By Sylvia Kay • Zero Waste Coordinator, Sierra Club NJ
Extended producer responsibility (EPR) tasks manufacturers to pay and innovate to solve the huge waste problems created by the production and sale of their own products. EPR bills are making a timely entrance into a growing global waste crisis. Over the coming year, New Jersey legislators will be increasingly focused on an EPR packaging bill.
At this time, solid waste management needs a reformation to comply with “reduce, reuse, recycle” and to relieve municipalities strapped with sharply increased waste management costs. EPR is an environmental management strategy mandating that producers (the manufacturer/brand owner) take responsibility for reducing waste and recycling products they sell and the packaging used. The producer may work individually or as part of an industry group (“producer responsibility organization”). Producers are responsible for reporting data to a state authority or appointed body which has oversight responsibilities. While states have passed EPR rulings for specific waste items such as carpets or batteries in past years, EPR packaging bills are presently being formulated across the United States. This is a vital initiative because packaging forms a large category of waste material—28% in the United States, according to the Environmental Protection Agency.
To date, only four states have passed statewide EPR legislation of some sort for packaging. These laws focus on single-use products and packaging and may involve one or more types of materials (eg, plastics, glass, paper, and metals). The EPR packaging laws of Oregon (SB 582), Maine (LD 1541), Colorado (HB 1355), and California (SB 54) vary greatly in their scope and strength. The bills of Colorado and California are the most recent. Currently, many states are in the process of formulating EPR bills. They include Maryland, Vermont, Connecticut, Illinois, Washington, Rhode Island, New York, and New Jersey. There is wide variation in these bills. New Jersey’s bill (S426/A1444) is presently being revised and will likely be ready for a vote at some point in late 2023.
While there are many elements to “reduce, reuse, recycle,” it is suggested that stronger, model EPR bills include several essential elements:
• Reduction of overall packaging material to be used
• Elimination of toxins in packaging
• Strong oversight by a government group or government-appointed group
• Establishment of clear rates and dates for reduction and recycle regulations
• Exclusion of chemical recycling (aka advanced recycling)
Overall reduction of packaging material is vital and key to this bill. Reduction of packaging material will require design changes and could be incentivized with “eco-modulated fees.” These fees would create a reward system for pro-environmental packaging. The desirable low fees would be awarded to producers creating packages that are reusable or have high post-consumer, recyclable content. High fees would be assigned to producers creating packages made with minimal recycled content and disposed of in landfills or incineration plants. Fees would be collected and dispersed by a government agency.
EPR packaging bills are severely needed to reduce the huge and growing volume of global waste. Future waste growth is linked to the global population increase, which is projected to reach 10 billion in 2050, up from 7.9 billion currently. Global waste is currently 2.01 billion metric tons annually and projections suggest 3.4 billion metric tons by 2050. The United States is one of the world’s leading producers of solid waste, especially on a per-capita basis.
EPR legislation is needed to lessen our dependence on landfills and especially on incineration plants. Over the past century, most municipal solid waste (MSW) was disposed of in landfill sites. According to the EPA, “Landfilling of waste has decreased from 94% of the amount generated in 1960 to 50% of the amount generated in 2018. Meanwhile, incineration of municipal solid waste has gained in popularity. Most recently, studies have highlighted the inadequacies and hazards created by incineration plants and the need for waste reduction and recycling has been increasingly recognized. Data and safety measure records from incineration plants across the nation are inconsistent, so it is difficult to track compliance with current safety regulations; however, it is clear incineration plants contribute significantly to greenhouse gas and pollutants. Further, these plants have a short lifespan of roughly 30 years and upgrades to older facilities can be a costly burden to taxpayers. Their favored location in lower-income areas underscores environmental injustice.
New Jersey has already passed an important plastic bag ban law (PL 2020) as well as a recycled content law (PL 2021). It now needs to focus on a strong EPR bill. New Jersey generated roughly 23 million tons of municipal solid waste in 2018, according to the most recent state Department of Environmental Protection data. It has 578 landfills with 12 currently in operation and four working incinerators. A strong EPR bill can reduce the overall amount of MSW created and decrease dependencies on landfills and incinerators. A strong EPR bill can help relieve taxpayers and municipalities from growing solid waste management costs. A strong EPR bill would decrease the use of virgin materials and grow markets for recycled materials. Of great importance, New Jersey’s draft EPR legislation would help promote employment in new areas of environmental waste management and would help welcome a severely needed age of waste reduction.