AFAIK there is only one in Newcastle Co. Dublin.
Yep. I expect all products subject to DRS will reduce in sales volume over the next few years. Its a wonder that the companies that own these products arent raising challenges.
Ireland's scheme is not well enough developed for the Tomra R1, the machine in Newcastle. When we get to Swedish levels, there could be a commercial case for a few of them, but it is up to each business to decide. As of January 2024 there were just 500 of them anywhere.
https://www.tomra.com/en-ie/reverse-vending/media-center/news/2024/500-tomra-r1s-installed
I agree with all of that. I am completely against the scheme by the way.
All I was saying is that Re-turns specific objectives is to get single use containers back. If am item that had a deposit paid is recycled at home (or not re-turned in any other way), re-turn has failed.
Yes. And if they increase the deposit as a result, thats ok, as long as the total price stays the same.
But I expect they will increase the total/product price, until the products themselves are priced out of the market.
We should also be asking why there isnt a discount in home waste collection charges, if we are forced to recycle via DRS exclusivley, or face product price rises.
I know one of my older relatives just can’t use the machines as she’s not very able bodied, and won’t ask for help to use them — every time I call over she’ll have already put all of the DRS items in the recycle bin and just sees it as an added cost.
I know people will say she’s an outlier but she doesn’t use enough bottles for her to be that bothered by it tbh
My guess is that there’s a % of items definitely still going into recycling via green bins.
A lot of stuff sold in takeaways/food service also doesn’t go into the recycling at all. It’s not being brought home and recycled- you still see plenty of it in normal litter bins.
The producers are not raising objections because DRS suits them in a least worst option way.
The first benefit is green washing. Re-turn and schemes like it appears to be green, but if you think about it, they really just legitimise and perpetuate single use plastic. Plastic recycling is energy intensive and recyclate must be combined with virgin plastic to work. Plastic is not good, but re-turn scheme can make it all look okay.
Second benefit is that almost all the burden of change is on other parties. Producers had a little spell where they needed to change labels, and they need to pay a small producer fee, easily recovered; other than that, it is business as usual for them Retailers meanwhile have ongoing operational, storage and hygiene challenges from RVMs, and consumers either lose money or go to the extra trouble of returning instead of recycling. Unlike the day zero challenges faced by producers, these are forever-more burdens of change borne by everyone else.
Thirdly, there will be little or no impact on sales. DRS does not change either producer or consumer behaviour, people generally either get on with the new process, or accept the small cost of not engaging. Virtually no one says, "I won't buy that Coke / have that beer because of the deposit".
Finally, imagine any government measure that would properly reduce plastic, and ultimately end plastic containers, these would be truly devastating for producers and they will be happy to avoid:
1. Ban plastic containers in full
2. Ban plastic use for small volume / single use
3. Punative producer levy on plastic
4. Punative consumer levy on plastic
While adjusting to measures like the above would obviously also impact consumers and retail, but vs DRS these would be considerably more imposing on producers.
I expect sales volume will go up.
DRS plants the idea that plastic is fine to keep using. Sure its getting "recycled".
Agreed. I was responding to the post about significant product price rise. A can of coke goes from 1.15 euro to 2.15 euro, with a 1.15 deposit.
There will be a price point where consumers stop purchasing. In the short term, I expect the DRS deposit will go up to 20c. But who knows.
Sales will decline if the produce price goes too high, is the point.
If the 52 million in non returned containers means they can justify a ĥike in the "deposit", we will at some point reach a price point that consumers wont pay. Unless the deposit is incorporated into the existing product price, which is unlikely.
I know we are sometimes exhorted to indulge in Blue Sky Thinking. But we have entered the world of the absurd here.
How so?
A 3 or 4 euro deposit will be required to change peoples behavior. Won't happen though, The producers would be up in arms………..
How can you put a 4 euro deposit on a can of coke?
Anyone thinking the system here is the "most anti consumer" one has clearly never used many, or any, other ones.
The German one where certain containers can only be returned to certain shops is a clusterfuck and has seriously damaged the use of reusable glass (they include glass) containers - as you need to bring them back to the right place.
The German system is more anti-consumer than ours because glass has to be returned to a certain place?
We have a population of 5.4 million. With 54,000,000 euro in unrefunded deposits in 12 months thats 10 euro per head of population.
Germany's population is about 83 million. How much do they have in unrefunded deposits?
Would the Germans have introduced a DRS like ours on top of kerbside collection leading to higher collection charges?
Why couldn't you? If they are serious about hitting those collection targets (which they aren't) you'd have no issues with people jumping through hoops for their 4 euro back.
It would also force the actual producers (those that make the money from the product being sold) to serious consider better ways of distributing their products…………which ultimately needs to happen is there's any levl of seriousness about the RRR process.
It's still a deposit irregardless of how long you wait between posts about nonsense price increases.
If a can of coke costs 1.15 today, people arent going to pay 5.15 for a can of coke tomorrow.
Adding 4 euro to the cost is not adding a deposit, it is increasing the price of the product to 5.15, with the option to reclaim 4.15 of your purchase, at your own time and effort.
Net result is people just wont buy the product.
Incorrect. It is an increase in the product price.
Before DRS, a can of coke costs 1 euro.
The product price is 1 euro. Contents 85c plus 15c container.
If you increase the price of the product to 5 euros, the contents still cost 85c(same 330ml volume of exactly the same liquid), but the container now cost 4.15.
If you decide to keep the container, for whatever reason, you are now paying 4.15 for it, not the 15c you used to pay before DRS, for exactly the same container!
A deposit should be built into the product price, not added on top of it.
If the can of coke is 1 euro and people arent returning the containers at a DRS value of 15c, increase the DRS to 50 cent but retain the 1 euro product price.
Why do you want to keep the container?
It doesnt matter why; all that matters is that I paid for it before DRS and now I am paying more for it after DRS.
In the example, the can of coke was 1 euro before DRS.
When the DRS scheme was created, what should have happened is that the price of the can of coke stays at 1 euro, but you get 15c back when you return the container.
That IS a desposit, because the total price of the product is not subject to an increase.
As we know, what actually happened is that DRS ADDED 15c to the can of coke, so the product now costs 1.15.
That is a product price increase, but some folks havent realised it.
As mentioned, I have no issue with the scheme itself, but keep the product price the same and just increase the value of the deposit on the container (can costs 1 euro still but you get 30 cent back when you return the container, rather than the15c you get today), if we want to encourage people to return the can.
Anything other than that is a product price increase.
You won't buy the product until the product makes sense to buy.
The producers will have to come up with a more environmentally friendly way of distribution.
Everyone wins..particularly our future generations.
I don't see any difference between it and the current scheme only that it forces producers and distributors to do something about the issue rather than force it all back on the consumer will no effect on the reducing or reusing parts of the RRR.
Perhaps the solution IS to keep the container....who knows....
We will see advances in home recycling. If you mix non recyclables with recyclables, the waste companies will fine you.
Better that we recycle from home and dont waste time and emissions driving to bespoke recycling centres that are nowhere near when we live.
I dont know about you, but i have better things to be doing with an hour on a sunday that queue up at a machine for a couple of euro, when I can far more efficiently recycle from home.
What days do you buy the drinks?
I’ve yet to queue for more than 2 minutes at a machine, I doubt anybody has ever queued for an hour at a machine and I doubt you can prove this claim.
An hour consists of packing the cans, driving to the DRS, queue up, use the machine (never works first time) then leave and drive home again.
Versus 2 mins to recycle at home, using the waste mgt service I already pay for.
I've seen machines out of action for over an hour.
I've seen people on foot get to machines and either the queue is long with people putting in entire black sacks or machine out of action, and leave carrying the bottles home again with them. PITA.
Have the cans stored in a bag as you use them, drive to the shop when you’re doing your shopping. Aldi, SuperValu and Tesco machines never seem to fail, Lidl is a bit of a faff but always takes them in the end.
It’s not easier than it was previously but I’m getting my money back every single time. People who complain about it and then don’t return them are the main ones losing out.
