Peter Jones's comments
Great! Time to open a factory churning out containers at decimal points of a penny cost then take them round the corner and get paid a 2000 times income compared to output cost! What planet are they on??
Here we are 15 years down the road after "Mass Balance-London" and there is still a lack of regionally based power and heat load mapping which can be matched to the availability of re-usable "scrap" carbon that is otherwise incapable of economic re-use via material recycling , composting or AD.
No data will always = incoherency , lost chances and low productivity.
|Ho ho -this has only taken 20 years to penetrate! Why stop at Packaging I ask- what about the other 5 primary supply chains- automotive/transport , domestic furnishings , WEEE, clothing , chemicals & pharma ?
This is about a strategic concept for all the "stuff" in the cycle of domestic consumption- not just the wrapping!
Local authorities should be paid as agents on their behalf via the logistics and disposal chain operators.
Peter Jones OBE
Given the emergent /predicted trend for public finances, a government view favouring any transfer of risk from private to public purse will be a challenging ask. However an upside that involves legislation transferring risk and funding responsibility onto supply chains via EPR could revolutionise the sector by economies of scale and deliver far greater data integrity.
It will also be interesting to compare any Tolvik update to Appendix I in Biffa's "Future Perfect" offering costed 2020 options at 2002 prices ( ISBN 0-952-3922-3-2) 16 years back.
Why the surprise? A classic example of what happens in the absence of an integrated data capture system based on independent double entry tonnage data. The I.T. has driven the cheque and credit card system for years. Applied in the resource area it would better inform policy and accelerate knowledge of abnormal flows within days.
Issues of design, quality and end market applications can be delivered in a low cost framework by offering material, product or Brand supply chains the option to fund and manage end life, circular economy systems for their material, product or brand.
Internalising such costs at point of sale offers substantive cost reductions for public funding of MSW and the carrot of a VAT offset to such trade bodies or brands will benefit overall Govt. borrowing needs.
Micromanagement by Government, bans and more regulatory targets are likely to be counterproductive - set the framework, internalise end management of materials at point of sale as a production cost and include as part of the audit process is the way forward.
The plastics trade bodies should be given the option to take full ownership and responsibility for end life plastic. The costs of doing so should be subject to independent audit on a National basis , with a per unit fee applied transparently so that retailers cannot negotiate it out. Participant firms could be granted an equivalent reduction in VAT on the basis that they are taking over a public cost as it is internalised to the price of the product. In overall terms Trade bodies can achieve improved economies of scale in logistics and reprocessing, improve quality segregation and stimulate waste management.
If anyone wants to share the joke email me at email@example.com for the suggestion made to AMDEA in July 2001.
Now they have the economic pain.
Over 1 million tonnes of AHPs represent 100 MwE capacity utilised via advanced thermal systems.
Fair comment in some ways but landfill bans are bureaucratic at a time when it will be a no brainer to go elsewhere with gate fees to landfill of £100 per tonne.