California’s Plastic Pollution Prevention and Packaging Producer Responsibility Act, also known as the Senate Bill 54 (SB 54), has drawn criticism from businesses who oppose rising financial burdens, and environmental advocates who argue the packaging bill does not go far enough.
California EPR: “Toughest” US packaging bill under fire for delays and loopholes
Related Posts
A recent article in The New York Times, (“Maine Will Make Companies Pay for Recycling. Here’s How It Works.” 7/21/21) explored Maine’s dramatic new recycling law. But it also missed the point on paper recycling. In a letter to the editor, AF&PA responded to set the record straight: Telling readers the U.S. “recycling rate for plastics and paper products” is 32 percent is like telling them the average elevation of Denver and Death Valley is about half a mile. It may be technically true, but it clouds over more than it reveals. Whatever is true of plastic, the fact is that for all paper, the recycling rate was 66 percent in 2020. The recycling rate for paper-based packaging specifically—like cardboard boxes and corrugated containers—was a whopping 89 percent. In fact, more paper is recycled by weight from municipal waste streams than plastic, glass, steel and aluminum combined. In the context of a story about proposals in several jurisdictions that would turn our current recycling system on its head, these distinctions matter a great deal. Extended producer responsibility programs would disrupt the most effective recycling streams in the interest of improving the least effective, while imposing large new costs on producers who are already being responsible by investing capital to innovate and use a highly renewable and recyclable material—paper.
The European Federation of Corrugated Board Manufacturers (FEFCO) has issued the Corrugated Packaging Recyclability Guidelines – design for circularity. With the aim to contribute to the sustainability of packaging, the guidelines provide the industry with a practical set of tools to implement in the recycling of paper and board to ensure the optimal use of natural resources and minimise their environmental impact. The circular economy needs recycling, waste prevention and re-use to keep materials in the loop and minimise the use of resources. Paper and board are a sustainable, renewable and ecologically sound choice for packaging. In practice, the recyclability of packaging products will be determined by composition. This all starts with their design, followed by the way they are collected, sorted, and presented for reprocessing.
Stakeholders from around the world are invited to give feedback on the revised national forest certification system for China. Deadline for comments is 30 April. Give your feedback now! The China Forest Certification Council (CFCC), the PEFC national member for China, revised the country’s national forest certification system following the entry into force of the revised 2018 PEFC Sustainable Forest Management standard. The revised China Forest Certification Scheme is also the first national system submitted to PEFC for endorsement that includes a Trees Outside Forests (TOF) standard. TOF certification was one of the innovative developments of the 2018 PEFC Sustainable Forest Management standard.