‘Don’t let perfect be the enemy of good’ is great advice, but for some even better advice… Simple doesn’t work.

A lot of my time lately has been taken up by discussions and meetings about the Recyclability Assessment Methodology (RAM), currently on version 1.1. Some of the discussions are rather intense and heated with two sides of an argument coming from the perspective of producers and recyclers.

The recyclers are worried that exemptions or allowances in the RAM are going to mean that contamination rates are going to go up. As an example, coloured PET is now acceptable according to RAM criteria, where it was amber originally (it was never red). The recycler is concerned that this means that a company like Coca-Cola, might suddenly think ‘ah we spent millions making Sprite bottles clear, let’s make it green again, because we can.’ To be clear I don’t know what Coca-Cola spent on the new Sprite bottle, nor do I know what they are thinking, but I can’t see them rushing to start making Sprite bottles green again.

Retailers are worried about their bottom line, they are going to be the ones impacted the most by the RAM, in some cases tens of thousands of SKUs need to be assessed under the RAM criteria, and some of their packaging is going to be hit quite hard by fees, in some cases unfairly in the name of simplification.

The interesting thing here. There were some vocal advocates for simplification of the RAM, yet they were also some of the most impacted by the simplification.

The RAM is published by PackUK, the scheme administrator for Extended producer Responsibility for packaging or pEPR for short. We love a good acronym, don’t we. The RAM is intended to act as a guidance tool for the assessment of existing packaging placed on the market against a set of recyclability criteria, resulting in a traffic light rating system. Red, amber, or green. The ratings are intended as a reference indicator to how easy packaging is to recycle, green meaning it is easy to collect, sort, reprocess and recycle. Amber means there are some limitations, but it is still recyclable. Whilst a red rating, essentially means you can’t come to the recycling party.

There is a key word in that last paragraph, any guesses?…

Guidance. As anyone who has ever been on a meeting with Paul East and asked whether a label that covers 61% of a bottle is recyclable, Paul will tell you, guidance means just that, it is guidance. It is not the law, just a helping hand to lead you on the righteous path to better decision-making.

Many of us are familiar with the age old good, cheap, and fast Venn diagram. It is well known that you can make something of variable quality with just two of those qualities, but to have all three is impossible if you want anything intelligible.

The RAM was produced in record time, the first consultations went out in October 2024, with the first version of the RAM being released on 23 December 2024, an early Christmas present for all in the packaging industry.

Some would argue that this was too fast, and it should have been given more time. But how much longer, 6 months, 6 years. I have sat in multiple meetings and working groups that still feel like they are discussing the same questions for the best part of a year, if not longer. The team behind the RAM had to make a choice between putting out something workable now and refining it over future revisions or sitting through torturous hours of debate with multiple stakeholders who will never agree on what is recyclable or not. Given the options, I think they made the right choice.

We are already seeing the implications of the RAM criteria and the incoming modulated fees hitting the shelves. Already some brands are switching lines from glass bottles to aluminium or plastic bottles. Fentimans is just one example that has been publicising their 250ml can range recently, after reports claiming that pEPR risks closures within the glass industry.

M&S has switched one of their own brand oat drink lines into a HDPE bottle, arguably, this may be a recyclability move rather than a RAM move, but it’s another material switch worth a mention that improves the recyclability and hence the RAM grading of a pack from amber to green.

There has been a lot of confusion since the latest release of the RAM, from questions about why small packaging like coffee pods are graded as red and why suddenly design criteria such as nanocomposites, label sizes and some flexible specifications have been removed and what is now acceptable. And that is just for the plastic packaging.

It seems for a start that some people are getting their wires crossed between the RAM and brand and retailers own RAG (red, amber, green) lists. The RAM is an important guidance tool, but at this stage it is by no means the complete and definitive guide to recycling.

The RAM has been developed and released quickly, too quickly to be anything definitive, but it doesn’t need to be. It is designed to enable brands and packaging producers to grade their packaging to decide what their modulated fees will be. It says so on page 3 of the RAM v1.1, ‘this rating affects the disposal fee that will be charged for that packaging.’ It is not a design for recycling tool.

Another common question we have been asked is whether RECOUP’s guidelines and those of other companies like RecyClass, Ceflex, British Glass, or CEPI are now redundant. The short answer is no. The RAM is not able to replace anyone’s guidelines now, in maybe 10 or 20 more versions it may become the defacto authority in recyclability guidelines, but for now the current guidelines in place are still the way brands and producers should be designing packaging.

RECOUP’s guidelines are designed using feedback and evidence gathered from the recyclers and end markets for the materials and consider all aspects of the recycling process to ensure the highest quality recyclate is produced. Which I would like to think is the same across all the other packaging industry guidance documents too.

The eagle eyed amongst you will have noticed a lack of aluminium guidance being mentioned above. Sometimes I wish that I worked in the aluminium industry, it must be the simplest material to recycle of them all. Have you seen their RAM section? It kind of goes like this:

• Is it aluminium ✔
• Is it sorted ✔
• Then it’s recyclable ✔

I guess simple does sometimes work.

Rethinking Resources: A Second Life for Your Stuff

I recently moved house, and alongside all the excitement (and challenges) that come with it, I became more aware of my consumption habits and potential waste. It’s not until you move all of your worldly belongings that you realise what you have and what you no longer need or want!

One of my first focus areas once moving was confirmed was to start going through each room identifying anything that I didn’t need or want anymore. I’m not a hoarder but having lived in the same place for a number of years it’s very easy to accumulate stuff, some of which I hadn’t used or seen for years! This process then left me with piles of belongings that I needed to do something with, anything from bean bags to shoes to cat toys!

Having spent a lot of time at work immersed in the world of reusable packaging, my personal circumstances started to highlight a whole new area of reuse to me as I didn’t want to send these perfectly good items to landfill. I didn’t want to simply take everything to the ‘tip’ and hope for the best. Instead, I explored different reuse options. Some items went to charity shops, while others were sold on online platforms like Vinted or Facebook Marketplace. Anything truly unusable went to the household waste recycling centre. I realise though that not everyone has the time, motivation, capacity or are able to access these services so many items do not make it onto further reuse options and end up going to landfill or incineration when they are perfectly usable and could have had a second-life. Suez estimate that 35,500 items suitable for reuse pass through Household Waste Recycling centres every day, equivalent to 13 million items a year[1]. These are mostly recycled, incinerated or landfilled and do not go on to any kind of reuse.

Suez also found that home movers are a prime culprit for disposing of goods (electricals, furniture, toys, textiles, garden, diy etc), throwing away up to £150 million worth each year. I think this relates back to my previous comment of you don’t know what you really have until you start to move it all! Electrical items represent a large portion of the challenge, 160,000 tonnes are ending up as waste each year with 880 million unwanted electrical items still stored in people’s homes¹.

The applicability of considering reuse isn’t just for when you are moving out but also when you move into your new home! Furniture is of course a big part of a house move and while I had originally thought new house, new furniture, everything I owned was actually all in pretty good condition, even after 10 or more years, despite it mostly being flat pack furniture that had endured at least two moves before (good old Ikea!). The choice about whether to keep the furniture really made me think about just how wasteful we can be when we move and decide to buy all new furniture or change the decoration in part of the house so the old sofa/cupboard/bed/table despite being perfectly good no longer matches the décor so unceremoniously gets turfed out.

While I made the decision to keep much of my old furniture, there were new bits and pieces that were needed. I took a conscious decision to source as much as possible from second-hand sources, whether this be online platforms or local charity shops. We have a great one near us that has an abundance of furniture, most of it in great condition, that needs a new home at a fraction of the cost you would pay for it new. And yes, while financial reasons were a factor (we all know that moving is a costly business!) the environmental impact was also there at the front of my mind, buying belongings for a house is a huge use of resources. Suez project that more than a fifth (21%) of household spending is on products that could have been sourced, quite easily, second-hand¹.

One of my favourite places to peruse used furniture and household goods is my local Emmaus community. Emmaus is a homelessness charity that provides a home, training and work opportunities supporting those who have found themselves homeless. The communities generate income through social enterprises with the main business activity being the collection of donated household furniture and goods which are then sold in the community shops. As well as charity shops, the communities also run cafés, house clearance businesses, gardening projects and clothing shops with some communities also “upcycling” old furniture, re-painting and re-upholstering it to give it a new lease of life before it is sold on. This is all run by “companions,” those who live in and are supported by the Emmaus community. Not only does reuse have a positive environmental impact but it can have positive social impacts too!

When was the last time you cleared out your home – did you consider where those items ended up? Every year, millions of perfectly usable items are discarded simply because they don’t fit a new home’s aesthetic or because replacing them seems easier than reusing. But small changes in how we buy and dispose of household goods can make a huge difference. Next time you’re about to throw something out, ask yourself: Could someone else use this? And before buying something new, consider checking second-hand sources first—you might save money, reduce waste, and even support a good cause!

[1] Repair, reuse, reform: How to accelerate progress to a circular economy, SUEZ

Pushing the Facts!

As no doubt many of you will have seen, mainly because you can’t escape it, plastic is a hot topic.

Recently a report was released that claimed plastic Starbucks cold cups are not recycled. Thirty-six cups were electronically tagged to trace their end-of-life journey. The reports data showed that only 4 of these cups ended up at a materials recovery facility (MRF) for potential recycling, while the rest ended up either landfilled, incinerated, or just plain lost. Now, I’m not going to get drawn into whether I think a plastic Starbucks cold cup is recycled, because my issue isn’t so much with the ambition of the report, but with the execution of the research.

Small electronic tags have become the weapon of choice in the investigative reporter’s arsenal for tracking waste movements. There have been numerous accounts of people placing these tags inside products before binning them in the hope of tracing their final destination.

The majority of these tags are designed for tracking personal items. A bit like the ‘find my phone’ apps which can trace your mobile phone or smart watches, now tags can be added to virtually anything from laptops, bags and keys, to even shoes and pets if you really wanted to. Their batteries can last for up to a year and they are concealable or can be attached like a keyring.

At RECOUP, we spend a great deal of time at various MRFs for our members testing their packaging and working out if it ends up in the right material fractions to have the best chance at being recycled. I say best chance, because despite all efforts to get something into a material fraction, it doesn’t always mean it is going to be recycled once it gets there.

One thing we always tell our members, is that we need the packaging in the same condition it would be after consumers have thrown it away, this means it needs to have been filled with product and emptied. There is a good reason for this practice, and that is because the contents of a pack often leave residues, which if not rinsed can alter the weight balance of the pack. When the packaging is being sorted, if it is heavier at one end, it means that the pack has a strong chance of either the air jets not being strong enough to capture it, or just being spun off in a random direction, most likely to residual waste.

The Starbucks cup experiment relied on gluing tags between two plastic cold cups (let’s ignore the fact batteries cause fires for a moment) and placed them into bins at selected Starbucks and tracked them. Whilst their intentions were admirable, their execution was flawed.

You see, any respectable MRF, should one of these cups not arrive there in a burning refuse collection vehicle, is likely to spot the cups containing some kind of foreign object and remove it straight to residue. If that doesn’t happen, it is then likely to be missed by the optical sorting because it is heavier and drops into residues, or it might get captured by the eddy currents (the part that sorts aluminium), where it is also likely to be picked off manually and, you guessed it, directed to residue.

So with that in mind, are we surprised that from this test conducted only 4 cups appeared at MRFs? My only hope is that the 4 that appeared at MRFs didn’t do so because their systems missed them, and that they also got picked out and sent to an incinerator or a landfill.

Now I am always up for some objective debate about whether materials are actually recycled, but when we have news reports and ill-advised science experiments, it all gets a bit out of hand.

The report failed to consider the waste management and recycling systems in place and shows a clear lack of knowledge of the way materials are sorted for recycling. It should come as no surprise to anyone with any knowledge of the infrastructure that these tagged cups ended up in landfill or incinerators. If anything, the fact 4 made it to MRFs should be seen as a failure in the system to divert them as contamination from the recycling stream.

We are seeing an increase in reports that take flawed research and use it to make exaggerated and sensationalised claims about the recyclability of plastic being a lie. We as an industry need to make sure that we are calling out these reports with fact-based evidence and news agencies and other contributors to misinformation are held to account.

Now, coming back to the topic of fires. Barely a day can go by without someone, somewhere reporting on a fire at a recycling facility or in one of the refuse collection vehicles collecting from a street in the UK. Sometimes battery fires even start in the battery recycling collections at supermarkets.

Most of these fires, if not all can be attributed to lithium batteries. Single use disposable vapes are often blamed for recycling fires, but the fact is, anything that contains a lithium battery is a fire risk when placed into a recycling bin, even musical Christmas cards.

Once they are crushed or compacted the batteries can be punctured, which causes a chemical reaction within the battery leading to an explosive fire which ignites the surrounding material. Knowingly placing devices containing lithium cell batteries into recycling bins recklessly endangers the safety of not only the staff driving collection vehicles and at recycling facilities, but also the public who could have been impacted by a fire either on the road or at homes close to the recycling centres.

It is reported that fires cost the waste management industry over £100 million every year in downtime and repairs alone. Reporters need to consider their options before putting people’s lives at risk to produce a story that doesn’t even reflect the truth about the recycling industry. If they really want to find out where packaging goes, there are plenty of companies that would be willing to give them a site tour. They could even ask RECOUP if they can join one of our many member visits to find out more about the recycling process, it might not be as explosive, but it would certainly be safer.

Natural vs Artificial Christmas Trees: A Look at Life Cycle Assessments (LCA)

The choice between a natural or artificial Christmas tree has long been a topic of debate, particularly when considering environmental impact. Life Cycle Assessments (LCA), which evaluates the environmental impacts of a product from production to disposal, can provide insights into the ecological footprint of each option. Here are some highlights from Christmas Tree LCA Studies:

• The most significant environmental impact of artificial Christmas trees is associated with the manufacturing life cycle stage (51‐77%).[1]
• The overall impacts of the natural tree are significantly influenced by the chosen End‐of‐Life treatment. [2] Composting or mulching minimises emissions, while landfilling can release methane.
• The transport distance travelled to purchase the annual Christmas tree is a significant factor in the tree’s overall life cycle. [3]
• Most LCAs suggest at least 5–10 years to break even with natural trees in terms of emissions.[4]
• The break even years to keep an artificial tree, such that the impacts are comparable to the natural tree purchased annually, is dependent on the End-of-Life option for the natural tree.[5]

A bit of DIY?

ESU sustainability services offer a Christmas Tree LCA calculator. Users can enter travel distances and Christmas Tree types to calculate more relevant results to their situation. https://esu-services.ch/software/christmastrees/

See the perspective:

Another important aspect of Life Cycle Assessment that can be useful in our decision-making is putting things in perspective. For example, in the case of packaging, a lot of attention is often attracted to the environmental impact of certain packaging types, while packaging only contributes to a small proportion of the total product impact (e.g. packaging accounts for less than 1% of the total impact of packaged meat).[6]

The impact of the tree life cycle, for all scenarios, is less than 0.1% of a person’s annual carbon footprint.[7]  Therefore, carpooling or biking to work only one to three weeks per year would offset the carbon emissions from both types of Christmas trees.[8]

It is also not the main contributor to the environmental impact of festive activities, where unnecessary purchases and food waste will have a higher impact.

Relative  impact of common festive activities kgCO2eq, adapted from https://esu-services.ch/software/christmastrees/

Both natural and artificial Christmas trees have environmental trade-offs. To minimise your impact:

• Choose a locally sourced natural cut tree and compost or mulch it at the end-of-life or
• Rent/reuse potted natural trees or
• Invest in a high-quality artificial tree (second-hand even better!) and commit to reusing it for a decade or more.

LCA is a powerful tool for decision-making. In the case of Christmas Trees, it can help identify the “hot spots” in the product lifecycle, understand trade-offs, facilitate better design and identify the less impactful process or treatment.

The RECOUP and BPF LCA Library contains various studies describing the environmental impact of plastic materials, products, production processes, recycling, and waste management. RECOUP also offer an LCA Service which can help to conduct tailored LCA studies on products and services.

For more information on the LCA Library or LCA Service get in touch lca@recoup.org

[1] Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of an  Artificial Christmas Tree and  a Natural Christmas Tree, 2010

[2] Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of an  Artificial Christmas Tree and  a Natural Christmas Tree, 2010

[3] Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of an  Artificial Christmas Tree and  a Natural Christmas Tree, 2010

[4] https://www.thinkstep-anz.com/resrc/blogs/pine-or-plastic-the-sustainability-of-christmas-trees-lca/

[5] Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of an  Artificial Christmas Tree and  a Natural Christmas Tree, 2010

[6]https://pureadmin.qub.ac.uk/ws/files/258397198/Accepted_Manuscript_Comparative_life_cycle_analysis_of_a_biodegradable_multilayer_film_and_a_conventional_multilayer_film_for_fresh_meat_modified_atmosphere_packaging_and_effectively_accounting_for_shelf_life.pdf

[7] Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of an  Artificial Christmas Tree and  a Natural Christmas Tree, 2010

[8] https://www.christmastrees-wi.org/uploads/content_files/files/LCA_Christmas_Tree_ellipsos.pdf

Let’s Not Overlook It: Why Washing Deserves More Attention In The Reuse Revolution

While RECOUP have been working on and researching the topic of reuse for a couple of years now, it wasn’t until recently that we visited a reusable packaging washing facility to see for ourselves how this phase of the reuse system operates.  I think it’s safe to say that we both left with a whole new appreciation for the role that cleaning and washing plays in a reusable packaging system!

Before our visit to Blue Planet Washing Solutions, we were both expecting to turn up to see a larger version of a domestic dishwasher.

And it was a large dishwasher, however, a very different one to what is in your kitchen!

The machine itself was a long industrial appliance approximately 20 metres long, specifically designed for servicing reusable plastic packaging to maximise the efficiencies, guarantee a thorough and standardised wash process, and take into the consideration the material properties.

On the day we visited, cups and lids were being put through the machine for washing. The inventory of reusable packaging items to be cleaned are loaded into trays if they are smaller items such as cup lids, and secured with metal nets, which hold items in place throughout the process. Larger, heavier items, such as cups can be placed directly onto pegs on the conveyor belt and fed into the machine. The conveyor belt system allows the washing to continue while the inventory of dirty and clean items are put into or removed from the washing process meaning it’s one continuous process line!

As they move along the conveyor belt, the items going through the wash process follow a three-stage cleaning process. The dosage of wash detergents and rinse aid is adjusted to the local water hardness to achieve the best results. During the main wash stage, items are agitated to allow all the surface contamination to be removed.

The machine had an extended last section to remove moisture and completely dry the washed items before they are inspected and packed for the next reuse cycle. The drying section is especially important for reusable plastic packaging, requiring additional drying time compared to other materials. Once through the drying process the packaging is ready for reuse! Visual quality checks ensure cleanliness, further quality checks and tests are tailored to individual reusable packaging provider needs, packaging types and products.

The cleaning process achieves its maximum environmental and commercial efficiencies when the washing system works at full capacity. Impressively the machine we saw can wash up to 10,000 items per hour and be on 24/7 if needed, with some scheduled maintenance breaks.

The use of reusable packaging is growing, particularly reusable plastic packaging. The BPF forecast that by 2035 the adoption of reusable plastic products, including packaging, will significantly increase, representing up to 13% of plastic waste flows[1]. We are seeing more and more reuse systems utilising plastic coming to market. For example, this year Abel & Cole launched their award winning (a RECOUP Award being one of those!) Club Zero refillable milk bottle. This system uses a bottle made from polypropylene (PP) that allows for multiple refills and is also recyclable, when the time comes. Customers return the bottles to Abel & Cole for washing once used; by reusing these bottles just 4 times it cuts the carbon footprint of single-use plastic milk bottles in half[2].

Another example that has recently come to market, that is also part of a reuse return system, is the Ocado pilot of online reusable packaging[3]. The system utilises a plastic container that is pre-filled with product, designed to deliver food cupboard staples and laundry products to customers. When they are empty, the containers are returned to Ocado delivery staff for their next delivery.

What both of these examples have in common is the need for the packaging to be washed once it is returned, to refill it and return it to the system for its next use. A lot of focus has been given to the introduction of, and trial of, reusable packaging at the point of sale, but sometimes we forget that without appropriate washing infrastructure, the whole system would collapse. Washing is a crucial step in any reuse model ensuring that products are safe to reuse, maintaining hygiene standards and extending the life of packaging.

There is a lot of innovation already happening in the process, alongside multiple calls for further development of the washing process. A standardised and certified washing protocol that can help all washing facilities align and provide top-quality results, is yet to be developed. Standardisation of the packaging items will also help increase the process efficiency and create a foundation for automating inventory, loading, and packaging clean items for further reuse. Incorporation of technologies based on AI, RFID, QR codes, etc, can enhance systems with real time data and provide solutions for allergen control, quality assurance, tamper evidence and consumer communications.

So, next time you use reusable packaging that is going back into a reuse system, take a moment to appreciate the cleaning process that made it possible and the ongoing developments that are happening to improve reuse systems. Without washing, the cycle of reuse would simply not work!

Read more about RECOUP’s work on reuse here: RECOUP | Reuse

[1] Recycling Roadmap

[2] Club Zero Refillable Milk

[3] Ocado first to pilot online reusable packaging scheme | News | The Grocer

All That Glitters Is Not Gold!

­Earlier this year, I was patiently doing my very best to encourage my teenage son to revise for his mocks when he said “What’s the point?  It’s not like I’ll be able to afford my own home and we’re all going die from Climate Change anyway.”  Needless to say, I was both horrified and heart broken and Ok a part of me did think perhaps he was just being flippant to dodge his revision but even still, it really got me thinking. By the nature of my job, you would expect me to be interested in the natural world but just lately, when I reflected on my son’s comments, I realised that I had been checking out. My morning browse through my news app has been swapped for a lazy scroll through YouTube shorts!

On the one hand news agencies and environmental groups have done the most amazing Job of informing us about climate change, habitat loss and a whole raft of environmental challenges but, do you know what….. I’m over informed on these issues -I GET WHAT THE PROBLEM IS!!!!! It is no wonder then that a Woodland Trust survey found 65% of adults[1] are worried about climate change and that this figure is even higher amongst young people.  I don’t want to know about political promises or global pacts -it’s too remote and outside of my control. What I really feel I need to know and want to know is ‘what I can do right now’.  What I want is hope, and some sense of control – a little more can do if you please!

Yes, we need to make massive amounts of changes but let’s take a different view. Sustainable lifestyles shouldn’t focus on loss rather what we gain. Change that makes us feel good, hopeful and change that is easy and fun! After talking with my son and reading headlines of raging eco anxiety amongst teens and young people, I feel adults have a moral responsibility to gift our young people some hope… and fun too!

A recent visit to a school furthered my thinking on this.  Change needs to be relevant and specific to young peoples lives. I hate to say it, but recycling milk bottles just isn’t going to cut it, a prom however is an altogether different consideration. The leavers prom is a ubiquitous feature on most school’s calendars.  The end of stressful exams, the transition from uniform clad children to young adults and the promise of a long, and hopefully gloriously sunny summer. It is a hotly anticipated celebratory rite of passage which is keenly awaited by school staff and students alike. On the surface, the promise of limousines, sharp suits and glittery prom gowns can be utterly thrilling and all consuming. But, underneath the bright lights, sequins and fake lashes there is another measure of consumption which is altogether much more troubling.

In an age where we are more and more aware of the ramifications of climate change, resource inefficiency and biodiversity loss due to humans’ insatiable desire to consume and purchase, the idea of a ‘prom do’ can feel a little…well, privileged and careless.  Let’s face it, prom night dresses are famous for being worn once and never seen again -a night of glory enabled by synthetic materials, glitter and sequins. Aside from the microplastic polluting potential of such materials, the energy and transportation carbon footprint alone for this single use item feels indulgent.

However, ‘prom dos’ offer an opportunity.  Often, they are organised in school by young people for young people meaning they have the power to make change in their hands![2] In these settings, young people are surrounded by adults and teachers who are committed to their education, development and welfare both academically and emotionally.   Children and young people need to be educated and supported to confidently make sustainable decisions which help mitigate climate change and resource depletion though informed smart savvy choices.

So, if you too are all about ‘can do’ we’d love to hear from you. We are looking for companies to partner us in creating a sustainable prom guide for young people. An honest guide which does talk about the ‘issues’ but, importantly, spends way more time talking about intelligent sustainable choices for prom wear, beauty, transport, venues, decorations and food.  Changing mindsets from one of restriction, loss and worry to one which is hopeful and joyful about the future because they are better informed and better supported to take their first steps in navigating a life that will require them to think creatively and ‘do different’ to ensure a safe and secure future for all.

Let’s choose hope. Let’s do something remarkable!

[1] Young People’s Climate Anxiety Soaring – Woodland Trust

[2] https://carbonliteracy.com/climate-change-mental-health-addressing-eco-anxiety/

My Entry Into the Waste Management Industry

I never thought that post-university I would end up in the waste management industry… I didn’t acknowledge or consider where my rubbish went after I was done with it, and even less so in university where we had one general waste bin, and a makeshift recycling bin (that was just a cardboard box from one of the hundreds of deliveries we had arriving each month because we were all girls). Also, we only used this box to collect glass and cardboard in because we didn’t want the general waste bin to be heavy when taking it through the kitchen… into the corridor… into the lift… through another corridor… outside… around the building… you get the idea.

So, avoiding really thinking about bins and rubbish was great until I moved back home and got my first graduate job. I had no option but to face the thing I dreaded doing the most at university (and still do at home); I was faced with the challenge of bins. I had no idea bins and rubbish caused so much chaos for so many different people. And, oh, do I wish I was still slightly naïve about it.

I was working within a local authority as a waste and recycling assistant helping households and flats understand different waste processes and which bins they should be using for different materials. Within 10 months of that role, I think I had seen every sight you could think of when it comes to domestic waste collections, bins and the public. Some more pleasant than others, but some that have been engrained in my brain ever since. Every week we were faced with bin stores that had recycling bins brimming with black bags, textiles and other non-recyclable objects that continued to grow due to collection restrictions.

Just from my own actions, I think waste disposal and recycling can take a seat on the back burner for many different reasons (and not just because it might be slightly gross). It is quietly easily forgettable when it comes to our everyday lives which are increasingly chaotic and busy. We use items for what we need them for and then they just go in the bin. Therefore, when it comes to disposing of our waste, it is only a passing thought with usually no further consideration about what happens once it has been taken. At least that is how I felt prior to working in the industry. It takes me back to my time at university where I now feel apologetic and wish I had the knowledge I do today about waste and recycling, as simple actions can make such a big difference. I now know that the wrong item being in the wrong bin can cause lots of issues later down the line.

Learning as I go…

At the beginning it was a real test for me to absorb all this knowledge about kerbside collections, contamination, Material Recovery Facilities (MRF) and whatever else. It was a whole new language, and I guess this can be said for anyone going into their first roles or changing careers into entirely new sectors.

Becoming a part of a waste education team where no previous residential communications had been established worked in my favour, as it has meant that we, as a team, were effectively starting from the drawing board with only a blueprint of waste services, collections and other bits to help. This seemed to be the case for many other local authorities I had spoken to, and helped me understand why people struggle with, and may not want to think about, recycling and waste disposal. It is because the information is never usually there to begin with, or it is limited. So, how can we expect people to make the right choices if there is no guidance?

Now I know that education and resident communications can really influence the efficiency and knowledge of different waste management services local authorities offer and, of course, inform residents on what to do and how to do it correctly, helping protect the environment. The biggest issue I found is that all local authorities have their own unique way of waste collection, using different bin colours, sacks or boxes, and allowing different items to be disposed of in each bin. This is something of which I have learned even more about since joining RECOUP.

There is no standardised procedure for waste disposal, and that became a difficult challenge when trying to overcome contamination rates. Combined with the lack of communications for residents to read, it really felt like we were fighting a losing battle. Hopefully, with introduction of the new Simpler Recycling legislation this will cut the confusion and make recycling more straightforward.

Speaking with residents was difficult. It highlighted the challenge of not having the correct procedures and information in place to address these issues when waste collections have been implemented for so long. At the beginning, I felt like a fraud speaking to them about their waste and recycling when I had no idea about it either; every step was a learning curve but soon it became second nature. Answering questions like: “why wasn’t my bin collected?”, “why didn’t we know about this?” or “what do I actually put in each bin?” became a regular occurrence.

What was obvious from these encounters was that people find household recycling really challenging, and I agree. This was especially prevalent when speaking to people who had recently moved houses from different cities or counties. Research from DEFRA finds that the recycling rate was at 43.3% at the end of March 2023^[1]. Unisan suggests that the reason for lower recycling rates is due to collection difficulties because of contamination from misinformation and lack of awareness, and that there should be a larger effort to improve recycling infrastructure^[2].

These difficulties lead to a significant loss of resources that could have been recycled and can create an accumulation of waste and environmental problems. When researching into this further, I found that WRAP released a report in 2022 stating that 84% of UK households unintentionally contaminate their recycling bins through “wish-cycling”^[3]. This tells us that the want to recycle is there, but it can be complicated knowing what your local authority accepts for recycling due to differing MRF contracts and methods of collection.

Therefore, changes to recycling collections through the Simpler Recycling legislation is ambitious, but necessary. Commitment towards a “common-sense approach” is what is needed^[4], but then the issue of infrastructure to support this change comes into question. However, from a household perspective this could be the change that is needed to reduce the contamination rates and “wish-cycling”. Standardising what we should be recycling is the first hurdle but communicating that to residents should be prioritised afterwards as this is what is going to make the biggest difference to the quantities we recycle. Stopping the confusion that many people face by addressing the issue at hand seems simple, but will it be enough?

What I have learned…

Having now been in the waste management industry for nearly a year I can say that, despite the ordeal I have experienced seeing many different bin stores and answering the same questions repeatedly, it is quite rewarding knowing that you are a part of a magnitude of different people who are working towards a common goal of a cleaner, healthier Earth, and rallying for a more circular economy when it comes to waste and sustainable choices.

I think as we progress and implement recycling policies, more local authorities will produce educational campaigns and be more active in their pursuit for less contamination, which in turn will mean higher quality recycling. It is beneficial for them, the world, and for us. It is about time we took the waste we create more seriously. From finishing university to now, I can confidently say that I have found the challenge of understanding the waste management industry very interesting, and I am still learning every day. There is still so much room for improvement, and choices made in the future through developments in technology and government legislation will have a major impact on public wellbeing and ultimately the future health of our planet.

[1] Local authority collected waste management – annual results 2022/23 – GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)

[2] Recycling in the UK: How Much Recycling Actually Gets Recycled? | Unisan UK

[3] 84% of UK households are unintentionally contaminating their recycling bins | WRAP

[4] Simpler recycling collections and tougher regulation to reform waste system – GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)

Reuse Has To Be Convenient And …

Over a year ago, my fruit and vegetable delivery service finally responded to customers’ requests, including mine. Since COVID times, the business has been asked to reuse delivery cardboard boxes. I asked for it through customer surveys and emails. I was not alone; it was in newsletters occasionally: “We know you want reuse, we are looking for ways to make it work.” And they did and offered to take cardboard boxes back for reuse. I could not be happier!

How many times have I returned the box for reuse since the box reuse scheme started?

Three times ☹. ( It’s a weekly delivery).

Is return too complicated? Not at all. All I am asked for is to carefully cut packaging tape instead of pulling it off, flatten the box, and leave it outside for collection the night before delivery.

Were boxes too damaged to be reused? No, most of the time, the box still looked new and was perfectly suitable for return.

What seemed like an easily achievable action for a dedicated reuser like me, in reality, required much effort.

Why?

Returning the box is only a tiny step different from the default behaviour – recycling. Instead of taking the box out with recycling, I needed to keep it until delivery day. But even this tiny step required some adjustment, not only from me but also from other household members.

Sometimes, the tape on the box was ripped instead of cut, making the box unsuitable for reuse.

Sometimes, the neatly prepared box was “helpfully” taken to recycling before I could leave it for collection.

Sometimes, the box fell victim to the weather while waiting to be collected.
Sometimes, more creative family members magically transformed the box into a plane or Easter bunny.

A good amount was repurposed for storage boxes for a cube unit. ( Note: Repurpose and reuse are different, so while repurpose is generally good, in the case of returnable packaging, repurposing takes the box out of circulation. This is not the best for reusable systems’ economic and environmental performance.)

And other times, I simply forgot!

Through my own example, it was fascinating to see what research has shown—that environmental behaviours such as reuse and recycling are not always value-driven. While it does help when it aligns with our green values, convenience also plays a big role. So does a habit. So does a social norm.

Habits take time to build, especially if you rewrite the previous habits: cut the tape instead of ripping it, put the box out before the delivery instead of taking it to the recycling bin right away. These small changes require additional mental effort until they become familiar and automatic.

Social norms have been shown to be a significant driver of recycling behaviour: most people recycle because it is what people around them do—their family, neighbours, and community.

It is accepted as the right thing to do.

After I decided to write this text, I returned almost every box (so it’s more than three now 😊). Surprisingly, the thought of someone reading about me not returning the boxes became the missing element for a new habit to stick.

That’s a great reminder in relation to the wider adoption of reuse systems: new habits need time (allow some time for the return rate to establish), and reuse needs to become the new norm!

Recycle Ready – Two Sides Of The Debate

Introduction

The recycling industry has many facets and therefore many opinions. While there are many aspects where the industry agrees; there are many more where disagreements happen. Even more when stakeholders from other industries are involved. But while this may make things challenging, healthy discussion keeps things moving.

RECOUP’s aim is to get industries talking to each other to reach a common goal. However, sometimes this ‘healthy discussion’ can include disagreements. All with the same goal in mind, but differences in the detail of how to go about it.

One example of this is the extent to which packaging manufacturers make claims concerning recyclability. The discussion below centres on the phrase ‘Recycle Ready’ which has been used by packaging manufacturers for a while.

A request to Packaging manufacturers and brand owners – please don’t stop at ‘recycle ready’

Paul East – Head of Packaging Recycling and Design

The term ‘Recycle Ready’ can be useful in industry discussions, for example pointing out packaging which has been changed from multi-material laminates to mono material. However, why then label the pack as ‘Recycle Ready’? This can be misleading and confusing to the consumer.

There have been many packaging formats placed on the market which use this phrase. Where the phrase is then used on-pack, this can contradict the disposal instructions given by local authorities for recycling from home. This is particularly the case with film and flexible materials that are not yet collected by all local authorities yet may still claim recyclability.

OPRL has changed it’s labelling, which is primarily a message to the consumer, to a binary system. This was because they recognised that too many options can lead to confusion. In my opinion, the same rules apply to labelling the pack as ‘Recycle Ready’.

The point is the public don’t want to know if it is Recycle Ready or not – just ‘can I recycle it’, and where. While we are trying to make recyclability and recyclability labelling easier to understand, additional labelling just adds more confusion.

So why should the communication between brand owners and other industries be any different? There is a danger that the term ‘Recycle Ready’ could be used to imply that the brand has done its ‘bit’, and the rest is up to the waste management industry. Relying on the recycling industry to make the changes required, without acknowledging the time and expense that this entails, is contrary to RECOUP’s aim, as mentioned in the introduction; to encourage stakeholders to talk to each other to reach a common goal.

We must ensure that innovation is not stifled. But why not target that innovation towards matching current recycling infrastructure? This way more packaging can be captured for recycling now.

Don’t stifle innovation by blacklisting ‘Recycle Ready’

Richard Cham – Technical Manager

While I agree with Paul to some degree on his stance on the term ‘Recycle Ready’, for me there are some situations when the phrase can be a good thing, in the right context. Take, for example, Capri-Sun with its recent roll-out of fully recyclable mono-PP pouches for their 200 ml juice drinks. Currently, with no flexible polypropylene recycling stream in the UK, it could be argued that these are ‘Recycle Ready’ in that they claim recyclability but place the burden of recycling on someone else making sure that this happens.

In reality, it is my opinion that in this context, announcements by companies such as Capri-Sun should be applauded. They have taken a multi-material, multi-layer, laminated pouch, which was not recyclable, and they have replaced it with something mono material that has a chance at being recycled. We know from the testing of the pouches and other mono format flexibles, that in the right facility they have the potential to be identified and sorted by near infrared (NIR) equipment at Material Recovery Facilities (MRF). One drawback with the 200 ml pouches is that they are flat and will end up with the 2D stream, where they are currently unlikely to be sorted into a flexibles stream.

However, skip forward to the year 2027 and suddenly the whole recycle ready argument begins to make sense. From March 2027, it will be mandatory for all local authorities in England to collect flexible packaging at the kerbside. This is likely to be the case across the majority of the UK. When this happens, Capri-Sun won’t be playing catch up, they have already taken the time to research thoroughly, test and develop a fully recyclable mono-PP pouch, that is ready for kerbside recycling collection.

Whilst it is important not to mislead customers with labels offering false promises, we must ensure that brands and packaging manufacturers are not scared of innovation. This is why it is important to think ahead with a ‘Recycle Ready’ mindset and test packaging formats, using companies like RECOUP. This will help to make sure that packaging designers and brands are taking the correct decisions and direction with regards to their packaging, making them more sustainable and recyclable in the future.