packaging Associations express their rejection of the possible introduction of deposit system
The Association of Beverage Cans, Ecoacero, the National Association of Manufacturers of Glass Containers (ANFEVI) and the National Packaging Pet (ANEP), representing virtually all potentially subject to packaging deposit system, and unanimously rejected the possible establishment of deposit and return system for used packaging (SDDR). In his view, it would be a measure in other countries has emerged as an initiative with clear commercial origin and related to the restriction of competition or the protection of local markets and industries.
The best known case, the German SDDR, both Spain and the EU Commission and seven other Member States have raised objections to such deployment, arguing, among other factors, the appearance barriers that restrict the free movement of goods and products. Tank systems currently in place in some European countries have not improved the overall performance of recycling.
Spain has set up an integrated system of packaging waste management (GIS) that is operating successfully since 1998 and has largely meet and exceed the goals set by the Directive on packaging and packaging waste and its corresponding transposition into English law. Altering this context today without taking into account the reality of English industry and society itself have consequences so damaging that its scope is difficult to assess.
is very questionable, moreover, its alleged environmental goodness. Additional transportation needs generated by the SDDR, with specific routes to pick up containers in commercial areas and, in the case of small businesses, while inhaling through routes, involving increased fuel consumption and, therefore, a significant increase in emissions CO2, which is unacceptable in the current circumstances, especially when systems are cheaper and more environmentally efficient.
The signatories do not enter the valuation of the additional costs that establishments would be forced to accept the return of empty containers, because they understand that is an assessment corresponding to the traders themselves, but in any case remember that any increase in costs have an effect on the price of the products and the purchasing power of citizens.
In the few countries where a SDDR is running, it generates an obvious cost to the city, for containers that can not be returned for many reasons. In cases for which information is available, this value is around 10% of the amounts advanced by consumers (15% according to latest figures published by the Norwegian SDDR own). In Spain, this figure could exceed four million euros a year. The difficulties of such refund, remember the undersigned, ? Are higher for consumers with more modest, which also consume cheaper products where the value of the deposit could often exceed the value of the packaged product?.
add further that it is false to claim that deposit systems supporting the introduction in the market for reusable, as in all countries with deposit system for reusable packaging ratio has been decreasing regularly.
are also asked to stop confusing consumers with the message that they will return the containers? As formerly?, Ie market conditions quite different, with very little supply of products that were produced in local plants distributed at very short distances and which containers were returned to refill because there was no alternative.
reusable packaging in Spain have a significant share in the packaged beverage market and are used on those occasions where consumption may be more appropriate both from a business perspective and environmental.
The main weakness of the tank systems is its discriminatory nature. Apply only to a few products and some specific packages, as opposed to integrated management systems, covering equally all product packaging and put on the market. Implementation a deposit system not only can dispense with the SIG, but forces keep a whole to manage the majority of used containers, which effectively remain outside the SDDR, and this measure would be grossly disproportionate and counterproductive. According
doctrine of the European Commission itself and applying common sense, there is no environmental justification for treating some differently based on the same package of products containing, as it does at all deposit schemes in operation.
http://ide-e.com/index.php/actualidad/1441-asociaciones-de-envases-manifiestan-su-rechazo-a-la-posible-implantacion-del-sistema-de-deposito.html
0 comments:
Post a Comment