…or wasting universally vs. extending production responsibly universal wastes and extended...
Post on 21-Dec-2015
222 views
TRANSCRIPT
…or Wasting Universally vs. Extending Production Responsibly
Universal Wastes and Extended Producer Responsibility
Questions about Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR)
• What EPR programs already exist outside the US that we can model?
• How are EPR Take Back programs different than other HHW programs?
• How has EPR evolved in California?• What has been learned from EPR
efforts in California so far? • What models can my community
use?• What is EPR Framework Legislation
and why should we care?• What more can we each do to
accelerate implementation of EPR programs?
3
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
TV
DV
D
Vac
uu
mC
lean
er
Sh
aver
Co
ffee
mak
er
Mic
row
ave
Was
her
Dis
hw
ash
er
Dry
er
Fre
ezer
/F
rid
ge FL
CF
L-I
CF
L-n
I
HID
Eo
L-F
ee
( %
of
Co
st P
rice
)
Situation Netherlands after 3 yrs
Best case estimation
Specialty of lighting:High Costs Involved
Excerpt from presentation by Rob Koppejan, Philips Lighting and Christoph Rautenfeld, OSRAM at the CIWMB in April 2008
Collections and Recycling Support Organization : main operational flows
CRSO
End User
Municipalities
Prof. Collection Site
Retail Transporter Recycler
Government
Producer
Product Flow
Financial FlowStakeholder
Excerpt from presentation by Rob Koppejan, Philips Lighting and Christoph Rautenfeld, OSRAM at the CIWMB in April 2008
5
Clear Responsibilities of each Stakeholder required
Producers: Support the setup of CRSOs, transfer waste fee
Consumers: Return of end-of-life products, payment of compliance costs/fee
Distribution: Take back end-of-life productsMunicipalities: Provide municipal collection sitesRecyclers: Comply with recycling requirementCRSO: Organize efficient and sustainable
organization, inform stakeholdersGovernments: Define stakeholder responsibilities, ensure
level playing fieldNGO’s: Increase awareness
Excerpt from presentation by Rob Koppejan, Philips Lighting and Christoph Rautenfeld, OSRAM at the CIWMB in April 2008
Progress of Collection Laws in Europe Directive
2006/66 – Collection of all batteries
MTEECYLVLTSIIEBGRONOFIDKESITUK
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
'85 '91 '92 '93 '94 '95 '96 '97 '98 '99 '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08+
% o
f M
arke
t
LU AT CH NL
SEBE
DE
FR
SKCZ
PL PT
TRHUGR
Directive 91/157 – Collection ofhazardous batteries
Directive 98/101 – Mercury ban
Battery collection in Europe
Excerpted from presentation by Hans CraenEuropean Portable Battery Association, April 2008
European Portable Battery Association (EPBA)
Interfaces with EU & international bodies
20 National Battery
Associations (NBA) Interface with national
Governments
14Collection and Recycling
Organisations (CRO) Compliance with producer
responsibility
Set up by members
How EPBA Addresses EPR Requirements
Excerpted from presentation by Hans CraenEuropean Portable Battery Association, April 2008
New Battery Directive (2006/66) Marking: (1) Crossed-out dustbin
(2) Chemical symbol(3) Capacity marking on portable and
automotive batteries
Financing: No visible fee to end-users visible fee on invoice level will be possible
Specific recycling targets:- recycle 65% of contents of lead –acid batteries,- recycle 75% of contents of nickel cadmium batteries,- recycle 50% of contents of other batteries on average.
European legal framework for batteries
Member States have until 26 September 2008 to transpose the new Directive into national law
Excerpted from presentation by Hans CraenEuropean Portable Battery Association, April 2008
EPR Resolutions, Ordinances, Plans and Policies
It’s Good to be Green…
…Don’t you want to be Green too?
• > 75 presentations
• Outreach materials and model resolutions
(25 to 46) of 58 counties53 City Councils
Counties:
Alpine *
Amador
Butte
Calaveras *
Colusa *
Del Norte
El Dorado *
Glenn
Humboldt
Imperial *
SolanoSonomaSutter *TehamaTrinity *TuolumneVenturaYolo
San Louis Obispo *San MateoSanta ClaraSanta CruzShasta *Sierra *Siskiyou *
Placer * Plumas *SacramentoSan Benito *San BernardinoSan FranciscoSan Joaquin
MendocinoMerced *Modoc *Mono *MontereyNapaNevada *
Inyo *Lake *Lassen *Los AngelesMaderaMarinMariposa
•EPR Resolution adopted by regional or partner agency
The Evolution of EPR Advocacy in Del Norte County
1991
New PHHW Facility in 2005-Thanks CIWMB (and Oil dumpers!)
February 2000
2007
2009-????
U-WasteE-Waste Feb. 2006
- 2009
EPR Pilot Programs under HD17FTuolumne County
• Two sites; In-store Take Back for fluorescents and batteries
Provided:
• Tech support
• Promotions, surveys
• Pre-paid containers for 5 months
Retailers continue program at their own expense.
Surveys indicated program very popular with staff
and customers
• All household Battery Take Back
• 28 locations – now most convenient material to recycle in Del Norte County
(933% increase)• First ‘Tape a Terminal’
outreach• Recovery: ~1000 lb/yr for
community of 29,100• Still, only 3-5% of estimated
annual battery sales
EPR Pilot Programs under HD17FDel Norte County
EPR Moving Forward
• ONLY strategy with potential for >20% recovery of most U-wastes in California
• Only viable approach from fiscal cost containment and/or environmental perspective, technical issues aside
• Essential to Green Chemistry Initiative• HD18F: More Outreach, Business Awards, & models for MORE LOCAL ACTION, like…• HHWE update with EPR policies as central programs
addressing materials banned from disposal after 1995• Local actions and partnerships on sharps• AB283 (Chesbro) EPR Framework Legislation in play
needs your support soon – Get ready now
Tedd Ward, M.S.Program Manager
for the
Del Norte Solid Waste Management Authority
“My life is garbage, but I’m in recovery.”
Extended Producer Responsibility / Product Stewardship Resources
• CPSC: http://www.calpsc.org/ (!!!)
• Northwest PSC: http://www.productstewardship.net/
• CIWMB EPR Framework and Checklist:
– http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov/EPR/
• CIWMB HD17F Grant Programs:
– http://www.calpsc.org/projects/DelNorte.html