nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

The new recycling system

MoonMotorway

I am just after hearing of the new recycling system that will be coming into the country in the new year.

I can't believe what I am hearing. It's sounds absolutely ridiculous and just seems like a measure to penalise people who already recycle in their bins.

People will be charged extra at the tills and then you need to bring your recyclable trash back to the shop, to get a token or slight cash back on the recyclables.

What is the goal and the aim of this? Is it to encourage people to recycle more.

This is ridiculous for people who do recycle using their bins and it seems as if its measure to penalise people.

I don't own a car and I live in a rural area and I rely on buses to get me from A to B. I mainly shop online for groceries because it's convient to order online and get them delivered. So I am hardly ever in grocery shops any more. Realistically I am not going to save my trash when I recycle anyways just to carry them on a bus and bring them to the closest recycle centre outside a shop. Then what happens if the machine is broke when you get to the shop?

There has to be some sort of an opt out option available at the tills in shops for people who already recycle at home in their bins.

What is the purpose now of continuing with the recycling bin when the new system is going to penalise you of you don't recycle at the shops?

I have never heard of anything so f*cking rediculous before in my life.

If I wasn't so busy for the next few more weeks I would be making an appointment with my local policitian to get this changed. Hopefully in the new year I will still feel strongly about it and get onto my local representative. There has to be an opt out option at the tills. Simple as.

I didn't see a discussion on this yet.

Threadbans

Anaki r2d2

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Furze99

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121629158#Comment_121629158

At this stage, the RVM Evangelists have their minds completely sealed against logic. Doubtless they'll slink away when bin collections charges rise, there's more or less the same amount of gratuitous littering as before and the public at large are all a bit pissed off at the extra inconvenience and cost.

bren2001

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121629158#Comment_121629158

Youre statement was that there was conclusive evidence. You've not provided a shred of evidence to support your claim.

Instead you want to restart a debate that we may have already met the target via kerbside collection. That's not a discussion I want to have with you. I want you to stand over your points with data to back it up or retract it.

Very simply put, its yes or no, do you believe there is conclusive evidence to show that we will not meet the collection targets via the RVM model?

Boggles

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121629057#Comment_121629057

Well no you asked me will this achieve the stated collection targets.

I pointed out we may be already have achieved it.

Imagine without this bloated expensive mess.

Pure theatre.

bren2001

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121628974#Comment_121628974

You buy your can and pay a 15c deposit. The retailer gives this to ReTurn (I assume).

You return your can to Aldi (for example) and they give you 15c.

Aldi then give your bottle to ReTurn who give them 15c to cover the refund they provided PLUS a handling fee of 2.2c (if processed by an RVM).

That is my understanding of the flow of money. ReTurn have a variety of different sources of income.

bren2001

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121628666#Comment_121628666

Ive asked you for the conclusive evidence several times. You have chosen not to provide that.

Earlier in the thread you berated people for portraying their opinion as fact. I have asked you to backup your point. You refuse to do so.

Muahahaha

Does anyone know what is the flow of money on this scheme. Like the customer pays 15c and gets it back on return. But do the supermarkets then make money by selling the cans and bottles to recycling facilities or how does it work? Given these cans and bottles have the most monetary value in recycling who makes money out of it?

Boggles

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121628823#Comment_121628823

The impact for you will be cost, as bottled beer is more expensive than canned.

Bottles are also more damaging for the environment.

But I wouldn't worry about that, this has nothing to with the environment in reality.

elperello

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121628823#Comment_121628823

You pretty much have it figured out.

Cans and plastic bottles it is.

You certainly can avoid the RVM if you buy beer in glass bottles.

More info. here -

https://re-turn.ie/?gclid=CjwKCAiAkp6tBhB5EiwANTCx1AkOSEjBeRAsOPVFGdc5lCaDoD2UyYCwL-qqKgK_rhzBrkO0uDP-jBoCQOcQAvD_BwE

ofthelord

Hi All apologies for jumping in in the middle of your discussions - A quick Q as I haven't read the full 52 pages of posts and hadn't really heard of this new recycling scheme until very recently when i noticed the new machine going in outside the local Aldi. For this new recycling system, is it just cans ie beer/coke etc and plastic bottle ie coke/water?

Just looking to see what impact this might have on me, don't really buy anything in plastic bottles besides the very odd bottle of concentrated cordial mix. But I would buy beer in cans every week or two, so if I moved to bottled beers I might avoid having to use the machines?

Red Silurian

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121628666#Comment_121628666

Still no proof, no?

Boggles

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121628608#Comment_121628608

It was you that moved the goal posts. Not me.

The narrative was the scheme was being introduced entirely to reduce single use plastic.

When it was pointed out to you that metal is not plastic you pivoted to another scheme, which has been finally passed and watered down sufficiently enough that Greenists are venting spleen about it.

The reality is, cans were added because they are high value trash not because of some EU directive.

One of the main reasons being I imagine recycling plastic is soon to become the new dirty phrase like diesel and I imagine Green Party leaders will have to hold their hands up to that one too.

But trust me bro the new scheme after that one will be the right one. It has to be it's got a new logo.

The environment something something.

Red Silurian

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121628583#Comment_121628583

Running away because you've no proof? Nice!

bren2001

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121628595#Comment_121628595

Is the scheme designed to reduce single use plastic reduction? According to you, no. So why is that relevant?

The scheme is designed to meet the directive linked above. You cannot provide, or refuse to provide, any data to support the view that RVMs will not facilitate and enable Ireland to meet the relevant targets.

Boggles

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121628585#Comment_121628585

Holy taken out of context Batman.

In terms of single use plastic reduction.

But you knew that.

Very close to being another I ignore TBH.

bren2001

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121628573#Comment_121628573

why are we spending billions going forward on a scheme that has been proven conclusively not to work

A direct quote from you.

The function of the scheme is to meet the collection targets setout in the EU Directive linked above. Not the single use plastics (as you corrected me on). There is zero ambiguity in your sentence. Can you please provide the conclusive evidence you allude to in the comment quoted above.

Boggles

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121628570#Comment_121628570

You haven't provided any. You dumped a pdf that contains absolutely nothing to do with the question I asked.

As proven repeatedly on this thread you post in bad faith.

So we are most certainly done.

Have a good one. 👍️

Boggles

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121628562#Comment_121628562

Again, I didn't you are confused.

Red Silurian

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121628484#Comment_121628484

The only one of the two of us that has provided any proof thus far is the spoofer? Strange logic

bren2001

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121628540#Comment_121628540

Please provide the conclusive proof that shows RVMs are not capable of meeting the collection rates? You made a statement, I am now asking you to back that statement up. Yet you are refusing to do so.

Boggles

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121628519#Comment_121628519

You asked me will Ireland achieve the collection rates set out by the directive.

I asked you what the current collection rates are. You don't know.

But you expect me to answer the question.

Imagine your manager tasked you with increasing something to 77%. What's the first question you ask? What is our current rate?

Your manager tells you that information is unknown.

I imagine you would be updating your CV.

It's theatre pure and simple.

You said there was conclusive evidence that RVMs will not allow us to meet the collection targets

Nope

bren2001

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121628505#Comment_121628505

You are now trying to change the narrative. I am not going to comment as to whether we have or have not met them.

You said there was conclusive evidence that RVMs will not allow us to meet the collection targets. Please provide that conclusive evidence. That is all I am asking.

Boggles

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121628498#Comment_121628498

Can you please provide the conclusive evidence that shows we will not meet the collection rates specified in the relevant Directive via RVMs?

How do you know we haven't met them already?

Have you the figures?

Much like this scheme it's all rather secretive.

bren2001

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121628472#Comment_121628472

So you're pointing towards the incorrect Directive because that suits your argument?

Can you please provide the conclusive evidence that shows we will not meet the collection rates specified in the relevant Directive via RVMs? You said there was conclusive proof. You have said this is designed for collection not recycling. Please provide the evidence and stop deflecting.

If you refuse to do the above, then which do you believe, is this scheme about recycling? or this this scheme about collection? Please provide the conclusive evidence for whichever you believe this schemes aims to address but stop changing your position to suit your narrative.

Boggles

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121628477#Comment_121628477

This shouldn't be difficult.

If the pdf you dumped has an answer to the question I asked, just copy and paste it.

Unless you are spoofing of course.

Red Silurian

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121628215#Comment_121628215

Ok I'll hold your hand with this and send you the screenshot with the words that you don't seem capable to comprehend, but before I do are you willing to backup your statements with proof?

Or does the burden of proof only lie with me on this one?

Boggles

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121628432#Comment_121628432

How do aluminium cans fit into a plastics directive???

They don't. I have stated several times they were included because they are the high value trash.

Chit Ching!

Boggles

On another note, this scheme is going live in 2 weeks.

Apart from one cringy short add that popped up on YouTube of a bottle singing which was so brief. It took me a while.

Where is the campaign to inform millions of people about a scheme that needs near perfect social buy in?

The amount of people I talk to who still have no idea this is coming is staggering.

So why all the secrecy?

bren2001

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121628384#Comment_121628384

How do aluminium cans fit into a plastics directive??? I accepted your point the other day and stated you were correct, are you changing your mind now when it no longer suits you?

The scheme is designed to meet EU Packing Waste Directive (link below). Can you please provide the "conclusive proof" that shows RVMs cannot meet the targets as setout in the Directive below? Please stop deflecting.

https://environment.ec.europa.eu/topics/waste-and-recycling/packaging-waste_en

Boggles

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121628231#Comment_121628231

The directive is to reduce single use plastic.

There is a clue in the name.

My point is this scheme won't. As evidenced by every country I have looked at that has it.

And no Germany have not reduced there consumption on single use plastic, they have on reusable containers.

bren2001

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121628176#Comment_121628176

The current scheme is designed to meet the Directive. And the directive is solely focused on collection, according to you. Can you please provide the conclusive evidence that show that the RVM scheme does not improve the collection rate sufficiently in a country to meet the targets setout in the Directive?

I'll go first with an example..... -> Germany.