State Secretary Van Veldhoven gives House of Representatives more explanation on deposit decision

Photo credit: Pro Shots

On 22 June, State Secretary Stientje van Veldhoven replied by means of a letter to the questions asked by members of the House of Representatives in the written consultation on the Decision on the introduction of a deposit on small plastic bottles and implementation of motions on beverage cans.

Deposit on bottles

90% separate collection target for plastic bottles

As of 1 July 2021, there will be a deposit on small plastic bottles. In addition to the introduction of a deposit, a 90% target for separate collection of plastic bottles has also been established in the regulations. This performance obligation for the industry stems from Article 9 of the European Single Use Plastics Directive. At European level, this target must be achieved in 2029, but the Netherlands has legally established that it already wants to reach the 90% target in 2022.

Exception for dairy and juices

The deposit decision, however, does not mandate that plastic bottles containing dairy and juices also carry a deposit. Both D66 and GroenLinks have asked questions about this to the State Secretary. Dairy and juices together account for 17% of the market share of small plastic bottles (the market share of large plastic bottles is unknown). GroenLinks asks: “If the goal is to collect 90% of all bottles separately, but no deposit applies to 17%, how do we reach that 90%?“.

In her answer, Van Veldhoven says the following:

“The 90% target for separate collection applies to all bottles, and therefore also to bottles of juices and dairy. If these bottles are not collected through the deposit system, producers will have to collect these bottles separately in another way, for example through PMD (plastic, metal packaging, and drink cartons). In the implementation decision of the Single-Use Plastics directive, I will include a provision that allows bottles for juice and dairy collected via PMD to be counted towards the 90% separate collection target.”

This answer is in conflict with what is stated in the explanatory notes of the decision published on 24 April 2020 in the Bulletin of Acts and Decrees of the Kingdom of the Netherlands. This explanatory note is binding, and it states:

In accordance with the Environmental Management Act and the Waste Framework Directive, «separate collection» means a collection in which a waste stream is kept separate by type and nature of the waste to facilitate specific treatment. The common joint collection in the Netherlands of plastic packaging waste, metal beverage packaging (cans), and drink cartons in the so-called PMD bin cannot, given the aforementioned definition of the concept of «separate collection«, be qualified as such. After all, during collection via the PMD bin, multiple (waste) packagings – differing from each other in type and nature – are collected jointly. Before they can be processed individually, post-sorting of the various (waste) packagings originating from the PMD bin is necessary.

Furthermore, the European Commission is currently working on an implementing act for Article 9 of the Single Use Plastics Directive, in which it prescribes binding rules on how the 90% separate collection must and may be calculated. It is possible that bottles collected through PMD may not be counted as separately collected, or only under very strict quality requirements. This implementing act is expected next month.

In addition, collecting bottles via PMD complicates an accurate calculation of the collection. When plastic bottles are collected via a deposit system, they can be counted and registered individually. The collection rate can therefore be accurately determined in a deposit system. On the other hand, bottles collected through PMD are weighed, not counted, which is by definition much less accurate. Often, residues such as moisture and dirt are included, or even packaging made of other materials that has not been properly sorted. In a reaction, the European environmental movement has also let it be known that they do not agree with counting bottles from PMD.

Obligation for the industry, enforcement by the ILT

In response to questions from CDA and D66 about achieving the 90% separate collection target, Van Veldhoven replies that this is a performance obligation for the packaging industry, which the Human Environment and Transport Inspectorate (ILT) will enforce. Producers report on this every year and it is up to producers to take measures to adjust when they do not reach the goal, according to Van Veldhoven. She does indicate that the ILT, if necessary, has the option to impose measures. This is what is currently happening in relation to glass recycling, where the industry has never achieved the 90% glass recycling target.

Refillable bottles

In addition to transparency about what and how much is collected, the infrastructure of a deposit system also facilitates the step towards re

Photo credit: Pro Shots

On 22 June, State Secretary Stientje van Veldhoven replied by means of a letter to the questions asked by members of the House of Representatives in the written consultation on the Decision on the introduction of a deposit on small plastic bottles and implementation of motions on beverage cans.

Deposit on bottles

90% separate collection target for plastic bottles

As of 1 July 2021, there will be a deposit on small plastic bottles. In addition to the introduction of a deposit, a 90% target for separate collection of plastic bottles has also been established in the regulations. This performance obligation for the industry stems from Article 9 of the European Single Use Plastics Directive. At European level, this target must be achieved in 2029, but the Netherlands has legally established that it already wants to reach the 90% target in 2022.

Exception for dairy and juices

The deposit decision, however, does not mandate that plastic bottles containing dairy and juices also carry a deposit. Both D66 and GroenLinks have asked questions about this to the State Secretary. Dairy and juices together account for 17% of the market share of small plastic bottles (the market share of large plastic bottles is unknown). GroenLinks asks: “If the goal is to collect 90% of all bottles separately, but no deposit applies to 17%, how do we reach that 90%?“.

In her answer, Van Veldhoven says the following:

“The 90% target for separate collection applies to all bottles, and therefore also to bottles of juices and dairy. If these bottles are not collected through the deposit system, producers will have to collect these bottles separately in another way, for example through PMD. In the implementation decision of the Single-Use Plastics directive, I will include a provision that allows bottles for juice and dairy collected via PMD to be counted towards the 90% separate collection target.”

This answer is in conflict with what is stated in the explanatory notes of the decision published on 24 April 2020 in the Bulletin of Acts and Decrees of the Kingdom of the Netherlands. This explanatory note is binding, and it states:

In accordance with the Environmental Management Act and the Waste Framework Directive, «separate collection» means a collection in which a waste stream is kept separate by type and nature of the waste to facilitate specific treatment. The common joint collection in the Netherlands of plastic packaging waste, metal beverage packaging (cans), and drink cartons in the so-called PMD bin cannot, given the aforementioned definition of the concept of «separate collection«, be qualified as such. After all, during collection via the PMD bin, multiple (waste) packagings – differing from each other in type and nature – are collected jointly. Before they can be processed individually, post-sorting of the various (waste) packagings originating from the PMD bin is necessary.

Furthermore, the European Commission is currently working on an implemented act for Article 9 of the Single Use Plastics Directive, in which it prescribes binding rules on how the 90% separate collection must and may be calculated. It is possible that bottles collected through PMD may not be counted as separately collected, or only under very strict quality requirements. This implemented act is expected next month.

In addition, collecting bottles via PMD complicates an accurate calculation of the collection. When plastic bottles are collected via a deposit system, they can be counted and registered individually. The collection rate can therefore be accurately determined in a deposit system. On the other hand, bottles collected through PMD are weighed, not counted, which is by definition much less accurate. Often, residues such as moisture and dirt are included, or even packaging made of other materials that has not been properly sorted. In a reaction, the European environmental movement has also let it be known that they do not agree with counting bottles from PMD.

Obligation for the industry, enforcement by the ILT

In response to questions from CDA and D66 about achieving the 90% separate collection target, Van Veldhoven replies that this is a performance obligation for the packaging industry, which the Human Environment and Transport Inspectorate (ILT) will enforce. Producers report on this every year and it is up to producers to take measures to adjust when they do not reach the goal, according to Van Veldhoven. She does indicate that the ILT, if necessary, has the option to impose measures. This is what is currently happening in relation to glass recycling, where the industry has never achieved the 90% glass recycling target.

Refillable bottles

In addition to transparency about what and how much is collected, the infrastructure of a deposit system also facilitates the step towards refillable bottles. The Party for the Animals therefore asks the State Secretary whether, when setting up the deposit system, she is directly taking into account a transition from single-use bottles to refillable bottles, also to prevent a lock-in on single-use bottles.

This could be done, for example, by directly establishing a quota for a minimum share of refillable bottles on the market, which is currently being considered in Austria. Van Veldhoven referred to the Plastic Pact and the implementation of the SUP Directive for measures to stimulate reuse. A precise answer to the question was therefore not provided.

A higher standard than 25% recycled PET

The Christian Union asks the State Secretary whether she wants to commit to raising the obligation introduced from Europe to use 25% recycled plastic. Van Veldhoven replies that applying 25% recyclate currently

only applies to plastic beverage bottles made of PET and that this standard is already being achieved in the Netherlands. “Application of more plastic recyclate in PET bottles is only possible if this can be done safely,” she adds, “I am willing to discuss this with the sector.”

At present, there are already several beverage producers selling bottles made of 100% recycled PET on the market. The door therefore seems to be open for policies with a higher target than 25% recycled PET in bottles for the Dutch and European markets.

All bottles may be returned to all return points

To the question from GroenLinks whether agreements have been made that the different return points accept all types of bottles, Van Veldhoven indicates that all bottles can be returned to all return points from 1 July 2021. This is possible because the producers provide one national system, the State Secretary indicates. There was previously no clarity on this.

Van Veldhoven’s answer seems to indicate that this return obligation will also apply to large plastic bottles. It would be good if this policy was also extended to glass bottles.

Monitoring the effects of deposits

The Party for the Animals asks the State Secretary if she is willing to continue monitoring litter for a few more years so that the effect of introducing a deposit is clearly mapped out. Van Veldhoven promises that Rijkswaterstaat will continue to monitor beverage cans and bottles in litter and will report on this every six months. It was already clear that cans would be monitored in execution of the motions by members Paternotte et al. and Dik-Faber et al. on tackling cans in litter.

The fact that bottles are still being monitored while there is a deposit on them is very interesting for showing the effectiveness of deposits, which is also interesting information for other countries.

It is not clear how long Van Veldhoven will let the monitoring run after the start of deposits on bottles. We advise a period of at least two years. In response to a question from the VVD, Van Veldhoven indicates that she will take the experiences with and effectiveness of deposits on small bottles into account when a decision is made in 2021 on the introduction of deposits on cans.

Deposit on beverage cans

Tackling beverage cans in litter

In her decision on the introduction of a deposit on small plastic bottles and implementation of motions on beverage cans of 24 April 2020, Van Veldhoven announced a similar two-track policy for cans as followed for the bottles. A reduction of 70 to 90% fewer cans in litter and 90% separate collection of cans must be achieved in autumn 2021.

Rijkswaterstaat has been monitoring the number of cans in litter since 2018. If it turns out in autumn 2021 that these goals are not met, a deposit on cans will also be introduced in 2022. The State Secretary is already preparing the necessary legislative measures so that they are ready in time for introduction in accordance with the timeline set out in motions.

In response to the question from the CDA parliamentary group about what alternatives the State Secretary has in mind in case a deposit on cans cannot be introduced, Van Veldhoven replies: “I see no reason why a deposit on cans cannot be introduced. I have no alternatives in mind.”

90% separate collection for beverage cans

In her answer to questions from the CDA, SP and GroenLinks about the decision-making process for cans, Van Veldhoven suddenly no longer speaks of a “performance target” of 90% separate collection, but of “90% recycling for the cans, which must be achieved in autumn 2021.”

It is unclear whether a mistake was made by speaking of a performance target of 90% recycling, but in the Letter to the House of 24 April 2020 it was clearly established that it is not about recycling, but about separate collection of the cans. This is important because only advanced separate collection systems with a deposit help to prevent cans in litter. A recycling target says little about the prevention of cans in litter because, for example, cans from residual waste or street sweepings can still be recycled.

Advancement of the deposit decision on bottles sets a precedent for advancing the decision on cans

Several critical questions were asked by the Party for the Animals about the extensive influence of the sector (the packaging industry and food retail) on the decision-making around deposits on plastic bottles and the delaying “cooperative resistance” strategy it uses in this regard. These have largely remained unanswered. In response to the question from the SP parliamentary group why unnecessary delay was accepted in the introduction of deposits on small plastic bottles, Van Veldhoven replies that there was no delay. “In the end, I brought forward the moment of decision-making in close consultation with the parties involved,” the State Secretary continues, “when I could conclude from the monitoring report that insufficient progress was being made. That was possible because the legislative process was completed in a timely manner and according to the promised planning.”

By bringing forward this decision for deposits on bottles, the State Secretary shows that it is possible to determine, based on earlier monitoring results, whether the targets will be met later that same year. This offers perspective for the decision on the cans.