Countries with exemplary waste sorting and recycling systems provide evidence-backed models that combine high recycling rates, robust government frameworks, continuous public engagement, and adaptive financial mechanisms.

Comparative quantitative data and analysis of implementation challenges shed light on strategies that could be effectively transferred to a U.S. county context.

Finland is notable for its exceptionally high recycling rates, especially for beverage containers.

In 2020, Finland reported a recycling rate of 94% for aluminum cans (out of 1.4 billion sold) and 92% for plastic bottles (out of 530 million sold).

This success is achieved through a privately operated bottle deposit scheme utilizing over 5,000 reverse vending machines nationwide.

Nearly all citizens participate in the system, motivated by deposit returns and the option to donate proceeds to charity.

Public outreach, clear communication, and visible return infrastructure drive community participation and reinforce the sorting culture .

The European Union sets ambitious recycling mandates: by 2025, municipal waste recycling should reach 55% and packaging waste 65%, with material-specific targets—75% for paper/cardboard and 50% for plastics.

Belgium, Finland, and Germany are leaders among the nine EU countries on track to meet these targets.

Across the EU, more than 75% of paper, cardboard, and metal packaging is recycled, but plastic packaging lags at under 40% in many countries.

On average, about 50% of municipal waste is recycled or composted, with 23% still landfilled.

Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR), enforced by robust legal frameworks, is a critical driver.

Producers bear both financial and organizational responsibility for post-consumer waste collection and recycling.

This government-mandated, industry-financed approach ensures high citizen participation and funding for necessary infrastructure .

South Korea demonstrates the impact of comprehensive incentives and strict regulation.

Under its Producer Responsibility System (PRS), South Korea attains an 80% plastic bottle recovery rate, with first-year recovery rates exceeding 70% in international comparisons.

Central to this is a punitive “Pigouvian Tax” on producers and system managers who fail to meet prescribed targets—a financial disincentive for noncompliance.

Public campaigns and easily accessible recycling points foster broad participation, while clear government targets and ongoing enforcement perpetuate high performance.

The coordinated approach, with tiered incentives, is vital for South Korea’s globally recognized success .

Taiwan’s “Resource Recovery 4-in-1 Program” and its pay-as-you-throw model have also delivered outstanding outcomes.

Residents pay for government-issued garbage bags by volume, directly connecting household behavior to waste costs.

Recyclable and organic waste is collected separately, free of charge, as an incentive for proper sorting.

This policy reduces total waste and boosts recycling rates.

The government’s strategic role encompasses stakeholder coordination, constant public education (including door-to-door outreach and school curricula), and tightening regulations over time as participation and sorting proficiency improve .

Japan similarly achieves strong outcomes via a phased introduction of intensive waste segregation laws and the widespread use of pay-as-you-throw systems.

Municipalities tailor waste categories and schedules, iterating on the system as local compliance improves.

Prolonged investment in public education—emphasizing why and how to sort—has created a cultural expectation, and low contamination rates underscore the system’s maturity.

Initial implementation saw resistance and confusion, but sustained government engagement and incremental changes ensured lasting success .

In Singapore, the overall solid waste recycling rate reached 57% in 2022, with household waste recycling at 12% and industrial waste recycling at 72%.

Material-specific recycling rates highlight strengths and weaknesses: only 6% of household plastics and 39% of paper/cardboard were recycled in 2021, while food waste recycling stood at 19%.

While official statistics show that 72% of households report participating in recycling programs, a significant challenge is high contamination—40% of collected recyclables are improperly sorted, reducing downstream effectiveness.

In response, Singapore is piloting smart recycling bins, digital engagement, and source separation technologies while sustaining intensive public education in schools and among seniors to build correct recycling habits .

China’s leading cities, especially Shanghai, have set ambitious separation and treatment capacity goals—incinerating up to 28,000 tons per day and processing 11,000 tons of wet waste per day by 2025.

Advanced technology, such as AI-powered sorting centers with over 95% classification accuracy, supports high-quality separation.

In Xiamen, low-value recyclables selection rates rose from 72.7% (2020) to 74.3% (2022), reflecting improved recovery with digital and community outreach platforms.

Nationally, recovery rates for paper and copper exceed 50%, but low-value recyclables are only recovered at 26.6% (2021), illustrating a continuing challenge .

Lessons and challenges observed across these leading nations include:

1.

Financial Incentives and Pay-As-You-Throw: Mandating the use of pre-paid garbage bags or metered collection, as done in Japan, Taiwan, and South Korea, directly curbs waste generation and improves recycling yields.

Such models require early and ongoing public explanation to increase acceptance and prevent illegal dumping at initial deployment .

Community Engagement and Education: Sustainable high participation requires repeated campaigns using schools, local leaders, and public signage.

Singapore’s struggle with contamination despite high self-reported participation highlights the necessity of clear, practical guidance on sorting and consistent feedback on results .

Technology and Source Separation Infrastructure: Advanced reverse vending machines (Finland), smart bins (Singapore), and AI-based sorters (China) enable both convenience and accuracy.

However, these must be paired with ongoing operational support and maintenance.

Regulatory and Producer Responsibility Frameworks: EPR obligations as implemented in Belgium, the EU, and South Korea ensure industry investment and compliance, reducing the burden on public budgets.

These require robust legal frameworks and enforcement for effectiveness .

Stepwise, Adaptive Implementation: Many countries deploy policies regionally, learn from early experiments, and gradually raise standards as local populations adapt to new responsibilities.

Phased rollouts help mitigate resistance and infrastructure bottlenecks (seen in Japan and China).

Challenges: Persistent issues include lower recycling rates for plastics and low-value recyclables, initial resistance to financial disincentives, and contamination due to insufficient public understanding.

Many regions note the need for transparent measurement and feedback mechanisms to continuously refine approaches.

The following summary table showcases the alignment of policies and outcomes (selected data for clarity):

Country/Region | System Highlights | Recent Key Recycling Rates | Challenges & Adaptations
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finland | Deposit system, clear outreach | 94% (cans), 92% (bottles, 2020)

| Initial setup costs, ensuring rural access; addressed by dense machine coverage and community buy-in
Belgium/EU | EPR, material-specific targets | 75%+ (paper/cardboard/metal), <40% (plastics, 2022)

| Plastic lagging, ongoing regulation update for hard-to-recycle streams
South Korea | PRS, pay-as-you-throw | 80% (plastic bottles), 70%+ recovery year 1 | Early resistance to new charges, resolved by heavy outreach and clear incentives
Taiwan | Resource Recovery 4-in-1 Program | High overall, exact latest unavailable; sharp increases in recycling and reductions in waste after PAYT rollout | Maintaining public participation; intensive education and staggered policy expansion
Japan | Local tailoring, strong law, PAYT | High, with more than 70% recovery in many streams | Slow start, took years of education; continual, region-based adaptation
Singapore | Centralized tech, education | 57% (overall), 12% (HH, 2022), plastics 6% | High contamination undermines stats; now piloting smart tech, stepped-up education
Shanghai/China | Tech-driven, enforced separation |

Wet waste/incineration capacity goals; low-value recyclables: 26.6% (2021); >50% for paper/copper | Addressing behavioral change, leverages digital tracking and AI sorting

The core conclusion is that successful recycling systems are characterized by comprehensive regulatory frameworks with strong financial incentives, accessible and convenient infrastructure, continuous public engagement, frequent adaptation to local realities, and transparent reporting on progress.

A U.S. county can adapt these lessons by piloting pay-as-you-throw models, investing in robust community education, engaging all waste chain stakeholders (using EPR), and phasing in new measures with clear performance metrics and accountability provisions.

Countries with exemplary waste sorting and recycling systems provide evidence-backed models that combine high recycling rates, robust government frameworks, continuous public engagement, and adaptive financial mechanisms.

Title:

Content: Ukraine will deepen cooperation with Finland in the direction of household waste management.
According to the press service of the Ministry of Regional Development, this was announced by the Minister of Communities and Territories Alexey Chernyshov during a meeting with the Ambassador of the Republic of Finland to Ukraine Päivi Laine.
It is noted that in Finland, only 1% of waste ends up in landfills, the vast majority is recycled.
This is the result of the interaction of the central and local authorities, as well as the awareness of citizens
Ukraine is also planning to adopt this experience.
“Finland is a country that demonstrates high standards of environmental waste management.
Almost all the citizens of this country sort the garbage.
As a result, 99% of household waste is recycled.
This experience will be useful for Ukraine.
So, a similar process is already underway in hromadas - in 1725 settlements of our state, a separate collection of household waste has been introduced.
But it is necessary to scale this direction and introduce useful practices of international partners in the country, "Chernyshov said.
Read alsoIn the Odessa region on the Danube, the dam is destroyed - under it meter voids In the press service reminded that thanks to the implementation of separate collection of garbage in 2020, about 6.3% of household waste was recycled and disposed of in Ukraine.
In turn, Laine noted that Finland is ready to share experience and help Ukrainian communities to implement waste processing projects.
“We also have companies that recycle waste into energy.
In such a comprehensive way, we improve the ecology of our country, ” she added.
Waste recycling in Ukraine
As UNIAN reported, in July 2020, the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine adopted in the first reading the draft law No. 2207-1-d “On waste management ”.
The document establishes the procedure for the collection, removal and treatment of waste, ensures the introduction of their separate collection and recycling, provides for the requirements for the quality of the provision of waste management services and the charging of fees for such a service.

Comparative quantitative data and analysis of implementation challenges shed light on strategies that could be effectively transferred to a U.S. county context.

Title:

Content: Bauhinia Party ｜ Refresh Waste Charges
Author: 01 Forum
Published: Updated:
Like most Hong Kong people, I did not have any concept or awareness of garbage collection, until I heard that it was officially implemented on April 1 this year, and I began to pay attention to it.
In fact, the legislation on waste charging has been passed by the Legislative Council as early as August 2021, and the specific provisions of waste charging are actually very simple and clear, that is, based on the "polluter pays" principle, all waste, whether from individuals, families or groups, or according to the pre-purchased designated garbage bags, or according to the weight of the waste, the "entry fee".
As for the government's intention to implement waste charging, it is also very clear and simple, that is, to force the public to reduce waste and recycle through charging, and promote the sustainable development of ecology.
Author ： Zhou Xiaojao
Although the rules are simple and clear, it is not so easy to really land.
In order to pay less, people will try to pack more garbage into garbage bags. How should those crowded garbage bags be tracked and handled? In order to pay less, people will dispose of their garbage in public places such as streets, parks, markets, shopping malls, etc., how should such behavior be identified and enforced? As for the different groups that produce large amounts of waste, as well as the property, cleaning, refuse collection and other organizations that assist in the disposal of waste, a series of countermeasures are also required.
It is in view of the complexity of implementation that the Government has set aside a preparation period of up to 18 months for the formal implementation of the Ordinance.
However, the general public, like the author, did not really start to pay attention to the new policy, which will affect every household, until the first two or three months of its implementation, and there was a lot of uncertainty and doubt. Ming. "
But the question is, is the disruption caused by garbage charges really just a problem of insufficient publicity?
How to deal with garbage is an old problem faced by cities, especially large cities.
Specifically, there are three core issues surrounding the garbage problem: First, how to control the amount of garbage generated? Second, how to encourage the classification of garbage management? Third, how to deal with different types of garbage? The first issue mainly relates to the source of garbage: how to avoid excessive packaging?
How to promote the environmental protection of packaging materials? The second issue relates to the recycling of waste: how to guide the public to separate and collect different types of waste according to the difficulty of recycling? The third issue relates to the fate of waste: simple stacking, centralized landfill or recycling, incineration and power generation?
In response to the above garbage issue, Hong Kong has not made a satisfactory response for a long time, let alone effective action.
The lunch boxes purchased on the street are still foam or plastic that cannot be decomposed. Shopping bags provided by shopping malls are also plastic products, and the goods purchased from the mainland are wrapped in plastic layer after layer.
There was a time when Hong Kong encouraged the classification of kitchen waste and the production of agricultural fertilizer from kitchen waste. Unfortunately, this good practice failed to persist, and the public has not formed a self-awareness of garbage classification.
A large amount of waste has been sent to the countryside to landfill without any sorting. The existing three major landfills are already overwhelmed, and facilities such as waste power generation have taken more than 10 years to start.
Solving the waste problem itself is a systematic project, involving all aspects, coupled with the interests of thousands of households and changes in living habits, so each country in the disposal of the waste issue mostly adopt a gradual, tailored, durable strategy.
Japan is recognized as the best country in terms of waste disposal. The key to its success is the gradual development of a sense of garbage sorting through half a century of sustained efforts and strict laws and regulations.
Mainland China also tries to start with garbage sorting, although there is a strong enforcement force, but the government still dare not play a game of chess across the country, but choose some cities to pilot first, and then gradually push to the whole country.
In contrast, Hong Kong, which has been lagging behind on garbage disposal, naively uses “polluter pays ” as the ultimate“ killer ’ s mace ” in an attempt to “get it done. ”
This mentality is understandable, but can a simple, one-size-fits-all waste charge really solve the waste problem facing Hong Kong?
Can you encourage eco-friendly packaging?
Can you promote garbage separation?
More importantly, can the current waste charging design really reduce the amount of waste generated?
I am afraid the answers to these questions are not as optimistic as the Government thinks.
If Hong Kong ’ s waste challenge is not effectively addressed, then what is the point of this policy, which costs the time and money of all citizens and stakeholders?
For example, in order to make up for the long-term inaction on reclamation, the SAR Government hastily launched the HK $trillion-dollar Lantau Island Construction Project in the absence of full consultation with the community, making it difficult for the project to ride under the current internal and external environment. The awkward situation.
The author is not sure whether garbage collection will also face similar experiences, but if the publicity and communication in the next few months can not convince the community that the relevant garbage collection policy can effectively solve the garbage problem faced by Hong Kong, then it is necessary for the SAR Government to suspend the implementation of the relevant policy, and redesign the plan to be more gradual and targeted, focusing on effectively solving the waste generation, waste management and recycling. A series of policies, and consistent implementation.
In fact, the above doubts about the government ’ s waste charging policy have emerged since the government first introduced the relevant bill to the Legislative Council in 2018.
Although the Bills Committee set up at that time to scrutinize the relevant bills supported the direction of the Government's waste reduction policy, it also made a large number of recommendations on the effective implementation of the relevant policies. Some members even held different views on whether the relevant fees could achieve the preset targets.
The Government has also responded to the views of the Bills Committee, including improving waste reduction and recycling measures and providing assistance to those in need.
Regrettably, these reasonable measures should be perfect in the two years after the passage of the relevant regulations in the preparatory stage either in the form, or the lack of publicity, and ultimately let this in the design of the innate deficiencies, in the landing and inadequate preparation of the waste reduction policy is likely to fall into the eyes of the public "workers hurt money" and abandoned halfway.
The author, Zhou Xiaojui, is a researcher at the Bauhinia Institute for Policy Studies.
The article is only the opinion of the author and does not represent the position of Hong Kong 01.
Please email us at 01view @ hk01.com.
Please attach the author ’ s real name and contact details.
If not applicable, no notice will be given.

Finland is notable for its exceptionally high recycling rates, especially for beverage containers.

Title:

Content: Menu Close

Scottish bottle deposit scheme to be blocked – but evidence from Europe suggests it’s the way forward

Unrecycled drink containers are a huge problem in the UK. A survey by Planet Patrol, a non-profit organisation, found that the drinks industry was responsible for more than a third of the litter found in the UK in 2020 and 2021. The items included plastic and glass bottles, metal drinks cans, single-use cups and lids.

This is a concern. Litter takes years to degrade, causing harm to wildlife and habitats, and cleaning it up is expensive. Street cleaning costs UK taxpayers an estimated £1 billion each year.

The Scottish government has proposed a deposit return scheme. People will pay a 20p deposit when they buy a drink in a single-use container, which they get back when the empty bottle or can is returned. Scottish drinks containers would also need to be specially labelled and tracked.

But the scheme is under threat. The UK government is unlikely to agree to the trade exemption needed to enable trade rules in Scotland to differ from the rest of the UK. And critics argue that a deposit return scheme will be difficult for smaller retailers in an already competitive sector due to the costs of handling returns and registering with the scheme.

However, similar schemes in other European countries have prevented huge volumes of litter from entering the environment. These deposit return schemes offer insight into how effective a measure they can be and provide a possible route for implementation in the UK.

Evidence from Europe

In Finland, a deposit return system for glass bottles was introduced in the 1950s and continues today, having included plastic drinks containers for the past 20 years. The scheme is operated entirely by the private sector, with 5,000 plastic container-return machines located across the country in shops, hotels, restaurants, offices and schools.

Each time a person buys a drink in a bottle or a can, they pay a 15 to 40 cent deposit, depending on the material the container is made out of. The containers are then recycled or the materials are reused on their return.

Almost every bottle and can in Finland is recycled as a result of the scheme. In 2020, Finnish residents recycled 94% of aluminium cans (out of 1.4 billion sold) and 92% of plastic bottles (out of 530 million). By contrast, just 82% and 57% were recycled in the UK respectively.

Norway has achieved an even more impressive recycling rate of 97%. Norway’s deposit return approach is instead supplemented with an environmental tax imposed on bottle producers. The tax is NOK 6.46 (£0.50) per unit of metal and glass and NOK 3.91 (£0.30) for plastic items. To avoid the tax, producers must recycle more than 95% of the containers they produce.

Plastic bottles usually end up being “downcycled” into other items, like fleece materials. But the tax has encouraged producers of plastic bottles in Norway to make bottles easier to recycle by using more uniform and less contaminated materials. Efforts have included using approved bottle tops and glue and labels that are easier to remove. The quality of recycled plastic in Norway is now so high that recycled bottles can be made into new bottles.

Plastic recycling schemes in Europe have also delivered social benefits. The Finnish system allows people to choose to collect their deposit or donate it to charity. In Berlin, those not inclined to return their bottles to the store can leave them under bins for others to collect and claim the reward.

Public acceptance

The success of a deposit return scheme largely depends on what happens to the item once it is returned. Success is not based on economic viability alone. Any deposit return scheme needs to be acceptable to the people who run and use it.

Cost-benefit analysis of two separate deposit return schemes (recycling and reuse) for plastic food trays in Sweden found that the costs are greater than the benefits for recycling, but not for reuse. If you consider the costs involved in packaging, washing and the recycling process, then a return scheme may work best if the item is reused.

In Scotland, concerns about how the scheme will run and its real benefit are chipping away at the confidence of the public and drinks retailers. Research finds that many people in Scotland are unaware of how the deposit return scheme would operate and why it is necessary. Some of the study’s participants even perceived the refund charge as another form of taxation imposed by the Scottish government.

Communication plays a critical role. A different study, which explored the public acceptance of a deposit return scheme in Catalonia, Spain, revealed that the way a scheme is presented to users and how much information is given influences how it is perceived. More information (given over the phone) tended to yield a more positive viewpoint.

Clearly, more information is required for Scotland’s recycling scheme to be accepted more widely.

If designed correctly, deposit return schemes can encourage recycling by raising the value of plastic waste. Recycling and reuse schemes are also made more technically and economically viable if backed up with tax incentives.

But the barrier facing the adoption of a deposit return scheme in the UK is a lack of uniformity. We should not be asking if Scotland should adopt a scheme or not. Instead, plans for the rest of the UK to adopt this approach should be accelerated to get the whole of the UK on the same page.

Want to write?

Write an article and join a growing community of more than 161,200 academics and researchers from 4,583 institutions.

Register now

In 2020, Finland reported a recycling rate of 94% for aluminum cans (out of 1.4 billion sold) and 92% for plastic bottles (out of 530 million sold).

This success is achieved through a privately operated bottle deposit scheme utilizing over 5,000 reverse vending machines nationwide.

Nearly all citizens participate in the system, motivated by deposit returns and the option to donate proceeds to charity.

Public outreach, clear communication, and visible return infrastructure drive community participation and reinforce the sorting culture .

Title:

Content: Circular Economy : 18 EU Member States at risk of missing waste targets

Which countries are at risk of missing the 2025 targets for preparing for re-use and recycling of municipal and all packaging waste and the 2035 landfill target? The European Commission answered this question in a recently published early warning report. But first the good news. Nine Member States are on track to meet the 2025 targets: Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, Denmark, Germany, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and Slovenia.

And just as a reminder, these are the targets set out in the Waste Framework Directive and the Directive on packaging and packaging waste we are talking about:

  • 55% recycling and preparing for reuse of municipal waste;
  • 65% recycling for total packaging waste;
  • and material-specific packaging waste recycling targets (75% for paper and cardboard, 70% for glass, 70% for ferrous metals packaging, 50% for aluminium, 50% for plastic and 25% for wood).

Like our content? Subscribe to our newsletters!

Bad news for some countries

And now the bad news: 18 Member States are at serious risk of missing one or both of the 2025 targets.

Estonia, Finland, France, Ireland, Latvia, Portugal, Spain and Sweden are at risk of missing the municipal waste target.

Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Greece, Hungary, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Romania and Slovakia are at risk of missing both the municipal waste and the total packaging waste targets for 2025.

In addition, some countries continue to landfill most of their municipal waste and are likely to miss the 2035 landfill target. The Commission is making recommendations to these Member States, building on the ongoing financial and technical support provided to improve waste management performance. These recommendations cover a wide range of actions: reducing non-recyclable waste, increasing re-use, promoting separate collection, developing treatment capacity for sorting and recycling, improving governance, using economic instruments and raising awareness.

"Implementing waste reduction and recycling measures on the ground is key for our circular economy transition. Turning waste into resources helps us on the way to climate neutrality, increases the security of supply of energy and raw materials, and creates local jobs and innovation opportunities. The early warning report allows us, in close cooperation with the Member States, to detect shortcomings, take action ahead of the deadlines for meeting the targets, and share best practices in sound waste management," said Virginijus Sinkevičius, Commissioner for Environment, Oceans and Fisheries

Waste generation on the rise

On average, Europeans generate 530 kg of municipal waste per person per year (waste from households and similar waste from businesses). Although it is increasingly recycled and less landfilled, municipal waste (MSW) is still one of the most complex waste streams to manage. In the EU, about 50% of MSW is recycled or composted and 23% is landfilled. The amount of packaging waste generated is constantly increasing. Between 2013 and 2020, the amount of packaging waste generated in the EU will increase by 15% to almost 80 million tonnes. Around 64% of packaging waste is now recycled, although this varies by material. More than 75% of paper, cardboard and metal packaging is recycled, but less than 40% of plastic packaging - a problem in most EU countries, many of which are at risk of missing the material-specific target for plastic packaging waste recycling.

The early warning report allows us, in close cooperation with the Member States, to detect shortcomings, take action ahead of the deadlines for meeting the targets, and share best practices in sound waste management.
Virginijus Sinkevičius, Commissioner for Environment, Oceans and Fisheries

Significant differences between Member States

Looking at the report, one thing is clear: There are considerable differences in waste management performance across the EU. Some countries still have a long way to go to meet the targets agreed in EU legislation and further reforms are needed, in particular to ensure the treatment of biowaste, which accounts for a third of municipal waste, to ensure separate collection of waste - a prerequisite for recycling - and to improve data quality. However, most EU countries have introduced or are in the process of introducing waste reforms to improve recycling rates, some of which are expected to bear fruit in the coming years.

The results were also influenced by external factors, including the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, which reduced or stopped separate collection in some countries. The recent rise in energy prices is also having a negative impact on recycling activities.

The early warning report builds on the Environmental Implementation Review, which had already identified problems with the implementation of EU waste legislation. In particular, almost 2000 illegal or substandard landfills are still operating in the EU, representing a significant source of pollution and greenhouse gases and a missed opportunity for the recovery of secondary raw materials.

The European Union sets ambitious recycling mandates: by 2025, municipal waste recycling should reach 55% and packaging waste 65%, with material-specific targets—75% for paper/cardboard and 50% for plastics.

Title:

Content: Used plastic bottles, used to be regarded as a big killer of polluting the environment.
However, in Europe and America, consumer goods manufacturers have recently rushed to carry out plastic reduction actions, and let these plastic waste become a hot commodity in short supply.
According to S & P Global Platts data, the spot price of recycled PET chips made from plastic bottle waste since the beginning of the year has more than doubled in Europe.
As for the price in the United States, although the increase is not large.
In addition, statistics from the National PET Container Resources Association (NAPCOR) found that the price of recycled PET for food grades also rose to $1 per pound from 64 cents before the epidemic.
The main reason for the soaring price of recycled PET is the soaring demand for recycled plastics from consumer goods companies.
Nestlé, the world ’ s largest food company, has pledged to reduce the use of virgin plastic by a third by 2025 in an effort to protect the environment and reduce the use of virgin plastic.
Coca-Cola has set a goal of using at least 50% recycled materials by 2030.
In addition, these companies face fierce competition from other industries.
For example, in response to the plastic reduction action, the fashion industry also plans to use recycled plastic as the fiber of new clothing.
However, the supply of plastic bottles is not in demand, and under the tightening of environmental protection regulations in the United States and Europe, the future is likely to increase.
For example, the European Union requires local companies to use 25% recycled materials in new PET bottles by 2025.
Currently, only 5% of packaging in the region is made from recycled content.
# PET # Recycling # Waste # Plastic Bottle # Plastic

Belgium, Finland, and Germany are leaders among the nine EU countries on track to meet these targets.

Across the EU, more than 75% of paper, cardboard, and metal packaging is recycled, but plastic packaging lags at under 40% in many countries.

On average, about 50% of municipal waste is recycled or composted, with 23% still landfilled.

Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR), enforced by robust legal frameworks, is a critical driver.

Title:

Content: Producer Responsibility System Waste Reduction Policy Package in Place
Comments ‧ World Situation 2022 / 08 / 06
Share:
Share:
On average, more than 5 million plastic beverage bottles are disposed of in landfills in Hong Kong every day, reflecting the poor results of plastic reduction and recycling.
Under the long-term initiative of environmental organizations such as Green Earth, the environmental protection department is preparing to introduce relevant producer responsibility schemes (PRS) to respond.
In simple terms, PRS usually uses financial means, such as bottle fees and glass bottle levies, to induce "producers" such as manufacturers, retailers and even consumers to shoulder their due environmental responsibility.
Effective laws and regulations are indispensable to improve the industrial chain
PRS This waste management regulation is slightly different from the common pollution control regulations. To promote source waste reduction and recycling, effective regulations and the support of the entire recycling industry chain are indispensable.
First, the recycling industry chain, which includes high-coverage front-line collection points, large and small transport fleets, adequate recycling and recycling plants, a market for valuable recycled materials, and PRS system managers.
To promote the formation and effectiveness of the recycling industry chain, we must first have "smart" regulations, in which the setting of ambitious recycling targets, attractive economic incentives (such as refunds by bottle or bottle), and a reward and punishment mechanism for manufacturers are all key elements.
For example, the EPD recently proposed that each plastic bottle should be given a refund of at least one dime, hoping to achieve a recovery rate of 40% in the first year and 75% in five years.
Is there a “tooth ” for this purpose?
Hong Kong 's plastic recycling performance is poor PRS International
Green Earth analyzed a number of countries and regions that use PRS to manage beverage containers, and concluded that the average refund amount for each plastic bottle is more than HK $1, which is 10 times less than the corner of Hong Kong.
As for the average recovery rate target for the first year of PRS, the international average is above 70%, of which 80% in South Korea in Asia and 90% in the three Nordic countries are high; even if the target is lower, Lithuania and Slovakia are also 55% and 60% respectively, which are much more positive than Hong Kong's 40%.
The reason why PRS is called producer responsibility, the key word is the word "producer", which means that this stakeholder is responsible.
I would like to remind the environmental protection department that the recycling responsibilities of manufacturers and importers must not be missed.
The most direct approach is to set up an adequate reward and punishment mechanism to ensure that if the manufacturer fails to meet the recycling target, it must bear the responsibility, so that it can be matched with the "responsibility system".
Set up incentive mechanism to encourage manufacturers to respond positively
South Korea, a model student of high plastic bottle recycling, has adopted the Pigouvian Tax: if the market fails to meet the 80% recycling target, producers, importers and PRS system administrators have to pay the corresponding punitive tax on a proportional basis.
The author also believes that, in fairness, if the recycling rate exceeds the target, or the market adopts a considerable plastic reduction package (such as naked buy, reuse container sales), there should be corresponding incentives to promote the positive response of manufacturers and create a source of plastic reduction culture.
At a time when the Government has not yet submitted the PRS Bill to the Legislative Council, the Legislative Council (especially the Panel on Environmental Affairs) has the responsibility to monitor the quality of the policy and request the Administration to respond positively to the following key points:
1. Disclose the results of the EPD ’ s 2021 plastic bottle public consultation, including supporting the proportion of different refund amounts;
2. Keep up with the international standard, the minimum refund amount should start at HK $1;
Third, update the recovery rate target: 70% in the first year of policy implementation, and increase to 90% in three years;
Fourth, set up a review mechanism: if the recycling target is not reached within the deadline, then increase the legal minimum amount of refunded bottles, increase the economic incentive; at the same time, compared with the Piguet tax, manufacturers, importers, PRS system managers must be jointly responsible for the failure to meet the target.
Author: Liu Zhaolang Senior Project Director, Green Earth
Column name: GREEN FORUM
Follow the latest financial news analysis, like hket Facebook

Producers bear both financial and organizational responsibility for post-consumer waste collection and recycling.

This government-mandated, industry-financed approach ensures high citizen participation and funding for necessary infrastructure .

Title:

Content: ROP, or How will Kyrgyzstan recycle its waste?
In Bishkek, a seminar was held on the topic of extended producer responsibility (EPR) for the disposal of goods and packaging, organized by the WasteNet.KG. project.
The seminar was attended by producers of products, government authorities, waste processing enterprises, non-governmental and international organizations and experts.
Director of CSR Central Asia Agency Asel Arstanbekova noted that the issues of environmental safety, social responsibility of producers are very acute.
“In many countries, the topic of social expanded responsibility is already active and, having studied their experience, we would like to determine what is applicable for Kyrgyzstan, ” she said.
WasteNet.KG expert Natalia Baidakova presented the concept of the concept of extended producer responsibility (EPR), its implementation mechanisms, and the ultimate goal of which is to reduce and gradually reduce to zero the disposal of waste that can be used in recycling and recycling.
How is the situation with the ROP in Kyrgyzstan?
The issue of waste accumulation in Kyrgyzstan is reflected in many strategic documents, such as the National Development Strategy of Kyrgyzstan until 2040, the Green Economy Concept, and the Green Economy Development Program.
More than 40 laws include waste issues.
The main ones are the law on environmental protection, on industrial waste, which was adopted back in 2001.
Naturally, this document needs to be amended and supplemented.
In addition, a classification of hazardous waste based on international standards has been developed and adopted.
The legislation specifies that separate collection of waste should be carried out, for use as secondary resources it is prohibited to use hazardous waste as secondary raw materials.
But at the same time, many norms are absent, for example, there is no definition of what secondary waste is, there are no norms regulating the collection and processing of secondary raw materials, there are no norms for stimulating the processing of secondary materials, and so on.
The legislation undoubtedly requires changes, another thing is what these changes will be.
On March 19, 2021, a decree of the President of Kyrgyzstan on measures to ensure environmental and climate security was adopted.
A number of points were aimed at improving the efficiency of waste management, implementing separate collection of garbage, including stimulating the creation of recycling enterprises.
In 2019, a number of laws were also amended, for example, the law of consumption production, the procedure for handling hazardous mercury-containing waste.
What now?
In Kyrgyzstan, favorable conditions have been created for the organization of an effective management system and the introduction of expanded producer responsibility.
Thus, in December 2021, the Action Plan of the Cabinet of Ministers on the implementation of the National Development Program of the Kyrgyz Republic until 2026 was approved, which provides for the implementation of a number of measures to improve the waste management system.
The measures are aimed at introducing amendments and additions to laws, regulatory legal acts, including in terms of introducing the principles of the concept of extended responsibility of manufacturers of ROP for the disposal of goods and packaging.
Experience of other countries and international companies
Aleksandara Akirman, Caucasus and Central Asia Public Relations Manager at The Coca-Cola Foundation, noted that almost all global manufacturers of goods and packaging have committed to transfer from 8 to 10% of secondary raw materials to new packaging.
“In the next five to ten years, the companies intend to use more environmentally friendly materials, develop new types of packaging, provide for collection and processing.
At the same time, companies are trying to work with government authorities in their respective countries to ensure that such systems develop.
Now in Kyrgyzstan there is a linear economy of packaging, in which most packages go to landfill, are dumped in the form of garbage.
Almost 100% of the primary material is used.
While in a circular economy, plastic packaging is used endlessly.
The new packaging needs to be recycled.
Such a circular economy is possible.
In more than 30 countries around the world, we produce packaging from recycled materials, ” she said.
The OECD Environment Directorate, economist and environmentalist Frisief Lubinger in his speech noted that at present the ROP system is actively developing and is beginning to be used more intensively around the world.
"The transition to PPE is particularly active in North America, Europe and a number of transition economies, but it should be noted that in transition economies, additional resources are needed to make the system fully operational," he added.
Next, Givi Kalandadze, an expert from Georgia, the chairman of the operator of the ROP, said that the country has a special law on waste management, which has a special section under number 9 dedicated to the ROP.
“Also, the law has an important section dedicated to responsible persons who monitor the ROP.
Such a manager should be in each organization and be responsible for coordination, for cooperation with stakeholders in waste management. "
Experts from Kazakhstan and Russia also spoke about the system of implementation of the ROP in their countries, about successes and failures.
In addition, during the event, it was noted that the first place in the ROP system for packaging is occupied by the countries of the European Union, in which Belgium is the leader, where 91% of the population sorts garbage.
Next are the countries of the Middle East, followed by the countries of Africa, then Latin America, followed by Canada, then the countries of Southeast Asia and close the list of the countries of the former USSR.
Author: Munara Borombaeva.
Photo: Vlad Ushakov
Source: Kuramastory
Tell us your news:
BACK TO TOP
BACK TO

South Korea demonstrates the impact of comprehensive incentives and strict regulation.

Under its Producer Responsibility System (PRS), South Korea attains an 80% plastic bottle recovery rate, with first-year recovery rates exceeding 70% in international comparisons.

Central to this is a punitive “Pigouvian Tax” on producers and system managers who fail to meet prescribed targets—a financial disincentive for noncompliance.

Public campaigns and easily accessible recycling points foster broad participation, while clear government targets and ongoing enforcement perpetuate high performance.

Title:

Content: China's total waste increased by 18% last year, and the overall recovery rate rose to 55%.
Font Size:
With the recovery of economic activity and the resumption of business and social activities, the amount of waste discarded and recycled in China increased last year, but the recovery rate is still lower than the pre-Coronavirus level.
According to the 2021 annual report released by the National Environment Agency this morning (April 18), China produced about 6.94 million tons of solid waste last year, an increase of 18% from 5.88 million tons in 2020, but a decrease of 5% compared to 7.23 million tons in 2019 before the coronavirus outbreak.
Of the 6.94 million metric tons of solid waste, 3.83 million metric tons were recycled, with an overall recovery rate of 55%, up from 52% in 2020 but still down from 59% in 2019.
Among them, the recycling rate of industrial waste increased from 68% to 70%, while the recycling rate of household waste remained at 13%.
Addressing the joint opening ceremony of the Singapore International Water Week and the Singapore Clean Environment Summit at the Marina Bay Sands Convention Centre this morning, Minister of Sustainable Development and Environment Fu Haiyan said that to achieve the goal of reducing buried waste by 30% by 2030, China must promote more sustainable consumption and production methods.
The Environment Agency pointed out that due to the slowdown in construction activity and the export market demand for recyclables last year, the amount of waste recycling was lower than before the epidemic, especially construction and demolition waste, wood and non-ferrous metal waste.
Plastic waste recycling rate increased to 6%
The recovery rate of wood waste jumped 12 percentage points to 76 percent last year. The recovery rate of plastic waste and horticultural waste increased by two and three percentage points, respectively, to 6 percent and 83 percent.
The Environment Agency said that although the amount of plastic waste collected has increased by 60%, the recovery rate is still low.
Compared with 2019, the recycling rate of food waste increased slightly from 18% to 19% last year, while the recycling rate of paper and paperboard decreased from 44% to 39%.
This is due to an increase in the amount of paper and cardboard waste discarded and a decrease in the amount of recyclables exported.
The Environment Agency reminds that although the recovery rate of most waste streams last year was higher than in 2019 before the epidemic, there is still room for progress towards realizing the vision of a “zero waste country ”.
With the increase of economic activities and the increasing amount of waste production, it will be more urgent for China to shift from a linear economy to a circular economy.
In addition, 5.12 million metric tons of solid waste came from industrial sites last year, up 24 percent from 4.12 million metric tons in the previous year.
A further 1.82 million metric tons were household waste, up 3 percent from 1.77 million metric tons in the previous year.
As the trend continues, the amount of household waste disposed of last year has increased, and the amount of household waste collected under the national recycling program has also increased by 14% compared to the previous year.
The Environment Agency will continue to encourage households to develop good recycling practices and businesses and consumers to adopt sustainable practices through advocacy activities.
LIKE Our official website for more information

The coordinated approach, with tiered incentives, is vital for South Korea’s globally recognized success .

Title:

Content: Waste management in Hong Kong starts early and matures late. How can we catch up with Taiwan, Shanghai, Korea and the tail lights of the starry cars?
Author: 01 Weekly Report
Published: Updated:
Hong Kong's environmental protection policy has not made great progress. For many years, it seems that it has remained at the stage of "blue waste paper, yellow aluminum cans, coffee plastic bottles", and there is no plastic reduction policy.
Last year, the mainland stopped the import of waste paper, and Hong Kong recyclers also stopped collecting waste paper.
When the Government is faced with Members' questions on plastic reduction and countless initiatives by environmental groups, it is always in a state of "discussion" with the retail and restaurant industries, "under consideration", lest it harm the economic interests of the industry, and would rather harm the environmental benefits than see any actual action taken.
On July 1, 2019, the Shanghai Municipal Domestic Waste Management Ordinance was officially implemented.
At Haihong Bridge Station on the railway line, volunteers are promoting a little knowledge of garbage classification. (Visual China)
On the other hand, after years of vigorous promotion, waste management is well organized and highly efficient: South Korea ’ s waste management system is at the forefront of Asia, with Seoul being the most effective.
The local municipal authorities have the responsibility to collect, recycle and dispose of domestic and commercial solid waste. Waste management in Taiwan once lagged behind Hong Kong, but due to the early introduction of the waste levy policy by the Taiwan government, and then formulated a complex and effective waste management system, the situation in Singapore is gradually reversed. Shanghai launched the “Shanghai Municipal Domestic Waste Management Ordinance ” in 2019. The complicated measures have caused complaints from the public. Over time, the results can be said to be immediate after the people have familiarized themselves with the regulations.
Looking at the situation in these four Asian regions, it is not difficult to imagine why there is no systematic waste management in Hong Kong today, when we look back at Hong Kong's garbage collection practices, which rely entirely on the people's consciousness to separate and unsupervised waste.
For more details, please read the 285th issue of Hong Kong 01 (4 October 2021), “What should Hong Kong look for in Taiwan, Shanghai, Korea and Star? ”.
Click here to try our weekly newsletter for more in-depth coverage.
285 issues of Hong Kong 01 e-newsletter Other exclusive highlights:
Pull gate limit or energy consumption double control? China North and South electricity shortage is the same and different
The Expectations of Lam Cheng's Final Policy Address: Regaining the Dominant Power of Development and Restructuring the Land Economy
"Left glue" opens up the land, imagines that the government is lagging behind the people.
Has the central bank 'pacified' the property market twice in a week?
Sixteen Years of Progress: The Delayed Garbage Levy Ordinance
After Meng Wanzhou's return to the motherland, the public opinion has been heated to examine Sino-US relations.
Lau Kwok-hoon: Regaining the "True Hong Kong Speed" and developing a new centre in New Territories North
Is the time for UK to relax regulation of gene editing agriculture coming?
An Interview with Chu Hsing-hsiang and Hu Kuo-hsien
Leave a comment...

Taiwan’s “Resource Recovery 4-in-1 Program” and its pay-as-you-throw model have also delivered outstanding outcomes.

Title:

Content: Hong Kong ’ s slow progress in environmental governance – why not look at the Greater Bay Area and the world?
Author: Liu Mengting
Published: Updated:
In 2005, the SAR Government proposed to develop a recycling economy, that is, to reduce the environmental burden by repairing, recycling and extending the service life of materials, to find a way out for recycling recyclable materials, and to promote the development of related industries and promote economic diversification.
However, more than a decade later, Hong Kong ’ s circular economy has not made much progress.
In this regard, some scholars suggest leveraging the advantages of the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area.
At the same time, Hong Kong ’ s waste management policy is not yet climate, and we must match the experience of “top students ” such as Korea, Taiwan and Singapore.
Circular Economy Enemies the Greater Bay Area
Professor Patrick Poon, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, has been developing a patented technology for converting waste glass into environmentally friendly bricks since the 1990s, with a view to improving the recycling efficiency of waste glass.
Green brick is a kind of concrete brick, can effectively use construction waste and waste glass, the third generation of green brick has been put into the market as paving brick.
For more than 20 years, the technology has been optimized by scholars to the fifth generation, but it is still “technology without market ”.
In an interview with "Hong Kong 01" recently, Poon mentioned the two main reasons why the development of the local green brick industry is hindered, which is also the dilemma faced by Hong Kong's circular economy.
Pan Chih-sheng says that the research on green bricks has been successful, but the price is not competitive. (photo by O'Cara)
One of the main reasons is that local manufacturing has caused the high enterprise products to lose market advantage. Poon analysis, because the whole production process of environmentally friendly bricks produced in Hong Kong is completed in Hong Kong, and the land price and labor in Hong Kong are very high, and the price has also risen with the water. It is necessary to open up the market to achieve maximum trade liberalization, so the possibility of contractors choosing Hong Kong materials for profit considerations is very low.
On the other hand, the Hong Kong government has not introduced relevant policies to require the actual use of environmentally friendly materials, in the absence of just the premise, the market share of environmentally friendly bricks is unstable, and the current use of the third generation of environmentally friendly bricks is about 20% more expensive than natural sand bricks, so the project side may not consider the use of environmentally friendly bricks.
Another major obstacle is that the government did not help. Pan Zhisheng pointed out that environmental protection bricks are made of recycled materials, although the quality and performance of the bricks are not lost to natural sand and stone, but the quality difference is greater.
However, according to the existing government regulations, the two are regarded as the same, that is, the quality of environmentally friendly materials is too high, but it may still be regarded as unqualified due to the degree of quality difference. This single regulation is a constraint for the application of environmentally friendly bricks. If the outlook does not improve, it will be more difficult to attract investors.
Under such a vicious cycle, the government has no intention to invest or give support, and the environmental protection brick industry chain has become a dead end.
The recycling rate of local waste in Hong Kong is low, and exports are facing many restrictions.
In an interview with Hong Kong 01, Wong Woon-chung, director of the Johan Centre for Applied Forestry Research in the Pearl River Delta (PRD), Hong Kong Baptist University, pointed out that the land resources in Hong Kong are tight, such as the opening of a recycling plant for recycled materials will double the cost.
Mr Wong stressed that the circular economy requires complementary advantages from different regions. There is no way out if the development vision is limited to Hong Kong. (photo by Mr Cheng Tze-feng)
Waste management in Hong Kong is inefficient and should be seen around the world
South Korea, Singapore and Taiwan implemented waste levies in 1995, 1996 and 2000 respectively. Since then, they have gradually developed comprehensive and mature environmental policies with local characteristics.
Hong Kong's waste management system has been fragmented for many years, and it is time to look at the world and learn from advanced experience and thinking.
Hong Kong ’ s waste management policy has not been good for many years, and the climate should be on par with other regions. (Photo by Tsai Cheng-pong)
Korea has introduced waste utilization measures in a multi-pronged manner to achieve long-term management, so the Korean waste management system is at the forefront of Asia.
For example, the city of Seoul, which has achieved the most remarkable results, introduced a series of supporting measures in a few years to change the entire waste treatment model, public perception of waste and living habits after the implementation of the garbage levy system in 1995.
In contrast, the Hong Kong Government is always "discussing" with the industry and "considering" the initiatives of environmental protection groups.
Taiwan is also a leader in waste management in Asia.
The Taiwan government sent a special cleaning team to collect household waste from residents using two types of recycling trucks – yellow garbage trucks are used to collect general waste from residents using official garbage bags, and white garbage trucks are used to collect raw and cooked food waste, plastic and other recyclable resources.
As early as 1997, the Taiwan Environmental Protection Agency launched the "Resource Recovery 4-in-1 Program", which fully mobilized the role of the government, manufacturers, consumers and licensed recycling enterprises in waste management, not only to skillfully distribute the financial costs, but also to reflect the principle of impartiality.
Singapore has a small population, similar to Hong Kong, but the waste recycling work is more professional and centralized.
In Singapore, three waste management enterprises are licensed by the National Environment Agency (NEA) to provide waste collection and recycling services to residents in different parts of the country. The waste is meticulously classified into paper, plastic, glass and metal, and the garden waste is collected separately.
In the recycling process, incineration plants reduce the volume of waste by 90%, and then use 3% of non-incineration and non-recyclable waste to landfill to reduce the environmental burden.
According to statistics, Singapore ’ s solid waste recycling rate reached 51.7% in 2020, a model that Hong Kong can learn from.
As for the administrative efficiency of the Mainland, it is also worth reflecting on the Hong Kong government. In July 2019, Shanghai implemented what has been described as the “world ’ s most stringent ” waste separation measure.
First of all, its domestic waste is strictly divided into four categories, namely recyclables, hazardous waste, wet waste and dry waste; secondly, if individuals or units do not dispose of garbage in accordance with the classification, they will be punished with severe high fines.
Under the mandatory implementation of the government, Shanghai residents have achieved good environmental protection results after experiencing "pain".
The Garbage Levy Ordinance has already been introduced, but the Government must not be complacent about it, but must think about how to tie in with the Ordinance in the next step, and adopt a systematic and comprehensive thinking to achieve long-term waste management.
Leave a comment...

Residents pay for government-issued garbage bags by volume, directly connecting household behavior to waste costs.

Recyclable and organic waste is collected separately, free of charge, as an incentive for proper sorting.

This policy reduces total waste and boosts recycling rates.

Title:

Content: 【 Printing 】
How low-value recyclables turn waste into treasure
Related LINKS http: / / www.CRNT.com 2024-02-20 12: 12: 38
Beijing, Feb. 20 / According to Guangming Daily, “You see, this is the third time I made an appointment to go to the door to recycle, and I also took nearly 40 yuan of environmental protection reward. ” The problem of" taking too much land ", and also getting environmental protection awards, is really a lot.
“Old clothes, waste paper boards, glass bottles … These are low-value recyclables. If they can be recycled, they can be turned into treasures. It is a great help to promote waste reduction, resourcefulness and recycling. ” The on-site recycling staff is busy cleaning up and explaining.
According to the professional explanation, low-value recyclables are related to the concept of high-value waste such as waste cars and waste appliances, and their recycling is an important part of promoting the conservation and intensive utilization of various resources.
So, since the value is low, why do we need to carry out recycling?
The recovery rate of low-value recyclables needs to be improved
Low-value recyclables are recyclable, but they need to pay a higher cost for recycling, and it is difficult to effectively recycle various types of waste by relying solely on market forces.
Such as disposable lunch boxes, disposable plastic cups, foam, waste plastic packaging bags, waste beverage paper-based composite packaging, waste paper cups, paper bowls, waste textiles, waste glass and so on.
At present, most low-value recyclables in China are mixed into domestic waste for collection, transportation, incineration or landfill.
Among them, the average operating cost of incineration power generation construction is about 350 yuan / ton, which not only brings environmental pollution and increases carbon dioxide emissions, but also brings a continuous burden to local finances; landfill treatment requires occupying a large amount of land resources, and a series of problems such as groundwater sources and soil pollution.
A small number of low-value recyclables can enter the recycling system through the recycling behavior of enterprises or individuals.
However, due to the poor recycling efficiency of low-value recyclables, the level of technical equipment of enterprises is generally low, so it has become a "small scattered pollution" centralized explosion point and waste recycling system of the short board.
"Local governments do not attach importance to recycling, corporate recycling is not high, and people are indifferent to classification, which is also the reason why the recycling rate of low-value recyclables is generally low." The total recovery rate is only 26.6%, which is far lower than the average recovery rate of more than 75% of the main recycled resources.
In 2022, China 's main recycled resources recycling volume exceeded 371 million tons, of which waste steel, waste paper, waste copper, waste lead accounted for 22%, 54%, 35% and 47% of the production of steel, paper, copper and lead, respectively. The recycling of materials has added more than 45 million tons of recycled plastics, recycled paper and other recycled resources to society. Among them, recycled plastics save about 60 million tons of crude oil, which is equivalent to rebuilding a Daqing oilfield.
It is worth noting that the carbon reduction effect of low-value recyclables is very obvious compared to mixing domestic waste for landfill or incineration power generation.
For example, recycling 1 ton of waste plastic can reduce carbon emissions by 1.5 to 2.2 tons, equivalent to 700 to 750 liters of unleaded gasoline or diesel.
With the improvement of the level of public consumption and the high development of emerging industries such as e-commerce, the total amount of domestic waste in China's cities is constantly increasing.
Relevant research shows that it is expected that by 2030, the amount of garbage removal in China's cities and towns will reach 421 to 491 million tons / year.
If 40% of domestic waste is used as a resource, it can reduce the combined social cost of 1184.84 yuan / ton, and also reduce the emission of two [~ symbol ~] English and carbon dioxide, effectively improving the comprehensive economic, social and environmental benefits.
The key to establishing a recycling system for waste materials
Low-value recyclables come from every aspect of daily production and life, covering many varieties, diverse physical forms and different chemical properties.
How to build an effective upstream and downstream link, garbage classification, transportation and resource-based utilization of effective collaboration of recycling operation system, become the key to low-value recyclables recycling.
At the low-value recyclables sorting center in Haicang District, Xiamen City, Fujian Province, domestic waste mixed with low-value recyclables goes through the process of bag breaking, elimination, screening, etc., and enters the intelligent sorting platform and waits for "identification".
“Intelligent sorting mainly uses spectral recognition, AI and other technologies for precise classification, and the classification recognition rate is more than 95%. ” Tsai Liangzhi, general manager of sorting center, introduced that different materials show different spectra.
“After cleaning and sorting, the waste will become a production raw material, which is the most popular in the eyes of many enterprises, ” said Tsai. The sorted materials are refined into 15 categories such as ordinary paper, paper and plastic composite, and then sent to downstream recycling enterprises, and“ incarnated ” into products such as cloth, shopping bags, and plastic desks and chairs.
How to solve the front-end low-value recyclables sorting and recycling work when the mid-end intelligent sorting and end-use resource utilization are fully prepared?
In January 2022, the National Development and Reform Commission, the Ministry of Housing and Urban and Rural Construction and other seven departments jointly issued the Guiding Opinions on Accelerating the Construction of the Recycling System of Waste Materials, which sounded the urgent call for the establishment of a network system for recycling waste materials.
As one of the earliest cities in China to implement waste classification, Hangzhou, Zhejiang Province, relying on the advantages of digital economy, promotes the application of "Internet +" and other smart models in the construction of waste and material recycling systems, innovates the waste and material recycling regulatory model, and promotes the recycling process and system reconstruction.
Xiamen City firmly grasp the system construction of the "ox nose", after years of efforts, initially explore a "government coordinated deployment support - professional operation of enterprises - residents active participation" covering the front, middle and rear end of the low-value recyclable recycling model.
According to operational data, the comprehensive selection rate of low-value recyclables in Xiamen has increased from 72.72% in 2020 to 74.31% in 2022, which can turn 150,000 tons of waste into resources every year, with an economic value of more than 135 million yuan and a reduction of about 435,000 tons of carbon dioxide emissions.
Chongqing City is clear that by 2025, the city will basically establish a complete recycling system of waste materials, and the processing and utilization of renewable resources will reach 16 million tons.
Shanghai proposed that by 2025, the city's domestic waste incineration capacity should be stable at 28,000 tons / day, and the wet waste treatment capacity should reach 11,000 tons / day, fully ensuring the separation and disposal of domestic waste and the utilization of resources.
Technology Engine for High-Value Utilization
At present, takeaway has penetrated into all aspects of contemporary life.
According to industry statistics, China's annual use of takeaway lunch boxes has exceeded 1 million tons.
When you are in a big hurry, do you care about the ultimate fate of these discarded lunch boxes?
"We have solved the technical problems of recycling lunch boxes, such as removing impurities, deodorizing, spinning and fabric production, and successfully opened the technical route of 'recycled lunch boxes - slicing - granulating - brushing - weaving - clothing'." It is made of ultra-fine denier polypropylene fiber, and is made into fabrics and T-shirts with fast drying function.
Technological progress is the key to solving environmental problems.
At present, some textile enterprises use the production process of corner materials, printing and dyeing defects for recycling, the development of carpets, bedding, storage boxes and other home textile products, some enterprises use pesticide packaging waste, the development of rice throwing tray, packaging tape, engineering plastic barrels and other products.
In Licang District, Qingdao City, Shandong Province, smart recycling equipment is changing the habits of residents' recyclables and shaping a new fashion for green and healthy living.
“There is no need to classify, the machine will automatically identify whether it is recyclable, and it can automatically weigh and receive cash rewards after one-time delivery. ” Zhu Haiyan, a resident of Jinqiu District, Hushan Street, Li Cang District, said that smart recycling is good for residents and promotes garbage sorting.
Not only that, smart recycling equipment can also connect to the transportation platform through the Internet of Things, and through the big data operation platform, intelligent planning of the clearance route, greatly shorten the waiting time for full warehouse, residents can check the service status of each equipment at any time, reasonable arrangement of delivery time.
Nowadays, the "high value" application of many low-value recyclables has formed a "negative pressure" on the industrial chain, which is attracting more scientific and technological forces to help low-value recyclables become waste.
【 Printing 】
Related News:

The government’s strategic role encompasses stakeholder coordination, constant public education (including door-to-door outreach and school curricula), and tightening regulations over time as participation and sorting proficiency improve .

Title:

Content: Editorial: Waste recovery should be effectively increased
Font Size:
Data released by the National Environment Agency last week showed that according to a survey conducted in 2023, 72% of households participated in a recycling program, up from 64% in 2021.
However, more household participation has not translated into higher recycling rates, and China ’ s household waste recycling rate last year stagnated at a historic low in 2022, recycling only 12% of waste.
Pollution is the biggest challenge facing our country in the recycling process.
Blue garbage collection bins placed throughout the island are often used as ordinary garbage cans, so that the recycled items are contaminated by food waste and cannot be used.
Contaminated items are not limited to one box of recyclables, because recyclables in the same area will be collected in the same recycling vehicle.
The Environment Agency estimates that the contamination rate of household recyclables is about 40 per cent.
Therefore, it is very important to take the recycling box seriously and carefully check the items placed in the recycling box, and arbitrarily throw the garbage into the recycling box, which will destroy the entire recycling process and make the recycling efforts of interested people fall short.
To improve the recycling rate, we must first strengthen public education.
While the Environment Agency has been advocating for the proper use of blue recycling bins, it is clear from the data point of view that the agency must also step up its ongoing education efforts to ensure that everyone knows what is recyclable and what is not.
The elderly and domestic helpers need special attention and guidance.
Schools also play an important role in teaching students proper recycling methods.
Through early education, the younger generation can better understand and practice the right recycling methods and communicate this knowledge to their families.
The bureau should also consider improving the design of the blue recycling bin so that it is easy to put in but not easy to take out, to prevent some people from turning over the bin and trying to find paper, aluminum cans and other reusable items that can be sold, resulting in a mess around and people mistaking it as a garbage can.
Since there are limited categories of items that can be put into blue recycling bins, such as used clothing and batteries, which cannot be discarded, better results may be achieved if more types of recycling are provided and further classified.
The trial of kitchen waste recycling cabinets and smart recycling bins in BiShan and Xinmin is a good attempt.
The pilot scheme, launched in April 2022, uses smart systems to recycle food waste, used clothing, paper, plastic, aluminum, tin cans and glass.
Through the use of technology, it effectively reduces the pollution rate of recycled materials to 10%, far below the national average of 40%.
The company plans to install more smart recycling bins in 83 more locations from January next year.
Under the scheme, members of the public are required to download the application and scan the QR code to select the type of items to be recycled before they can open the recycling bins of the respective items.
Although the operation is more cumbersome, it can keep the environment clean and prevent abuse.
On the other hand, by participating in the recycling program to accumulate points to exchange supermarket gift vouchers, it is expected to change the public's recycling behavior and gradually develop the habit of sorting garbage.
Of course, changing attitudes towards recycling will require sustained public education and information.
Including non-household waste, China's overall recycling rate last year fell by five percentage points from the previous year, only 52%, which is far from China's goal of raising the recycling rate to 70% by 2030.
Our only Silmago landfill island is expected to be filled by 2035.
In addition to setting recovery rate targets, reducing overall consumption targets is also important as this reduces the need for recovery at the source.
Recycling is not convenient, and recyclable items must be properly cleaned and correctly classified.
To change long-formed habits and lifestyles is challenging, individual efforts may seem trivial, but the power of collective action is immense.
If everyone is actively involved in proper recycling and waste reduction, Singapore can overcome the challenge of waste pollution and move towards a more sustainable future.
LIKE Our official Facebook page for more information

Japan similarly achieves strong outcomes via a phased introduction of intensive waste segregation laws and the widespread use of pay-as-you-throw systems.

Municipalities tailor waste categories and schedules, iterating on the system as local compliance improves.

Prolonged investment in public education—emphasizing why and how to sort—has created a cultural expectation, and low contamination rates underscore the system’s maturity.

Initial implementation saw resistance and confusion, but sustained government engagement and incremental changes ensured lasting success .

In Singapore, the overall solid waste recycling rate reached 57% in 2022, with household waste recycling at 12% and industrial waste recycling at 72%.

Material-specific recycling rates highlight strengths and weaknesses: only 6% of household plastics and 39% of paper/cardboard were recycled in 2021, while food waste recycling stood at 19%.

While official statistics show that 72% of households report participating in recycling programs, a significant challenge is high contamination—40% of collected recyclables are improperly sorted, reducing downstream effectiveness.

In response, Singapore is piloting smart recycling bins, digital engagement, and source separation technologies while sustaining intensive public education in schools and among seniors to build correct recycling habits .

China’s leading cities, especially Shanghai, have set ambitious separation and treatment capacity goals—incinerating up to 28,000 tons per day and processing 11,000 tons of wet waste per day by 2025.

Advanced technology, such as AI-powered sorting centers with over 95% classification accuracy, supports high-quality separation.

In Xiamen, low-value recyclables selection rates rose from 72.7% (2020) to 74.3% (2022), reflecting improved recovery with digital and community outreach platforms.

Nationally, recovery rates for paper and copper exceed 50%, but low-value recyclables are only recovered at 26.6% (2021), illustrating a continuing challenge .

Lessons and challenges observed across these leading nations include:

1.

Financial Incentives and Pay-As-You-Throw: Mandating the use of pre-paid garbage bags or metered collection, as done in Japan, Taiwan, and South Korea, directly curbs waste generation and improves recycling yields.

Title:

Content: Policies on household solid waste still display inadequacy

SGGP

The amount of household solid waste (HSW) in major cities nationwide is expected to increase by 10-16 percent a year on average. However, the most common waste treatment method in Vietnam, which is mere burying, has proved its unsuitability for the modern and environmentally friendly development trend at present.

The waste treatment area in Da Phuoc Commune of Binh Chanh District in Ho Chi Minh City.

Statistics from the Natural Resources and Environment Ministry reveal that in 2021, the total volume of HSW in Vietnam reached 51,585 tonnes a day, more than 30,000 tonnes of which came from large cities. Such an amount, plus low awareness of communities in certain places, led to a low rate of waste collection and treatment. 71 percent of this HSW was buried in landfills, most of which are unhygienic. As the land resource for landfills becomes increasingly scarce, this method proves unsustainability in a long term.

Director Pham Hong Son of the Environment Protection Authority of the Central Highlands and Central regions explained that the limit in HSW management results from inconsistent legal documents regarding environment protection, and thus displaying an unclear duty of state units in this matter.

Limited state budgets for HSW treatment add to this problem as they cannot meet the high demands of the community. In the meantime, unattractive preferential policies and mechanisms for this aspect have prevented a successful mobilization of possible resources in the society.

Moreover, there is not yet detailed regulations on assessing waste treatment technologies, so localities are frustrated choosing suitable ones to apply in their areas. Adding to that is a low focus on scientific research for advanced waste treatment technologies, forcing the country to maintain the harmful method of garbage burying, which is not at all environmentally friendly.

Environmental experts mentioned that it is unattractive preferential policies that strongly discourage businesses from investing in advanced equipment or technologies to process waste. This calls for amendments in current policies by the State so that these businesses feel more eager carrying out technology upgrades.

In particular, expert on environment management Nguyen Quoc Cong from Hanoi Architectural University shared that the development and investment capital of the State for environment protection now only answer 50 percent of the real needs, not to mention inadequacies in budget allocation to different regions. Meanwhile, inconsistent and incomplete legal policies have created high risks and low profit in HSW treatment, pushing investors away from this field.

Mr. Cong, therefore, proposed certain feasible solution such as promoting HSW sorting at source; changing the awareness and thinking about private economic and private enterprise development; ensuring reasonable and transparent profits in legal policies when mobilizing social resources for waste treatment; allocating a certain state budget amount for investment in this field to attract the private sector.

He stressed that the State should allow businesses to actively suggest feasible waste treatment technologies in specific locations in accordance with the local land use planning as long as these technologies can ensure environment protection, while the land and capital use shows transparency.

Chairman Nguyen Van Thien of the Board of Directors of Binh Duong Water – Environment JSC. said that at present, the mechanisms and policies related to waste treatment are still vague and weak, leading frustration of localities when applying. Many businesses use capitals from different sources, yet cannot achieve their expected results. A lot of them have to stop operation after some time due to profit loss and no money to repair broken equipment.

“The Finance Ministry should develop a price framework for waste treatment and proper preferential policies (favoring recycled products in the market), introduce financial support to reduce the prices of recycled products to attract more consumers, and encourage the community to recycle a product through many cycles before destroying them via burning or similar methods. The Natural Resources and Environment Ministry should advise the Government on devising supporting mechanisms and policies for waste treatment in Vietnam to fulfill the goals set in the Environment Protection Law 2020” proposed Mr. Thien.

Representative of Vietnam Waste Planning Co. Ltd. Hideki Wada shared that in Japan, HSW sorting is divided into stages according to the real situation of the country. Japan uses waste bags of different sizes to calculate the waste amount for service fee identification. This has made its citizens high aware of disposing less garbage to save money, and in turn leading to cost reductions in waste collection and treatment.

By Minh Hai – Translated by Thanh Tam

Other news

Such models require early and ongoing public explanation to increase acceptance and prevent illegal dumping at initial deployment .

Community Engagement and Education: Sustainable high participation requires repeated campaigns using schools, local leaders, and public signage.

Singapore’s struggle with contamination despite high self-reported participation highlights the necessity of clear, practical guidance on sorting and consistent feedback on results .

Technology and Source Separation Infrastructure: Advanced reverse vending machines (Finland), smart bins (Singapore), and AI-based sorters (China) enable both convenience and accuracy.

However, these must be paired with ongoing operational support and maintenance.

Title:

Content:   • 3 minutes e-car sales collapse
  • 6 minutes America Is Exceptional in Its Political Divide
  • 11 minutes Perovskites, a ‘dirt cheap’ alternative to silicon, just got a lot more efficient
  • 4 mins GREEN NEW DEAL = BLIZZARD OF LIES
  • 7 mins Could Someone Give Me Insights on the Future of Renewable Energy?
  • 17 hours How Far Have We Really Gotten With Alternative Energy
  • 2 days "What’s In Store For Europe In 2023?" By the CIA (aka RFE/RL as a ruse to deceive readers)
  • 16 hours e-truck insanity
  • 4 days Bankruptcy in the Industry
  • 1 day Oil Stocks, Market Direction, Bitcoin, Minerals, Gold, Silver - Technical Trading <--- Chris Vermeulen & Gareth Soloway weigh in
  • 5 days The United States produced more crude oil than any nation, at any time.

Felicity Bradstock

Felicity Bradstock is a freelance writer specialising in Energy and Finance. She has a Master’s in International Development from the University of Birmingham, UK.

More Info

Premium Content

The Renewable Energy Boom Has a Waste Problem

  • Renewable energy waste is a growing problem due to the increasing use of solar panels and wind turbines.
  • Improper disposal of renewable energy equipment can lead to environmental and health problems.
  • Governments need to establish clear standards and regulations for energy waste disposal to ensure that it is done safely and responsibly.

As the global renewable energy capacity increases, so does the amount of waste from end-of-life equipment from solar, wind and other renewable energy activities. If we don’t address this problem soon it could become a whole new threat to the environment and human health. While a transition away from fossil fuels to alternative green energy sources is helping the world to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions and combat climate change, it is important to consider the implications that new energy activities may have on the environment.

Solar panels and wind turbines have a limited lifespan and need to be disposed of appropriately once they reach this point. While some components can be recycled and reused, much of the old equipment ends up in landfills due to the lack of infrastructure in place to manage the materials suitably. Renewable energy equipment, such as solar panels, contains components that can be harmful to humans, such as lead and cadmium, as well as other materials, like glass, aluminum, and silicon, which can be harmful to the environment if disposed of improperly.

One way that out-of-use equipment can be managed is through the creation of standards, such as the Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) directive from the European Union, which provides guidelines for the gathering, handling, recycling, and recovery of solar panels. The U.S. Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) also addresses the correct disposal of solar panels. However, many countries have yet to introduce clear standards for renewable energy equipment disposal, which has led to dangerous methods of disposal.

Several countries around the globe are rapidly increasing their solar and wind energy capacity, which relies on the production and installation of millions of solar panels and turbines. Tens of millions of solar panels are being installed each year in the U.S. alone, and globally the figure is over a hundred million. Despite the accelerated pace of the rollout, there are few recycling facilities prepared to manage old equipment.

Some countries are managing equipment disposal better than others. For example, France claims that 90 percent recycling efficiency is achieved in some of its flagship disposal facilities. However, others do not have mechanisms in place to even consider recycling old equipment. While it is important to put proper waste disposal mechanisms in place for the safety of people and the environment, it can also be a lucrative business. According to a study by the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) and the U.S. Department of Energy’s National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), the cumulative value of materials that can be recycled from solar photovoltaic (PV) waste is estimated at $4 billion by 2040 and $8.8. billion by 2050.

Supplies of many of the materials used to produce green energy equipment are finite, meaning it is important to recycle materials to reproduce equipment to continue to produce renewable energy. Jinlei Feng, a program officer at IRENA, explained, “By 2050, there will be more than 210 million tonnes of cumulative solar PV waste globally and more than three-quarters of that waste will be generated after 2040 and 40% in the last five years between 2045-2050. Feng added, “Annual solar PV waste generation will touch 10 million tonnes by 2040 and increase to 20 million tonnes by 2050.”

India is currently trying to navigate solar waste problem. Pavagada in the south of India is home to the world’s third-largest solar power plant, which holds 25 million panels across a 50 km2 park, with a capacity of 2,050MW. There are 11 other giant solar parks across the country, with plans to develop a further 39 across 12 states by 2026. However, with great solar ambitions comes significant waste. India is aiming for a solar output capacity of 280GW by 2030, of which 70.1GW is already installed. One study predicts that this will produce an accumulation of over 600,000 tonnes of solar waste by the end of the decade, which could increase 32-fold to over 19 million tonnes by 2050.

Although there are protocols in place to manage the disposal of old equipment, which state that solar waste from the plants must be transferred to e-waste contractors, authorized by the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB), within a specified timeframe – typically 90 or 180 days – few abide by these rules. Most solar farms are in remote areas and must pay to transport old equipment to authorised contractors. Solar glass has no real value, meaning there is little incentive for waste contractors to collect and manage the equipment. This has led to the development of a network of informal operators – who dismantle, aggregate, transport and recycle panels. Instead of ensuring proper disposal methods are followed, many operators sell their waste equipment to informal buyers, meaning the materials cannot be recycled and repurposed, and many of the materials end up harming both people and the environment.

To ensure that renewable energy equipment is disposed of appropriately, and recycled where possible, governments must establish clear standards and regulations for energy waste disposal. Further, they must ensure the mechanisms are in place and funding is available to guarantee proper disposal takes place. Without the necessary standards, green energy equipment could contribute to environmental and health problems in the coming decades.

By Felicity Bradstock for Oilprice.com

ADVERTISEMENT

More Top Reads From Oilprice.com:

Download The Free Oilprice App Today

Back to homepage

Leave a comment

Leave a comment

EXXON Mobil -0.35
Open57.81 Trading Vol.6.96M Previous Vol.241.7B
BUY 57.15
Sell 57.00

Regulatory and Producer Responsibility Frameworks: EPR obligations as implemented in Belgium, the EU, and South Korea ensure industry investment and compliance, reducing the burden on public budgets.

These require robust legal frameworks and enforcement for effectiveness .

Stepwise, Adaptive Implementation: Many countries deploy policies regionally, learn from early experiments, and gradually raise standards as local populations adapt to new responsibilities.

Phased rollouts help mitigate resistance and infrastructure bottlenecks (seen in Japan and China).

Challenges: Persistent issues include lower recycling rates for plastics and low-value recyclables, initial resistance to financial disincentives, and contamination due to insufficient public understanding.

Title:

Content: Waste Levy in many parts of the world urges public to pay attention to waste reduction
February 03, 2024 12: 58
Eastern Network Television
More News Clips
Ms Ho called for reducing waste generation and increasing recycling rates.
The Hong Kong Government has delayed the implementation of municipal solid waste charges until August 1 this year. The Executive Director of the Environmental Protection Promotion Council, Dr Ho Wai-ping, said today (3) that the waste charging system has been widely implemented in many parts of the world and has had some success. Charges and recycling system.
She believes that each area has different garbage bags and recycling bins, residents need to pay the corresponding fees according to the type and size of garbage, and also encourage residents to carry out waste separation and recycling at home.
In 2022, the per capita disposal of municipal solid waste in Hong Kong landfills reached 1.51 kg per day, compared with the daily disposal of many foreign cities of less than 1 kg, so the amount of waste in Hong Kong is quite high.
The waste charging system encourages the public to reduce waste generation and increase recycling rates. This will not only help reduce the burden on the environment, but also promote the sustainable development of the recycling industry and create more green jobs.
She believes that when people need to pay for their own waste, they will pay more attention to their own consumption patterns and actively strive to reduce waste generation.
She added that the implementation of waste charging also faces some difficulties and challenges, such as public understanding and acceptance, just like when you travel to other areas, you have to take away the waste produced, or do a good job of recycling.
What does it mean that the public may think that the government is just collecting extra revenue, but the waste is never automatically sent to the landfill, and it takes some procedures and a lot of resources to carry out, she pointed out that waste reduction is actually very simple, as long as the public actively do a good job of clean recycling, take "green in the area", do not have to pay for waste, and can also exchange for green reward points for daily necessities.

Many regions note the need for transparent measurement and feedback mechanisms to continuously refine approaches.

The following summary table showcases the alignment of policies and outcomes (selected data for clarity):

Country/Region | System Highlights | Recent Key Recycling Rates | Challenges & Adaptations
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finland | Deposit system, clear outreach | 94% (cans), 92% (bottles, 2020)

| Initial setup costs, ensuring rural access; addressed by dense machine coverage and community buy-in
Belgium/EU | EPR, material-specific targets | 75%+ (paper/cardboard/metal), <40% (plastics, 2022)

| Plastic lagging, ongoing regulation update for hard-to-recycle streams
South Korea | PRS, pay-as-you-throw | 80% (plastic bottles), 70%+ recovery year 1 | Early resistance to new charges, resolved by heavy outreach and clear incentives
Taiwan | Resource Recovery 4-in-1 Program | High overall, exact latest unavailable; sharp increases in recycling and reductions in waste after PAYT rollout | Maintaining public participation; intensive education and staggered policy expansion
Japan | Local tailoring, strong law, PAYT | High, with more than 70% recovery in many streams | Slow start, took years of education; continual, region-based adaptation
Singapore | Centralized tech, education | 57% (overall), 12% (HH, 2022), plastics 6% | High contamination undermines stats; now piloting smart tech, stepped-up education
Shanghai/China | Tech-driven, enforced separation |

Wet waste/incineration capacity goals; low-value recyclables: 26.6% (2021); >50% for paper/copper | Addressing behavioral change, leverages digital tracking and AI sorting

The core conclusion is that successful recycling systems are characterized by comprehensive regulatory frameworks with strong financial incentives, accessible and convenient infrastructure, continuous public engagement, frequent adaptation to local realities, and transparent reporting on progress.

A U.S. county can adapt these lessons by piloting pay-as-you-throw models, investing in robust community education, engaging all waste chain stakeholders (using EPR), and phasing in new measures with clear performance metrics and accountability provisions.