Information about the abolition of deposits is flawed

However, additional information only became available two days ago and appears to be flawed: calculating the environmental impact was not possible in such a short time. According to the environmental movement, the new cost assessment is flawed in its design and based on incorrect figures.

Two weeks ago, in a debate with the House of Representatives, State Secretary Atsma stated that deposit systems cost 6 cents per bottle, and collecting mixed plastics costs only 1 to 1.5 cents per bottle. However, that cost comparison was successfully challenged with a memorandum from Recycling Netwerk, the coalition of environmental organisations advocating for good waste and materials policy. At the request of a large number of political parties, Atsma promised a response to the Recycling Netwerk memorandum.

Atsma ignored the request to allow the House of Representatives at least one week of reading time. The State Secretary for the Environment spoke of "sufficient certainty to stick" to his plans, even without an ex-ante calculation of all environmental effects. But the letter received by the House of Representatives two days before the debate did contain a number of appendices on the cost comparison. The current costs of mixed collection of plastic bottles are now estimated by the business community at 2.6 cents per bottle, twice as much as the 1 to 1.5 cents in the previous debate. And in the new version of the deposit study, no fewer than 11 of the 15 cost items were changed compared to the "final version" of two weeks earlier. The cost calculation is now 3 to almost 40% lower. The costs of the deposit system could therefore also come close to the praised alternative.

Chairman Robbert van Duin of Recycling Netwerk calls for a proper cost study: “The way the costs are compared now looks more like a circus act than a study.” It is noted that only the variant with the 40% lower costs can be taken seriously: “that assumes a yield from PET bottles that is only 10% below the current yield, while the maximum variant assumes a truly absurdly low yield”. In a letter to the House of Representatives, Recycling Netwerk also examines other cost items. It concludes that if necessary corrections are calculated, a deposit system actually turns out to be cheaper. In any case, the conclusion is that there are still far too many uncertainties surrounding the various cost items.

Robbert van Duin of Recycling Netwerk: “Abolishing deposit return systems is like throwing away your best shoes because the shoe salesman tells you you're going to make it big on those flip-flops.”

Together with municipalities and various waste management companies, Recycling Netwerk supports the petition “A real hero chooses deposit return”. On the website www.echteheld.nl, more than 23,000 people have now indicated that they support the expansion of the deposit system.

Letter from Recycling Netwerk to the House of Representatives Committee on Infrastructure and the Environment