Insights from EPR schemes in Japan
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
1 like•793 views
EPR insights from Asia Pacific region - Japan
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Viewers also liked
Viewers also liked (13)
Similar to Insights from EPR schemes in Japan
Similar to Insights from EPR schemes in Japan (20)
More from OECD Environment
More from OECD Environment (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Insights from EPR schemes in Japan
- 1. Insights from Asia Pacific Region - the example of Japan- National Institute for Environmental Studies (NIES), Japan Tomohiro TASAKI 2014.6.17 OECD Global Forum EPR Tokyo
- 2. Source: Contents Packaging Recycling Act Home Appliance Recycling Act (Large WEEE) Summary of lessons from Japan References 2Tasaki (2014.6.17) Presentation at the OECD Global Forum
- 3. Source: Japanese Packaging Recycling Act Achievements 1. Participation of many municipalities and citizens in recycling 2. Increased recycling capacity 3. Development of recycling technologies 4. Increased recycling 5. Promoted waste prevention and DfE Issues 1. High cost 2. Shared responsibility encourages partial optimization (?) 3. No collection target (A lack of shared vision) 4. Competition between EPR schemes and the market 5. Insufficient waste prevention (?) 3Tasaki (2014.6.17) Presentation at the OECD Global Forum
- 4. Source: Japanese Packaging Recycling Act (PRO scheme) 4 Downstream Upstream Collection Recycling/ proper treatment DfE Physical responsibility (role) Financial responsibility Municipality Tasaki (2014.6.17) Presentation at the OECD Global Forum Recycler Producer Producer Payment through the PRO Consumer Source separation 1 2 3 4 5 n Achievement n Issue Increased collection Increased recycling Increased capacity Promoted R&D Reduced use of packaging materials
- 5. Source: Achievement 5 Waste prevention by producers 7The 1st joint meeting of Industrial Structure Council and Central Environment Council for Packaging Recycling Act (2013.9.13) A distributed document. Voluntary target for 2015 (relative to 2004) Reduction rate in 2011 Cumulative reduction from 2006 Glass bottles 2.8% reduction for average weight per a bottle 2.0% 117 PET bottles 10% reduction for designated PET bottles 10.5% 239 Paper packaging 8% reduction in total 6.9% 504 Plastic packaging 13% reduction 10.4% 52.5 Steel cans 4% reduction for average weight per a bottle 4.7% 95 Aluminum cans 3% reduction for average weight per a bottle 3.0% 42.5 Paper cartons 3% reduction for 500mL paper cartons 0.3% 41ton Cardboard 1.5% reduction for weight per 1m2 2.5% 675 (103 tonnes)
- 6. Source: Japanese Packaging Recycling Act (PRO scheme) 8 Downstream Upstream Collection Recycling/ proper treatment DfE Physical responsibility (role) Financial responsibility Municipality Tasaki (2014.6.17) Presentation at the OECD Global Forum Recycler Producer Producer Payment through the PRO Consumer Source separation 1 2 3 4 5 n Achievement n Issue 1 2 High cost Unit contract price for recycling of plastic packaging 57.3 yen/kg (FY 2010) Partial optimization 1
- 7. Source: The contributory commission system for cost reduction 9 Estimated recycling cost Actual recycling cost Contribution 1 2 Difference Paid by producers Distributed to municipalities 9-10 B yen (FY 2008-10) 1.9-2.4 B yen (FY 2011-12) Yamakawa (2014); The figures of the contribution are from a website of the Japan Containers and Packaging Recycling Association (accessed 2014.2.9) Who can contribute?
- 8. Source: Quality of waste plastic packaging from municipalities after the introduction of the contributory commission system 10 A rank B rank D rank Packaging content >90% 85% -90% <85% FY 2006 FY 2007 FY 2009 FY 2008 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 Implemen- tation Established 1st payment 2nd payment 3rd payment The 1st joint meeting of Industrial Structure Council and Central Environment Council for Packaging Recycling Act (2013.9.13) A distributed document; Photos are from Tasaki (2008)
- 9. Source: Japanese Packaging Recycling Act (PRO scheme) 11 Downstream Upstream Collection Recycling/ proper treatment DfE Physical responsibility (role) Financial responsibility Municipality Tasaki (2014.6.17) Presentation at the OECD Global Forum Recycler Producer Producer Payment through the PRO Consumer Source separation 1 2 3 4 5 n Achievement n Issue 1 2 5 Sale in market -> Export 4 Prevention ? Insufficient waste prevention? Competition between EPR schemes and the market 3 No collection target (A shared vision) 1
- 10. Source: Japanese Large WEEE Recycling Act Achievements 1. Difficult-to-treat waste ended up in the hands of producers 2. Increased amount of recycling 3. Development of recycling technologies 4. Promoted dissemination of Information for DfE and personnel exchange Issues 1. Inconvenient systems for consumers 2. Improper treatment in non-producer routes and insufficient coverage Applying ADF has been discussed, …. Setting a collection target is being discussed 12 Specified Home Appliance Recycling Act Tasaki (2014.6.17) Presentation at the OECD Global Forum
- 11. Source: 13 Downstream Upstream Collection Recycling/ proper treatment DfE Physical responsibility Financial responsibility n Achievement n Issue Japanese Large WEEE Recycling Act Consumer Producer ProducerRecycling fee (charged through retailers) Retailer Collection fee Collection points 1 2 3 Reduced WEEE in the hands of municipalities Promoted recycling Promoted R&D Tasaki (2014.6.17) Presentation at the OECD Global Forum
- 12. Source: Achievement 3: R&D for separation of plastics 15Mitsubishi Electric Corporation HP (Accessed 2014.6.9) Green Cycle Systems （http://www.mitsubishielectric.com/company/environment/ecotopics/plastic_sp/greencycle/index.html）
- 13. Source: 17 Downstream Upstream Collection Recycling/ proper treatment DfE Physical responsibility Financial responsibility n Achievement n Issue Japanese Large WEEE Recycling Act Consumer Producer ProducerRecycling fee (charged through retailers) Retailer Collection fee Collection points 1 2 3 Tasaki (2014.6.17) Presentation at the OECD Global Forum Information Product designers 4 Factors for success Part of the fee can be used for R&D Factors for success: Physical responsibility R&D
- 14. Source: Achievement 4: Promoted DfE of large WEEE 18AEHA (2014) Environmentally Conscious Design for Electric Home Appliances in Japan
Editor's Notes
- Thank you for introducing me. It is my pleasure to be here. I present insights from Asia Pacific region. Due to time limitation, I need to focus on Japan ...
- ... and packaging and WEEE recycling, and then I will summarize. In the last slide of my presentation, references for details are provided. You can access case studies from China and Korea from the Forum’s website. These are also interesting.
- Let us begin. This slide shows main achievements and issues of Japanese Packaging Recycling Act. I will explain these two, about cost, and touch upon the rest very briefly by using this slide.
- This slide outlines the allocated responsibilities in the main scheme of the Packaging Recycling Act; how these responsibilities are allocated to stakeholders for these three activities, collection, recycling, and product design. Municipalities collect waste packaging from consumers and pay for it. Consumers cooperate with municipalities in source separation. Producers pay for recycling and recyclers conduct recycling. Producers have both responsibilities for product design. The blue numbers are main achievements: increased collection, recycling, its capacity, promoted technology development, and reduced use. You can see the evidences in your handout.
- One of main issues of this act is that cost is high. For instance, the unit contract price for recycling of plastic packaging is about 55 yen/kg. This is more than twice as high as the average cost of municipal solid waste disposal. Cost of collection is also high. The second main issue occurs here. I would like to emphasize that a system of shared responsibility tends to lead to partial optimization. This is a reason for Japan to introduce the following system.
- ... The contributory commission. Recycling cost is paid by producers as I mentioned. If the cost is reduced, producers will benefit. But who else can contribute to cost reduction? Municipalities can. Municipalities can remove impurity from collected waste packaging. So, this system was introduced to give an incentive to municipalities to collect waste packaging of a good quality by distributing half of the difference to municipalities. About 10 billion yen was paid to municipalities around 2008.
- This slide shows changes in the quality of waste plastic packaging from municipalities. Waste packaging of A rank has a good quality, and its percentage has been increasing thanks to the commission system.
- The other main issues include no collection target, and competition between EPR schemes and the market. After the price of secondary materials rose, waste packaging collected was sold in the market. The last issue is that some stakeholders think that waste prevention is not sufficient, and think that putting more financial responsibility on producer would work, and the opponents criticize their idea.
- Now let us move onto WEEE recycling. Four items in large WEEE: TV, refrigerator, air conditioner, and washing machine. Achievements and issues are summarized here. I will explain these two mainly and touch upon the rest briefly.
- Physical responsibility is a main characteristics of this recycling act. Retailers collect WEEE from consumer, and transfer them to collection points. Producers receive and recycle them. Consumers have financial responsibility. They pay collection fee and recycling fee. Let us see the achievements. First is reduced WEEE in the hands of municipalities. They used to face difficulty in disposal. Second, recycling was promoted. The current recycling rates are more than 80%. Third, technology development. I would like to emphasize this.
- An example is a separation technology of plastics. Polystyrene and ABS can be separated by utilizing their different electrostatic properties. This is just one of examples.
- The main contributing factor for the technology development is explained here. Part of the recycling fee can be used for R&D. Approximately 5% has been used. Another success is here. Fourth, thanks to physical responsibility borne by producers, information of downstream management is conveyed to producers smoothly, and product designers visit recycling plants as the next slide shows.
- Designers dismantle WEEE, and feedback to product designs is gained. Here are examples: a design that does not need a special tool to dismantle, labels for dismantling; and labels of materials used for a better material recovery.