Waste streams subject to extended producers responsibility (EPR)

Transcription

1 Waste streams subject to extended producers responsibility (EPR) 20 october 2011 Michel Colin Ministry of Ecology, Sustainable development, transport and housing Directorate General for Risk prevention Service de la prévention des nuisances et de la qualité de l environnement Département politique de gestion des déchets Bureau de la qualité écologique des produits Crédit photo : Arnaud Bouissou/MEDDTL Ministère de l'écologie, du Développement durable, des Transports et du Logement

2 SUMMARY 1 Waste stream subject to the EPR in France 2 Focus on three waste streams : tyres, agricultural products and furniture 3 How insuring that EPR promotes recycling/recovery? 4 Conclusion 2

3 1. Waste streams subject to EPR in France In place: Packaging EU directive End of life vehicles (elv)- EU directive Batteries and accumulators EU directive Unused medicines Tyres Electric or electronic equipments EU directive Textiles Graphic papers Products of agricultural supply (packaging, unused products, plastic films) Voluntary initiative Decided Will be in place in 2012: Waste of medical care in self treatment with piercing risks Diffuse specific households waste Furniture 3

4 1. Waste streams subject to EPR in France Households waste covered by EPR represent approx. 1/3 of this category of waste Some EPR waste streams cover professional waste Excepted for elv, collective schemes play a major role Most collective schemes include one or more agreed PROs (Producers Responsibility Organizations) Drivers for applying EPR: Reduce risks for public health (certain specific waste streams) Promote eco-design of products Relief the budget of municipalities for waste management Improve recycling/recovery of waste streams The 3 new EPR waste streams have been decided in the framework of the «Grenelle of waste» hold in

5 2. Focus on 3 EPR waste streams Tyres : Regulated EPR waste stream National initiative Specificity : retailers/distributors have to take back end of life tyres, up to a certain ceiling 2 operational PROs : Aliapur and FRP Some individual systems, for example Mobivia Group Launched in 2004 Scope : all types of tyres, at the exception of tyres of bicycles and small mopeds Data 2009 : total of contributions : 70 Millions (182 /ton of collected tyres) tons of tyres placed on the market Collected tyres: tons collection rate: 95 % Preparation for reuse and recycling rate: 17%, 28% Recovery in public works: 21% Energy recovery rate: 37% 5

6 2. Focus on 3 EPR waste streams Furniture Regulated EPR waste stream national initiative PROs : in creation ; at this stage, 1 for households waste, 1 for professional waste Financial support for municipalities collecting waste of furniture, and collection and treatment system managed by the PROs Will be launched in the middle of 2012 Estimated data 3,2 Millions tons of furniture placed annually on the market 2,7 Millions tons of waste annually generated, including 20% of professional At the time being, 4 % of the waste is prepared for ruse, 25 % is recycled, and 38 % is eliminated in landfills Required rates for preparation for reuse and recycling : 45% for households waste, 75 % for professional waste to be reached in 2015 Other recovery rate, collection rate : still in discussion Estimated average contribution: 200 /ton 6

7 2. Focus on three EPR waste streams Products of agricultural supply EPR waste stream national voluntary initiative Products: packaging of different types of agricultural products, unused products (phyto-pharmaceutical products, fertilizing products), plastic films 1 PRO: ADIVALOR Launched in 2001 Data 2009 : Total quantity of products placed on the market : tons Total contributions: 8,5 Millions Packaging phyto-pharmaceutical products : collection rate 66%, recycling rate 15% Plastic films: collection rate 41 %; recycling rate 99% Average collection rate, recycling rate: 46%, 79% 7

8 3. How insuring that EPR promotes recycling/recovery? Two options for the producer, for complying with its EPR obligations: Adhesion to a collective scheme; the collective scheme is subject to requirements prescribed by national authorities. Individual collection and treatment sytem, subject to requirements in particular on recycling/recovery It is in general easier for the producer to choose the first option. It is in the interest of the national authorities that most producers choose the first option, for the practibility of controls, and for a better visibility. Collective scheme play a very important role in waste streams subject to EPR Organisations created to manage those schemes (PROs) are essential partners for national authorities. 8

9 3. How insuring that EPR promotes recycling/recovery? Three types of PRO: Financial PROs : they provide for financial support to organisations (municipalities, associations, ) in charge of collection and treatment of waste. This support is calculated on the basis of a «downstream schedule». Operational PROs : they are directly in charge of the management of collection and treatment waste. Mixte PROs : they provide for financial support on one part of the waste stream, and manage directly collection and treatment of waste on the other part For all types of PRO, their budget are alimented by the financial contributions of producers. Those contributions are calculated on the basis of a «upstream schedule» taking into account quantities of products put on the market. They must have a separate book-keeping for this activity. No particular juridical statute is imposed to a PRO.

10 3. How insuring that EPR promotes recycling/recovery? Individual systems and PRO are subject to ambitious requirements in matter of recycling/recovery; sanctions are foreseen in case of non compliance; In the case of a financial PRO, the downstream schedule basis of the calculation of financial supports has to take the hierarchy of waste treatments into account; In all cases, the upstream schedule of PROs are conceived so that the contributions paid by the producers are modulated in function of eco-conception criteria. The relevant criteria are proposed by the PRO. This rule will be progressively applied by all PROs.

11 Conclusion It is confirmed that EPR may be an important tool for improving recycling/recovery performances on waste streams where the situation is not satisfying. Total financial contributions paid by the producers to PROs in France will exceed 1 Billion in The impact of these contributions on prices of products concerned are not sufficiently analysed at the time being. On most EPR PROs are alone or in small number. Therefore, a need for rules on the contractual relationships between operational PROs and operators of waste seems to emerge. There is a potential for extension of the scope of many EPR waste streams in place. This question, and the creation of new EPR waste streams will be the subject of a report presented at the end of 2011 to the french Parliament.

12 Thank You for your attention. Ministère de l'écologie, du Développement durable, des Transports et du Logement