EXTENDED Producer Responsibility (EPR) could increase the annual grocery bill for the average family of four in the UK by £312 per year, Aquapak has warned.
The firm, which develops materials designed to do the job of conventional flexible plastics and improve recycling efficiency, highlighted a lack of clarity because of definition changes, guidance shifts, and ‘illustrative fees’ for those developing more sustainable solutions such as converters, material innovators, and coating suppliers.
EPR aims to make producers financially and operationally responsible for the packaging they put on the market and for the waste and recycling that follows. The more recyclable the packaging, the lower the fee.
Aquapak claimed DEFRA’s definition is compositional rather than performance-based. For example, under current EPR definitions, ‘paper’ is packaging made from at least 95% fibre by weight. If a pack contains more than 5% non-fibre material, it is automatically pushed into a new category called ‘fibre composites’ which commands higher fees than the plastic packaging it is supposed to replace.
Mark Lapping, CEO at Aquapak, said, “The intention of EPR is to make more producers and brands use more recyclable packaging. However, a lack of clarity and flawed definitions means that instead of pushing for better design, some are already choosing to simply absorb the fees and pass the cost on to consumers – even though the consumer is already paying council tax towards the cost of disposal.
“A cost which was supposed to be a tax on the brand and instead the consumer will be paying for it twice at a time when the cost of living is still high. That’s hardly the outcome anyone wanted when EPR was first proposed.”
