Alupro, the aluminium recycling body has hit out at plans made for an 'all in' Deposit Return Scheme (DRS) that is planned for Scotland in 2021 - in an unexpected turn of events, it may actually increase the use of plastic bottles.
Criticism is seen to have ramped up in the recent weeks for how the DRS is to operate, seeing similar warnings from the glass industry for the same ideas. Just earlier this year, Scotland had indicated that it would look to introduce a redeemable deposit of 20p on all drinkers containers that are between 50 millimetres and three litres in size by 2021. While nothing has been confirmed to be in place for the rest of the UK, the majority of the respondents to the consultations of this year, have backed an 'all in DRS', while Michael Gove, the environment secretary, has also thrown his weight behind the idea too.
Alupro has claimed that charging a 20p deposit per drink on something like the multi-pack of aluminium cans, would be likely to add a cost of £2.40, and would encourage consumers to buy bigger plastic bottles instead. To test this theory, the organisation released a survey today that found that two-thirds of the 2,000 adults who were questioned that are currently buying multi-packs of cans, would indeed switch to plastic if faced with this choice. The recycling body has said that this could mean an extra 823 million plastic bottles will be released a year.
The Executive director, Rick Hindley, has said, "We are very concerned that if the same deposit fee is applied regardless of container size, it will have a significant impact on multi-packs of aluminium cans. The majority of consumers buy multi-packs, and these will become twice as expensive as the equivalent volume in plastic if a deposit return scheme is introduced with the same deposit fee. This would be a significant upfront cost for household budgets and, as our survey has confirmed, it will influence purchasing habitats."
Instead of the flat rate, Alupro is calling for a variable deposit in order to help to combat these potential issues. The glass industry has highlighted some similar concerns about a DRS that looks to shift consumers towards plastic packaging. To add, research carried out by the consultant, Oakdene Hollins for the European Container Glass Federation (FEVE) has also suggested that Scotland would already meet its EU targets for the glass packaging recycling through the current PRN system - alternatively the need for kerbside collections to run alongside the DRS to collect out of scope materials, is likely to "jeopardise" current local authority provisions.
On top of this, the report also suggested that Scotland's DRS would not lead to producers paying the 'full net costs' of recycling - this is known as the 'polluter pays' principle. Instead, consumers would probably be the main funders of the DRS unredeemed deposits. With a best practice capture rate of 90%, this would amount to £33.9 million of funding annually - if the capture rate dropped to 80%, the funding would then increase to nearly £67.8 million.
British Glass, the Glass sector trade association, has this week also hit back at figures on Zero Waste Scotland's (ZWS) suggestion that its DRS would lead to carbon savings. ZWS stated that 1.3 million tonnes of CO2 will be saved over 25 years through a DRS, as part of its claim that the scheme is "best for planet and consumers".
In comparison, Dave Dalton, the chief executive of British Glass, has instead commented, "We have been unable to obtain verification of the 1.3m tonnes of CO2 that ZWS claim will be saved over 25 years - or 52,000 tonnes of CO2 per year - by including glass in the scheme." Adding that, "At best, including glass will save less than 0.25m tonnes over 25 years or around 9,300 tonnes per year, making the Scottish Government estimates some 500% wide of the mark."
