycling) Mechanical biological treatment will be used more in future (versus incineration)

24. Clean Production Action Re-use in Europe On average in the European Union, about one third of the packaging for soft drinks, mineral water and wine is reused The highest reuse rates are achieved in Denmark, Finland, Germany and Sweden; in some cases more than 90 percent of the volume bottled (glass and PET) is reused in these countries.

25. Clean Production Action Beverage bottle reuse -Europe WINE REUSE: Austria (83 percent); Finland (71 percent); Sweden reuses 55 percent, Portugal around 50 percent; Spain 32 percent and Germany 29 percent. SOFT DRINK REUSE: Austria, Germany, Sweden, Finland and Portugal reuse between one third and two thirds of the glass packaging. Denmark achieves 80 percent, followed by Germany with 61 percent. BEER and MINERAL WATER: higher

26. Clean Production Action Germany’s Closed Material and Waste Management Act 1996 Aim to eliminate the dumping of untreated waste entirely within 20 years, as a result of the progress made in recovery technology. EPR in Germany extended to: Waste from Electrical and Electronic Equpment (WEEE) End of Life Vehicles (EoLV) Carpets and textiles Biowaste Construction waste Batteries