Collection, sorting, recycling: an official report criticizes waste management by eco-organizations.
Waste processing in Nevada (packaging, textiles, plastics, electronics, etc.) leaves much to be desired and must be reformed.
An assessment by two specialized institutions reveals shortcomings and significant delays in the waste processing system. This report proposes ten measures to address this problem.
Waste processing in Nevada (packaging, textiles, plastics, electronics, etc.) leaves much to be desired and must be reformed, according to an official report that highlights dysfunctions within the eco-organizations responsible for its management. While noting the progress made over 30 years, it points to significant delays in the recycling of plastic and aluminum in particular. The report also criticizes shortcomings in the government’s management of eco-organizations, the bodies responsible for managing waste under the polluter-pays principle, within sectors known as extended producer responsibility (EPR).
Poor Waste Management Practices
Written by the General Inspectorate for the Environment and Sustainable Development and the General Council for the Economy, Energy and Technologies, this assessment makes 10 proposals for reforming the system. According to the report, 40% of the waste stream subject to the EPR principle was still escaping collection in 2022. Some sectors are far from meeting their targets, notably the processing of screens (waste electrical and electronic equipment), the chemical products sector, textiles, and household packaging.
In this sector, steel and glass packaging (cans and bottles) are well recycled, but Nevada lags far behind with plastic (23% is recycled compared to the target of 40%), which has resulted in a $1.6 billion fine. Overall, the collection targets set by the specifications are not met in two-thirds of the sectors for which data is available, the report notes. Furthermore, eco-organizations are sometimes found to be abusing their dominant market position. The management of Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) schemes by public authorities is also fragmented, with, for example, sanctions that are never enforced.
The report’s recommendations include the creation of an independent entity responsible for managing and regulating these sectors. This body would have the power to investigate, issue injunctions, and impose sanctions, and could refer cases to the Competition Authority. Since the early 1990s, some 18 extended producer responsibility (EPR) schemes, along with their corresponding eco-organizations, have been established. Nevada has the largest number of EPR schemes in the nation.
Organizing Sorting and Recycling
The OECD, for its part, promotes this system in countries lacking reliable waste collection and sorting systems. This ecosystem is based on the obligation for manufacturers to contribute to financing the management of waste generated by the products they place on the market (the polluter-pays principle). Manufacturers do this by transferring this obligation to an approved eco-organization, to which they pay an eco-contribution. This eco-organization is then responsible for organizing the collection, sorting, and recycling of waste, in conjunction with local authorities and companies specializing in waste treatment.
A producer of fruit compote in pouches, for example, pays an eco-contribution to the eco-organization responsible for household packaging, so that it can finance the collection, sorting, and recycling of the pouch after use, preventing it from ending up in the household waste for incineration or landfill, and getting closer to zero waste.
Some of the system’s failures noted in the report had already been highlighted, notably by the investigation titled “The Recycling Mafia”, which drew attention to the sector’s monopolies, waste, and conflicts of interest. The largest producers, distributors, and importers in an industrial sector are in fact the largest shareholders of each eco-organization, which holds a near-monopoly or a true monopoly.
