Miljøprojekt, 896 – Affaldshåndtering af udvalgte engangsemballager

Waste Management of Selected Disposable Packaging

Summary

introduction

This report summarizes the results of the project “Waste management of selected disposable packagings”. The purpose of the project has been to assess:

the practical,
the environmental,
the hygienic and
the financial

consequences of alternative management of disposable packaging for beverage and convenience products.

The report describes:

Assumptions made, scope and methodology
Selection of types of packaging included in the assessments
The alternative waste management systems for the selected types of packaging
Calculation and assessment of environmental impact
Calculation and assessment of the financial consequences
Assessment of the alternative systems in relation to EU and other legislation
Assessment of practical aspects of implementation of the alternative systems
Comparison of the various systems against each others.

The project was initiated by the Retail Panel (Detailhandelspanelet) and financed through the Cleaner Products Programme, administrated by the Danish Environmental Protection Agency (Miljøstyrelsen).

In connection with the project a steering committee was established, including the following representatives:

Ms Birgitte Kjær, Danish EPA Household waste division, chairman of the steering committee
Mr Niels Remtoft (until June 2003), Local Government Denmark
Mr. Bo Larsen, COOP Denmark
Mr Torben Munk, Danish Supermarket Group
Mr Claus Bøgelund Nielsen, The Association of Retail Grocers in Denmark
Mr René Rosendal, Reno-Sam
Ms Caroline Kirkegård, Waste Denmark
Mr Søren Svenningsen, Trade Association for Bottle Reuse.

In addition to this Mr Jens Haue, Carlsberg, representing the Danish Domestic Product Supplier Association has participated in one meeting, and afterwards withdrawn from the committee.

The project was conducted by:

Mr Jan Jakobsen, LOGISYS A/S
Mr Stig Hirsbak, RAMBØLL, Department of Industrial Environmental Management
Ms Anne Louise Niemann, RAMBØLL, Department of Industrial Environmental Management
Mr Niels Juul Busch, RAMBØLL, Department of Industrial Environmental Management

Scope and methodology

The following five types of packaging were selected for the assessments of the consequences of implementing alternative waste management systems with increased recycling:

Disposable plastic bottles for non-carbonated mineral water
Disposable glass bottles for alcoholic soft drinks
Wine bottles
Disposable plastic bottles for milk
Disposable plastic trays and boxes for convenience products.

The assessments are based on comparisons between the impact of the existing waste management systems and the impact of the proposed alternative systems for each of the five types of packaging.

The purpose of the project is to contribute to the implementation of the environmentally, financially and practically most feasible waste management of disposable packaging, and at the same time contribute to the fulfillment of the EU targets for recycling of packaging.

The environmental assessments are based on Life Cycle Assessments (LCA) of the various types of packaging, handled in the different existing and alternative waste management systems. The assessments include calculations of environmental effects (global warming, acidification, discharge of nutrients to the aquatic environment and photochemical ozone formation), waste generation effects (solid waste, hazardous waste as well as slag and ashes) and resource depletion effects (mineral oil, natural gas, lignite and pit coal).

The financial assessments are based on estimates of the actual marginal costs of implementing the alternative systems for each of the packaging types.

For the environmental as well as the financial assessments, the estimates are made both for the whole systems, per packaging and per kg packaging material recycled.

Summarised assessments

It has not been possible to establish clear-cut conclusions for the various types of packaging, as in some cases the alternative system is environmentally beneficial but financially unfavourable, and in other cases the opposite. However, the following general conclusions for the various types of packaging can be made:

Plastic bottles for non-carbonated mineral water:

It is environmentally favourable to establish a recycling system with a deposit scheme, based on the collection of the packaging through the retail shops. It is also environmentally favourable to establish a recycling system based on municipal bottle containers, although the environmental benefit is smaller than the above system.
The additional cost of establishing a system based on the retail shops has been estimated at 0.34 DKK per packaging, and 0.42 DKK in the municipal system. These additional costs may affect the consumer prices.
The littering problem will most probably be reduced if a deposit scheme is introduced. A deposit scheme for these types of packaging will most probably appear logic to the consumers, as bottles for carbonated mineral water are already included in a mandatory deposit scheme.
Implementation of a recycling system for plastic bottles for mineral water will contribute to the fulfillment of the EU targets for recycling of plastic packaging.

Glass bottles for alcoholic soft drinks:

It will be environmentally favourable to establish a recycling system with a deposit scheme for this type of packaging. In particular, the reduction of the waste generation effect will be considerably.
The additional cost of implementing this system is estimated at 0.24 DKK per bottle.
It may appear logic for the consumers to implement a deposit scheme for this type packaging, due to the fact that some of the alcoholic soft drinks (those based on malt) as well as beer and carbonated soft drinks are already included in a mandatory deposit scheme.
The littering problem will most probably be minimized through the introduction of a mandatory deposit scheme.

Wine bottles:

The estimate of the environmental effects shows that the environmental benefit of implementing the alternative system is marginal. However, the estimates of the waste generation effects show that considerable benefits can be achieved when introducing the alternative system.
The additional costs are estimated at 0.38 DKK per bottle in the retail shop based system, and 1.25 DKK per bottle in the municipal system.
The introduction of a mandatory deposit scheme for all wine bottles will not reduce the littering problem, as the wine bottles do not contribute to the problem at present. It is not easy to determine whether a mandatory deposit scheme will appear logic for the consumers, as only few types of bottles are presently included in a deposit scheme.

Milk bottles of plastics:

The calculation of the environmental effects shows that it will be favourable to introduce a recycling system for plastic milk bottles, based on the retail shop system. For the municipal system the environmental effects will be marginal. Similar conclusions can be based on the calculation of the waste generation effects.
The additional cost of introducing a recycling system on the retail shops is estimated at 1.23 DKK per bottle if the cost of additional storage space is excluded, and 9.03 DKK if the cost of additional storage space is included. The additional cost of recycling of the bottles via a municipal system is estimated at 1.03 DKK.
The establishment of a recycling system for plastic milk bottles will not reduce the littering problem, as this kind of bottles do not contribute to the littering problem at present. It is not easy to determine if the consumers will find a mandatory deposit scheme logic, as milk packaging is presently not included in deposit scheme. On the other hand many beverage packagings are already included in mandatory deposit schemes.
The recycling of plastic milk bottles will contribute to the fulfillment of the EU targets for recycling of plastic packaging.

Plastic trays and boxes for convenience products:

It is environmentally favourable to introduce a recycling system for plastic trays and boxes for convenience products, if it is based on the retail shop system. The environmental benefit of introducing a municipal system is marginal. If the conclusion is based solely on the calculation of waste generation effects it will not be beneficial to establish a recycling system, neither based on retail shops nor on a municipal systems.
The additional cost of introducing a recycling system based on the retail shops is estimated at 0.91 DKK per packaging, excluding additional storage cost, and 5.59 DKK, including additional storage cost. For a municipal system the cost is estimated at 0.6 DKK per packaging.
The establishment of a mandatory deposit and recycling scheme will most probably result in a minor reduction of the littering problem for this type of packaging, depending on the level of the deposit fee. A mandatory deposit scheme for this kind of packaging may not be logic for the consumers.
A recycling system will contribute to the fulfillment of the EU targets for recycling of plastic packaging.

Based on the above assessments it seem to be most beneficial to establish recycling systems for plastic bottles for non-carbonated mineral water and glass bottles for alcoholic soft drinks. Hence, these types of packaging should be given highest priority in the further considerations.

Wine bottles should not be given high priority in the near future, as only minor environmental benefits are achieved by increased recycling of the bottles, and the cost of doing so is relatively high.

Establishment of recycling systems for plastic milk bottles as well as plastic trays and boxes for convenience products, returned through the retail shops, seems not realistic at the moment, due to hygienic and technical problems. The cost of recycling these kinds of packaging is relatively high, both via the retail shop systems and municipal systems.