Transcript Slide 1

Rethinking Recycling
in the U.S.
Extended Producer Responsibility
Food Industry Association Executives
November 14, 2012
1
Our Company
Regional Spring Water Brands
International Brands
Purified Water Brand
Our Vision
Sustainability from source to bottle, and from “cradle to cradle”
• How we harvest and monitor water sources
• How the water is tested and bottled
• How the bottle is captured and recycled for its next use
The Water’s Edge
In 2010, we conducted research to understand the
environmental footprint of bottled water and other
beverage choices. The findings indicated:
• Water is the best beverage option for the environment
– Tap water has the lightest footprint of all
beverages examined in this study.
– Bottled water is the best packaged beverage option
for the environment among drinks examined.
– Consumers can reduce the overall environmental
impact associated with drinking a bottle of water
by 25% by recycling the bottle after use.
– Available online at www.beveragelcafootprint.com
We want our bottles back
Our drive to reinvent recycling is rooted in our 2008 Corporate Citizenship
Report, where we committed ton increase PET beverage recycling
to 60% by 2018.
“PET plastic can be recycled
and reused almost indefinitely,
but in order to do that, we
have to get the bottles back.”
Kim Jeffery, NWNA CEO
Recycling in the U.S. Today
Total MSW Generation 2009
(243MM tons)
• In 2009, Americans produced about
243 million tons of municipal solid waste,
or about 4.3 pounds of waste per person
per day.
• Much of what we’re throwing can be
recycled.
• Recent estimates indicate that the market
value of discarded packaging may exceed
$20 billion annually… yet
–
–
–
–
6
Diversion rates are not improving
Costs are rising
Programs are aging and poorly designed
Government budget crises jeopardize the
viability of programs
Recycling in the U.S. Today
The business case for recycling
• Manufacturers need high quality, low cost material
• Current systems are not keeping up
• Collapse in newspapers is imperiling curbside program revenues*
–
–
–
–
–
Largest source of curbside recycling program revenue
Newsprint consumption down 50% in one decade
Recovered tonnage down 37.9% since 2006
San Antonio: From 50% of net revenues to 33%
Frederick County, Md., recycling program costs $6.3 million annually,
with revenue at $2.9 million
• Government respond mandating taxes, fees,
retailer take-back schemes, and narrowly-focused
“one-off” programs
Best if used by: 1982
* Source: David Refkin, GreenPath Sustainability Consultants, 11/1/2012
7
Extended Producer Responsibility
A policy approach in which a manufacturer’s responsibility for a
product is extended to the post-consumer stage of a product’s life
cycle. Also called product stewardship, its goal is to boost the
development of waste diversion and recycling programs.
Features:
• Internalized costs
• Industry management
• A market-based approach to meet demand for recyclable material
Advantages:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Lower net recycling costs
Recycling for all types of packaging
More private sector investment and employment
Mitigated supply chain volatility
Valuable material kept in use/reuse
Hedge against municipal budget shortages
How it Would Work
UNDER EPR
TODAY
• Consumers pay hauler or
city for recycling service
• Enterprise fees, utility bill,
general taxes
• Typical household cost =
$30-40 per year
• Government sets the goal
• Brand owners set up producer
responsibility organization (PRO)
• PRO designs stewardship program
– Funding, cost assessment,
material collection, processing,
recycling, governance, education,
clear performance standards
– Existing infrastructure used, when
efficient
• PRO executes program
• Consumer pays with new product
– Fees internalized in cost of products
– Individual companies determine degree
to which costs are passed to consumers
• Government tracks progress
Challenges
Designing a uniquely American system
Establishing a level-playing field
Setting a common definition of sustainable packaging
Collecting accurate data before targets are set
Ensuring accountability and transparency of costs
Maintaining industry/PRO control of funding and programs
Designing cost-effective and efficient programs
Harmonizing among EPR programs and state laws
Supporting all modes of recycling: drop-off, curbside, industrial,
commercial, institutional
• Generating robust public education
• Recognizing role clarity: Industry, government, consumer
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
The Payoff: Benefits of a U.S. EPR Model
• Consumer convenience from
strengthened curbside systems and
away-from-home programs
• Increased education/awareness and
enhanced participation
• A broader approach than isolated
take-back mandates, bottle bills, to
drive better environmental outcome
• A reliable consistent supply of
recycled materials for re-use
• New businesses, new jobs
11
Case Study: Manitoba, Canada
Canada’s first permanent, province-wide beverage container recycling
program launched in Manitoba in 2010.
Run by Canadian Beverage Container Recycling Association—a voluntary
organization supported by beverage companies.
Results to-date (new report pending) :
• Created over 100 municipal partnerships
• Recruited 65 non-municipal partners
• Deployed a total of 2,500 bins
• Participated in 115 event days in 2010
• Worked cooperatively with Multi-Material Stewardship Manitoba to
increase beverage container recovery rates in the Blue Box (residential)
collection system
• Designed a material tracking system (MTS)
to gather information on beverage container
recovery province-wide.
What EPR is Not…
•
•
•
•
EPR is not a food tax
EPR does not require in-store take back
Producers do not drive trucks around
Government does not control
producer fees or determine associated costs, industry does
Where NWNA and the SAIC study agree…
• Not all EPR is the same
• EPR’s power to change packaging design is limited
• EPR should not be a tool for funding government
Where we hope we agree…
• There is more to learn
• Conversation needs to continue
• It is critical to be at the table
What Nestlé Waters is Doing
Recycling
Reinvented
• Engaging stakeholders
– Manufacturers, retailers, haulers, recyclers, government
•
•
•
•
•
•
14
Listening, learning, measuring, studying
Building the business case with peer companies
Fostering discussions already under way
Partnering on non-EPR recycling pilot programs
Sparking dialogue in other places
Seeking introduction of state laws in 2013/14
Thank you.
15
Contact:
Brian Flaherty, VP, Government Affairs
(203) 863-0125
[email protected]
Michael Washburn, Ph.D., VP, Sustainability
(203) 832-6201
[email protected]
Resources:
www.nestle-watersna.com
www.recycling-reinvented.org
Appendix