Recycling has not been especially successful, even in Seattle, which seems to be the city that is most friendly to recycling in the country from my experience (although I might be wrong about this). So, in an effort to encourage recycling throughout the nation, what would you say about imposing extra taxes on disposable items, such as cameras, razors, and nonrechargable batteries? Below the fold is a story about how well this very program has been working in Europe, but I think they missed some very important items in their campaign; cell phones, ipods and computers, many of which are simply dumped into landfills. What do you think? Would you pay extra taxes to properly dispose of these items when you first purchase them as new?
Britain needs to tax disposable and hard-to-recycle products to encourage manufacturers to change what they make, according to a report by the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR).
The report calls for a new tax on items such as throw-away cameras, disposable razors and non-rechargeable batteries following the success of European countries who have imposed similar taxes with striking results.
In 1996, Belgium introduced a 5 pound charge on all disposable cameras that were not recycled. Now 80 percent of these items are recycled.
"
Cited story.
.
- Log in to post comments
Better to suggest taxing the first point of transfer - the manufacturer if local and the importer if not. Then use those taxes specifically to pay for collection and proper disposal so the cost is baked into the sale price from start.
It won't come to that, probably; a serious suggestion is all that's needed. The industry would be happy to take over collecting and recycling stuff if they can avoid a mandatory tax. That is especially true for large corporations that do business in many countries already - they have working recycling processes up and running in other markets already.
This is more or less what happened with cans and bottles. The industry chose to do it themselves, and we got a pretty good (though not perfect) system where you get a small amount of money for each can, glass bottle or PET bottle you turn in (least for glass, most for PET).
That is a crucial feature, by the way: Making it a hassle to comply and asking people to pay to do the right thing and many, most even, will not. Make it easy to do it correctly and many will. In Sweden people are used to sorting garbage already, and many places even have a special container for electronics. When it's as easy to do it right as wrong, most people do it right. Add in a small payment for turning stuff in, and it will catch most of the stuff not thrown away properly at first too.
Here in Seattle, and Kitsap, etc, it is illegal to discard computers and monitors with the regular trash; you have to hunt down one of the very few recycling centers that accept them and pay a fee of about $15 - $25. Apparently there is a component or two that have some level of radio-activity; your DVD player or broken scanner, while it certainly contains its own embedded but otherwise fully functional computer, apparently does not contain these components and can be trashed normally. According to the recycling center's representative I spoke to.
Radio Shack accepts used NiCd batteries for free. Maybe Alkaline. But not Lithium or NiMH. I have yet to find out how one is supposed to dispose of these - the domestic hazardous materials disposal center does not accept them. Lead-acid batteries are supposed to be turned in when you buy their replacements.
Seen the "CA Redemption Tax" labels on bottle? A recycling incentive built in to purchase price that as far as I know has been almost completely ineffective, except perhaps to the homeless who collect them for the refund. I never found out where to get that refund here in the NW, nor did I get any benefit out of it when I lived in LA; the bottles go into the recycling crate for free.
I think the first line of attack has to be to figure out how to curb the planned obsolescence cycle, used to be about 10 years, now seems to be less than 6 months. If we replaced our stuff less often, and presumably it was sufficiently functional when we bought it, then there would be less hazardous trash to worry about. Yes, I'm whistling hard. The worst offenders are the computer field (in which I include hand-helds and cellphones). Yes, its wonderful how fast these machines are getting, quite mind-blowing really, but it is driven hard by the lazy software vendors who do not place any value on writing efficient code. The prevailing attitude seems to be relying on Moore's Law to get their products performing just enough better than sluggish by the time they hit the market. We built machines at desktop prices in the 80's that were capable of real time scene rendering with light sources. Wiped out by the IBM PC. Based on what was/is arguably one of the techically worst possible CPU architectures of the time (mostly a different rant, but I do believe it also contributes to the garbage problems today).
Years ago I went to a conference where this issue of battery disposal was discussed. Many of the vendors there did indicate it was a concern on their part but their discussion centered on way to improve the product. Having just been exposed to the TONS of battery operated toys that my single grandchild has, I am even more concerned!
Rechargeable batteries
Actually, I'd rather pay somewhat higher property taxes so I could have curbside pickup of e-waste. I currently have one bin for glass, metal, and plastic containers, one bin for newspapers, and one bin for yard waste, and it all gets picked up weekly. Wonderful! But if I want to dispose of e-waste or other household hazardous waste properly, I have to look up when and where the collection site will be open, and set aside the time to go, and pay a fee when I get there, based on what I'm bringing with me. This is painful, and while I do it once a year or so, I think curbside pickup is the way to get high levels of compliance. But that's just me.
Taiwan, not a very progressive country generally, went to a complete ban on throw away chopsticks in their capital. I was really surprised that it worked. And a mandatory tax on plastic grocery bags -- they're a nickel now each. That REALLy motivated the Chinese people there.
I think there should definitely be taxes on non-recyclable disposable products (at least where alternatives are available). For one thing, that might even out the outlay disparity between disposable and reusable products and thus encourage take-up of the latter - for another, it might help discourage manufacturers from deliberately encouraging preferences for the former.
Packaging taxes, too, scaled depernding on how recyclable the packaging is (packaging combining different materials, for example, is almost impossible to recycle) and with zero tazes on commercially re-used packaging (both glass bottles and tin cans can be recycled, but the latter can and should be reused).
Charging fees for the disposal of waste - especially hazardous waste - is counter-productive. Good citizens like you and I may arrange with our local municipalities to dispose of that old fridge properly and even pay the fee for it, but for too many people it just constitutes an incitement to dump.