Christina%20Seidel

1
Christina Seidel

• Zeroing in on Waste
• the Role of
• Extended Producer Responsibility
• in a
• Zero Waste Strategy

2
Towards Zero Waste

• Need to change the perception of waste as a
  normal by-product of society
• Redesign processes and systems to eliminate waste

3
Extended Producer Responsibility

• OECD defines EPR as an environmental policy
  approach in which a producers responsibility for
  a product is extended to the post-consumer stage
  of a products life cycle.

4
Related Features of EPR Policy (OECD)

• Shifting of responsibility upstream toward the
  producer and away from municipalities
• Only producers have the ability to redesign
• Provide incentives to producers to incorporate
  environmental considerations in the design of
  their products
• Cradle-to-cradle

5
Waste Management System

• Responsibility to manage consumer waste is
  traditionally borne by society as a whole
  (represented by municipality)
• Cost of waste management is not reflected in
  product price
• Supported through municipal taxes

6
Historical Municipal Waste
Source Institute of Wastes Management, 1982
7
Current Municipal Solid Waste
Source Alberta Environment
8
Growth of Product Wastes
Source Spiegelman and Sheehan, 2005
9
Growth of Recycling
Source Spiegelman and Sheehan, 2005
10
Limitations of Municipal System

• Municipal waste management has been subsidizing
  poor product design
• Inadvertently encouraged disposable society
• Designed for collection and management of
  homogenous waste stream
• Lacks ability to handle reverse logistics for
  complex products
• Producer lacks input into efficiency and
  innovation

11
Potential for EPR Approach

• Offers dedicated systems to handle specific
  products through reverse distribution
• Assumption of cradle-to-cradle approach by
  producers offers opportunities for redesign
• Encouraged to eliminate waste from cycle
• Design for durability and recyclability
• Elimination of toxic materials
• Product price includes complete lifecycle costs
• Sends more accurate price signal to consumer

12
EPR Philosophy in Design

• Important to always keep fundamental philosophy
  in mind when designing EPR programs
• Danger in being too pragmatic when making design
  decisions
• Design choices focused on efficiency or
  simplicity can undermine program support

13
Design Criteria Checklist

• Financially sustainable
• Level playing field
• No cross-subsidization
• Separation of products / materials
• Environmentally sound
• DfE, 3Rs hierarchy
• Socially responsible
• Performance driven
• Transparent, inclusive

14
EPR Program Design Criteria

• Encourages Design for Environment
• Products / materials must carry individual costs
• Reward environmental performance
• Avoid basket of goods approach
• PROs practical and effective management
  organizations, but remove competition
• Encourage individual system design
• EPR more than funding mechanism

15
EPR Program Design Criteria

• 3Rs hierarchy
• Encourage environmentally-preferable management
  options
• Financial incentive for environmental performance
• In absence of definitive research, hierarchy
  assumed valid
• Life-cycle avoidance technique
• Environmental conscience on PRO

16
EPR Program Design Criteria

• Visible fees vs cost internalization
• Flow-through fees download cost onto consumer
• No price signal to producer to DfE
• Only one taxpayer
• Consumer vs taxpayer
• Visible fees symbolize producers unwillingness
  to accept responsibility
• Visible fees symptom of design failure

17
Contact

• sonnevera international corp.Christina Seidel
  Executive Director, Recycling Council of Alberta
  Box 23Bluffton, AB T0C 0M0phone
  403.843.6563fax [phone]info_at_recycle.ab.ca
  www.recycle.ab.ca