Almost two-thirds of revenue generated in 2013 from the Packaging Recovery Notes system (PRNs/PERNs) were used to fund collections or reduce secondary material prices, reports from reprocessors and exporters indicate.
According to figures released by the Environment Agency, last year PRN and PERN issuers raised more than £111.5m in total.
Of this, they said 33.6% went to fund collections of recyclables, and 31.2% to subsidise prices or develop new markets
The rest was invested in infrastructure or retained for future capital expenditure. Only 1.7% was spent to cover the costs of complying with the regulations.
Glass remelt PRN reprocessors raised over £28m, the highest amount among materials reprocessors and exporters.
But of this, only 6.4% was used to fund collections. Some 58% went to reducing prices and 34.7% was retained to increase infrastructure capacity or for future investments.
The recyclers that claimed to spent the highest relative amount on funding collections were glass remelt exporters (64.2%), and glass aggregate reprocessors (49.9%), followed by paper exporters (42%).
Aluminium reprocessors used 26% of their revenue to develop communication strategies, the highest percentage among recyclers.
You might also like...
T2E reports record PRN trades
The Environment Exchange (t2e) said it saw a record number of packaging recovery notes (PRNs) traded in 2018.
Defra told: ‘councils should ring-fence PRN funding’
Packaging producers want to see a return on their potential £600m investment into local authority recycling through a reformed packaging recovery note (PRN) system, resources minister Therese Coffey has been told.
Wood recyclers warn Defra not to decrease packaging targets
The Wood Recyclers Association (WRA) has urged Defra not to decrease wood packaging waste recycling targets and has backed the continuation of the existing packaging recovery note (PRN) system.
Councils call for independent oversight of EPR funds
Council chiefs have called for the creation of an independent body to distribute funding raised by the Government’s proposed extended producer responsibility (EPR) regime.
Have your say
You must sign in to make a comment
Please remember that the submission of any material is governed by our Terms and Conditions and by submitting material you confirm your agreement to these Terms and Conditions. Links may be included in your comments but HTML is not permitted.
Readers' comments (1)
Anonymous2 April, 2014 4:39 pm
It would be interesting to further segregate out the export PERN, this would show the true value of investment into UK Reprocessing, which is after all what the system is designed to do, grow UK reprocessing instead of NIMBY growth
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment