Deposit return scheme (recycling) - Part 2

kippy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122855133#Comment_122855133

It was probably me that dismissed it as not being based on the real world or my own lived experience.

I think it didn't take account of multipack discrepencies which was at least one issue.

Either way, I know myself the items I monitor myself have all gone up circa 10-15 percent in the past 12 months and the multipacks have reduced in size.

dxhound2005

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122855212#Comment_122855212

On the other hand, one litre bottles of soda water came down from 75 cents to as low as 59 cents.

jj880

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122855212#Comment_122855212

Come on lad. Soda water is down and the CPI says 1.1%. Nevermind mind what your eyes see on the shelves. Have a word with yourself! 🤣

jj880

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122855355#Comment_122855355

🤣 I hadn't refreshed the thread before my last post. As sure as Tuesday morning follows Monday night! Soda water!

dxhound2005

We had an agreement on the thread that if other people didn't use anecodatal evidence to override the CPI stats, then I would refrain from Soda Water. Truce over.

jj880

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122856277#Comment_122856277

Is there anywhere we can see what products + retailers are chosen for the CPI?

L1011

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122856357#Comment_122856357

Retailers are not revealed but are fixed. The index is categories not specific products.

The claim is 1150 retailers and >10000 prices used to calculate.

You can expand the sub indices sections here to see each product type. There is a nicer table, somewhere; I think I linked to it before but I cannot find it now

Consumer Price Index October 2024 - Central Statistics Office

thesandeman

I managed to beat the system yesterday.

I bought a few bags of cans (literally. I presume they had come from a broken box or something). They were accidentally priced slightly under MUP. They wouldn't scan at the till probably for that reason so the manager was called. She couldn't get it to work either so she got a bottle of mulled wine or something which was priced at €6 and scanned that for them.

As the wine doesn't come under DRS I wasn't charged the deposit on top.

It's only a few cent but I take a bit of pleasure over the fact that I got one over on them 🤣🍻.

L1011

Local shop sells cans from broken cases at MUP with an over-sticker that also doesn't flag the deposit on their tills; but you'll have to scrape an extremely sticky sticker off the old barcode.

jj880

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122856412#Comment_122856412

Those totals sound good but when you break it down to categories and sub categories as far as "Soft drinks" I'd be very interested to see exactly what retailers and products have been selected. For example here's what the CPI states for 12 months up to Oct 2024:

And here we have the 12 months up to December 2023:

So down from a 10% increase to 1.1%. Well isnt that handy for those who want to quote the CPI in support of Re-Turn. Give me a break.

Call me cynical but for that reason Im going to consider the CPI "anecdotal" also.

astrofool

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122856663#Comment_122856663

You have clearly proven you don't understand what anecdotal means. Bizarre.

jj880

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122856789#Comment_122856789

I said Im going to consider it anecdotal since we cant see what soft drinks / multipacks are selected so the stats can be manipulated depending on what comes onto shelves. I thought that was pretty obvious but whatever you want to cherry pick yourself.

elperello

Britvic Ireland reporting a bit of a hiccup due to DRS but recovered later.

The group said its volume declined in the early months following the launch of the Deposit Return Scheme, however, the last three months of the financial year saw a return to volume growth, up 5.9% on the previous year.

https://www.irishexaminer.com/business/companies/arid-41520413.html.

https://www.irishexaminer.com/business/companies/arid-41520413.html

kippy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122862918#Comment_122862918

Lets remember - all of these soft drinks companies are highly profitable and the Irish state and to an extent the EU have let them completely off the hook in relation to their environmental responsibilities, instead shifting ALL responsibility and financial costs to the consumer…………

elperello

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122862943#Comment_122862943

We are trying to reach the EU targets.

AFAIK DRS was supported by all parties in Dail Eireann and I'm not sure if any independents opposed it.

We have discussed all aspects at length here and identified ways the project could be improved.

It seems to me that DRS is established now for at least the foreseeable future.

That doesn't mean everyone likes it and anybody has the right to propose alternatives and campaign for their adoption.

kippy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122863776#Comment_122863776

I stated a simple fact - one that lets the producers almost completely off the hook for any part of their responsibilities in this area while their profits continue to rise.

I'd argue that the EU targets are pointless as they currently stand IF the use of PET products continue to increase (as they are in countries with this scheme in place for longer than us).

There's very little focus on the Reduce portion of the three r's with this scheme.

And yes, there are countless flaws with the schme - none of which appear to be getting addressed adequately.

The whole thing is designed to let the producers, the local authorities, indeed the state, off the hook in some regards as to our environmental responsibilities while attempting to appease us all that we are doing our bit for the environment when in fact we have just let all of the above off the hook………

elperello

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122864533#Comment_122864533

If you like you could outline your ideas for reduction leading to a PET free future.

I suspect that the cost and inconvenience for consumers will be greater than DRS.

L1011

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122864816#Comment_122864816

The only thing that works (for anything other than bottled water) is glass bottle return/wash/re-use; but that's falling out of favour in places like Germany as you have to return them to a store that sells that exact type of bottle. No bringing your Lidl own brand beer to a Tesco RVM.

For bottled water, it's having filtered tap water stations everywhere; and also ensuring your tap water system is resilient enough not to have cryptosporidium in it; or constant outages like I have in my area. Lots of 5L PET bottles being bought and going in my recycle bin cause of that.

kippy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122864816#Comment_122864816

This is the issue.

I am a single individual - like all here.

You are asking me, an individual who has zero expertise in this specifica area, zero access to actual figures and research to come up with a solution for a PET free future. Aren't there tonnes of professionals/organisations etc supposed to be working on this very problem - or perhaps those resources have now been shifted elsewhere as DRS is our magic non saviour and the impact of DRS hasn't been felt at all in the profits of those who should be looking at this?

I expect ANY real attempts to "save" the environment will add significant cost and inconvenience to the consumer one way or the other however at least a REAL attempt is being made to Reduce/Reuse and Recycle. This sheme doesn't based on its aims isn't covering any of those R's - it's purely designed so that better measurements can be taken on how much of this material is collected - not recycled.

Right now, there's ZERO reason for the producers/other stake holders to put any money/resources into finding a way to reduce PET useage and that ultimately means we are pissing against the wind - we might as well be firing them into landfill for all the good it will do in the longer term…………..

The simplest "solution" I had to "force" the real stakeholders to do something real was to place a significant fee on each plastic item - say 1 euro 50 cent - which would have a massive impact on consumer behaviour and MIGHT actually force those massive organisations to invest some money in real solutions…………..

dxhound2005

People with zero expertise can go online to inform themselves. But something which is slightly connected, the CPI methodology, gets dismissed without even being read. In favour of conspiracy theories about the supply chain secretly increasing prices in tandem with DRS. But zero evidence ever advanced for that.

I could probably spend the rest of my life reading the EU plans for plastic. Like anything else, progress will be incremental, like wind power and electric cars. If it is going to happen, it will not be painless. If people cannot even cope with a DRS system, they won't want the other stuff that is going to happen. There is even whinging about caps being tethered to bottles.

To say that producers are not going to pay for any changes is not correct. DRS and the past and future changes are all directed by the Polluter Pays principle. Which probably won't be without cost to us as end users, we are polluters as well.

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2019/904/oj

Article 8 has 9 clauses.

"Article 8 Extended producer responsibility

1.   Member States shall ensure that extended producer responsibility schemes are established for all single-use plastic products listed in Part E of the Annex which are placed on the market of the Member State, in accordance with Articles 8 and 8a of Directive 2008/98/EC."

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122866361#Comment_122866361

The CPI methodology is not intended to track the sort of price changes as flagged on this thread, it is based on a general fixed basket of goods. It has many "blind spots" and exclusions eg special offers, multipacks. For its purposes, it does what it needs to do to give an estimate of inflation.

But for the purposes of this thread, nope. It is not the be all and end all and have the answers you seem to think it does.

You are misrepresenting the purpose of the CPI. You have not remotely justified it.

Is every price increase by a supplier a "conspiracy theory"? Nope, that would be absurd.
Shrinkflation?
Changes to cheaper ingredients?
Every change made to increase profits by a company?
Do they require a conspiracy theory?

Utterly ridiculous as a concept.

batistuta9

is no one able check the digital receipts in some of the supermarket apps to show the increases?

dxhound2005

The CPI shows that there were higher increases in products which are now DRS, in the years before DRS. Compared to the period since DRS came in. But somehow those lower increases got attributed in part to the introduction of DRS. Without any evidence.

kippy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122866361#Comment_122866361

I gave you specific evidence of a specific single item that I used to purchase going from a 2 euro price (on the wrapper) to a 2.20 euro price on the wrapper earlier this year and to be honest theres nothing unusaly with businesses taking advantage of consumer confusion to benefit.

As for the CPI methodology for this specific pricing - it won't and cannot capture all of the variables. But look, if you don't see drinks companies increasing their profits this year you'll know the CPI is correct or will you?

Look,

I am happy enough to concede the point that the DRS hasn't had an adverse effect on the base point of products that use PET and ALU packaging as it seems to be a distraction for many people.

The consumers are part of the problem - no doubt. However I feel you aren't taking my point at all.

The DRS has taken ALL of the responsibility off those who profit (the container manufacturers, the drinks companies and the shops) and placed it firmly in the hands of the consumer.

I am saying very specificilly that producers aren't playing their part in the three R's and unless their profit levels are significantly adversely effected - they won't change anything.

Where is the article you have quoted actually being implemented in a manner that will make ANY different to the amounts of PET in circulation?

Badly Drunk Boy

For a bit of light relief. 😁 (Hopefully it wasn't shown here previously.)

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/8krbvsH_l-8

elperello

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122865557#Comment_122865557

Sorry if you felt I was putting you on the spot.

It was just an invitation to chat.

It seems we are agreed that removing PET will involve a lot of expense and inconvenience.

By far, most of the complaints re. DRS in the thread are about expense and inconvenience.

I really can't see a ten fold increase in deposit on the smaller bottles being a popular move with consumers.

And that's before we get taken to court by the manufacturers for placing restrictions on trade.

kippy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122866921#Comment_122866921

We each have ideas but to be fair we pay plenty taxes and fees so that people who are supposed to be fully committed to these endeavours come up with the solutions.

You might deem them to be about expense and inconvenience, I deem them to be about a scheme that promised the earth as "everywhere in europe is doing it and this has copied the best parts - public consultation/yada yada" but has had major issues since the start.

For example - you could deem the complaints about people not being able to get their refund directly to a bank card or bank account, rather than onto a flimsy piece of paper that can only be used to buy products in that particular store as a complaint about "inconvenience" - however most of this complaint is focused around the cynical nature of the implementation of this aprticular portion of the scheme. Its essentially making the scheme less convenient for people but not because of environmental reasons.

Same for issues around machines not working/people bringing bulk returns, the lack of forsight to care about people with limited mobility etc etc

These are complaints purely around the vast issues with the scheme.

A ten fold increase in the deposit would, you would think, force people to reduce their consumption of said products, which of course would lead to soft drinks producers profits being hit, which would of course put the onus back on them to come up with a more environmentally friendly solution for distribution of their product. That ultimately what is happening with other items whose use has been deemed bad for the environment………..

Getting taken to court? - You think thats an issue - see countless other areas of society where we tax or levy specific items to promote a reduction in use of such items……..

And again, it was only a simple suggestion. I'd expect experts would be able flesh it out.

elperello

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122866983#Comment_122866983

Basically you seem to be recommending that we go it alone in the EU.

We'd back out of DRS as it is and try to use it as a means to reduce the sales of products that manufacturers want to sell and consumers want to buy.

You'd hope that the manufacturers would change their production and distribution systems to suit our market of 5m people.

Maybe they would take a case due to market interference, alternatively they might leave us to it and abandon the Irish market altogether.

Either way it would be a car crash.

(by the way those RVM vouchers can be exchanged for cash, you don't need to make a purchase)

TheChizler

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122868146#Comment_122868146

We went it alone with the plastic bag levy and smoking ban.

Genghis

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122864843#Comment_122864843

Glass the only alternative? Eh?

Aluminium cans are a near perfect substitute for plastic drinks containers.

Aluminium also offer lots of benefit over plastic:

• Existing, proven, food safe technology (no need to invent an alternative or better plastic, just use cans instead of plastic)
• Aluminium cans are infinitely recyclable (plastic is not fully recyclable even one cycle)
• Aluminium has higher recovery value and can be mechanically identified in mixed recycling steams. Imagine: we could continue to keep mixed recycling!
• Aluminium does not seep BPAs into foods, nor does it degrade into micro particle pollution in the environment.

Aluminium is more expensive to produce sure, and no doubt it would not be easy on the producers to have to abandon their investment in plastic bottling while investing more in canning lines. There are also scenarios where glass is a better alternative than aluminium.

However, if we had inentivised a move away from plastic to aluminium (or glass where appropriate) at the point of production via say a high, progressive plastic only levy, e.g. 20c, rising up to €2 over 5 or 6 years; that would be many times better.

Instead we have adopted DRS which simply perpetuates a producer preference for plastic, and green washes it's use and production.

While DRS may mean more plastic containers get collected, with better separation and you would hope more plastic is recycled, don't forget that DRS has no impact on the amount of plastic containers being produced in the first place.