|
|
|
You are here: Home > Current Topics > At your Leisure > 6 February 2006 |
|
|
|
|
| Packaging waste target | Achievement | |
| Paper | 15% | 59% * |
| Plastic | 15% | 19% * |
| Metal | 15% | 39% * |
| Glass | 15% | 34% * |
| Overall recycling | 25% | 43% |
| Overall recovery | 50% | 48% |
* 2002 data
Image: A waste incinerator plant. What consequences could there be from increased use of waste incinerators? Copyright: Peter Sitzer, stock.xchng
We saw how the recovery of packaging waste involves burning the material and capturing the energy released, in the form of electricity. The incineration process is more widely used in continental Europe than in the UK. This partly accounts for the UK's failure to meet its 2001 overall recovery target. Incineration has not proved to be as popular in the UK as abroad because of local communities' fears over the health and pollution effects of the process. Pressure groups set up by local people have successfully fought plans for new incineration plants.
There are also concerns over some of the other potentially damaging results of increasing the quantities of waste sent for incineration:
Critics of this view point to the experience in the Netherlands and Germany where recycling rates are still high, despite high levels of incineration. Perhaps the important point is that the UK has been slow to embrace recycling and needs to settle in before trying to expand other waste recovery methods.
So if it has not increased significantly the quantity of energy recovered from waste through incineration, how has the UK managed to achieve its 2001 recycling targets?
A House of Lords report on packaging and packaging waste found that over 40% of the growth in recycling packaging waste has come from wood packaging, This kind of waste mainly consists of wooden pallets and crates. The report indicates that wood packaging is mainly recycled into processed chipboard products for the building industry.
The Lords' report gives evidence suggesting that apart from glass and, to a lesser extent, metals, most of the recovery and recycling growth in the UK is accounted for by industry and commerce. So, although more domestic waste is beginning to be sent for recovery in the form of glass bottles and tin cans, there is much more to be done. This might be difficult to achieve, as domestic waste is far more expensive to collect, clean and process than commercial and industrial packaging.
The evidence also suggest that the UK is exporting far more of its packaging waste than before. The Lords' report uses data from the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra), showing that waste exports rose from approximately 115,000 tonnes in 1998 to 460,000 tonnes in 2001. This equates to a rise in waste exports of about 400%.
It is clear that in order to meet the requirements for cutting the amount of packaging waste that we send to landfill, urgent action is needed. Local authorities, which have the responsibility for managing the collection and recovery of waste, are certain to increase kerbside collections of waste packaging. For example, at present it can be difficult to have your plastic containers collected. This may change despite the problems posed in terms of storage and recovery.
There are also some interesting new uses of packaging waste. The House of Lords report noted the innovation of road surfacing using recycled glass. Greater use of innovative materials such as this 'glassphalt' can be expected as pressure grows on landfill use.
It also seems likely that the Government will increase rapidly the capacity to incinerate waste. A paper from Defra due this month (February 2006) is expected to call for an increase in waste for incineration from current level of 9% to 25% by 2020. Opposition from environmental pressure groups and local communities affected by this policy can be expected to increase.
Market forces drive the UK's policy on recovery and recycling. Producers of waste are required to account for these materials and their eventual disposal. Just as companies are able to trade their greenhouse gas emissions, so are firms that produce packaging waste.
This market system, which has produced its own trading floor, known as the Environment Exchange, rewards the most efficient firms. Companies that produce packaging waste have to obtain a certificate proving that they recycle enough materials. If they can't do so, they can buy Packaging Recovery Notes (PRNs) from another organisation which has recycled more than their share. These PRNs are traded on the Environment Exchange.
Image: Fast food restaurants are a major producer of environmentally harmful packaging. Would you give up burgers and milkshakes if it meant reducing waste and pollution? Copyright: Getty Images, from Education Image Gallery
It's clear that public and media attention to the subject of packaging is growing. What concerns people most is the eventual disposal of this packaging. And yet, if people consume more and more packaged products, they can hardly be seen as blameless, can they?
Research into public attitudes to packaging has been carried out for INCPEN, an organisation set up by the industry to address some of the concerns over packaging and its environmental effects. The research indicated that consumers hold contradictory views on the issue. The very packaging that annoys people, littering their homes and streets, is the same stuff that allows them to have convenient, hygienic and safe products in their houses.
INCPEN found that there were two main reasons for people's contradictory views:
The study also found that, despite having initial negative views on packaging, these views are quickly forgotten when consumers go shopping. In fact, the research suggested that even when faced with the chance to buy the same products in an unpackaged form, most consumers will choose the packaged version.
In its report on consumer attitudes research, INCPEN reported that there are five key functions of packaging. These are reproduced below:
Consumers seem willing to buy more and more new products, or to consume greater quantities of existing commodities, in the form of multi-packs and super-sized portions. We are responsible for generating increasing quantities of packaging waste. Producers of these products are surely also to blame to a certain extent for using too much packaging.
Cynical observers would point to the apparently deliberate collusion between manufacturers and the packaging industry. A large proportion of packaging waste is in the form of plastics (by-products of the oil industry) and, some say, this is a direct result of our over-reliance on oil. However, when faced with the benefits of convenience, hygiene and safety that packaging provides, consumers find it hard to change their behaviour. Perhaps only coercion will work in influencing these habits.
As a member state of the EU, we cannot continue to send huge amounts of waste to landfill. We are required to reduce this by recovering more of the packaging waste that our lifestyles generate. Recycling has a big role to play in this effort, and the UK's performance in this area has improved significantly in the last few years.
The Government seems ready to encourage the incineration of increasing quantities of packaging waste, despite health fears and claims that this will deter people and firms from recycling.
