| mcharter | Tuesday, August 14, 2001 - 05:02 pm
Does anyone have information on the membership of the 'global environmental coordination initiative'? |
| Dave Burrell | Wednesday, November 28, 2001 - 03:39 pm
Being niaive in this area, my current perception is that quite how producer responsibility will really work has not yet been defined. Will it be a general levy on all goods if you are not collecting it yourself, and how will the levy change for better DFE products as opposed to bad DFE ones? |
| Joakim Skottheim | Friday, December 07, 2001 - 10:59 am
Creating incentives for manufacturers to invest in eco design is the key for a successful WEEE directive (coming producer responsibility legislation for EEE). The only way to do this is to make each manufacturer individually responsible for own products put on the market after the entry into force of the legislation, i.e. future waste.
So called historical waste, i.e. products put on the market before the entry into force of the legislation, is a different problem. All stakeholders (European Parliament, Council of ministers, Industry and NGOs) agree that manufacturers should collectively finance these products, since this would otherwise mean that new companies would receive a competitive advantage compared to existing companies and these products were manufactured with no consideration taken to eco design.
Individual financing responsibility as the main principle is favoured by most stakeholders, e.g. European Parliament during their first reading decided on such a position, all concerned industry sectors, environmental and consumer NGOs etc. Only the Council of Ministers favours a collective financing responsibility despite the fact that will in practice mean that no company would invest in DFR. (In fact, the member states only want to adopt a waste tax!) Why should a company invest in these activities if the cost saving for end of life treatment wouldn't benefit that particular company?
Please note that an individual financing responsibility does not equal an obligation for companies to set up their own individual recycling system. An individual financing responsibility will most probable be organised in collective recycling systems due to economics of scale in certain activities, e.g. logistics.
Hence the answer to your question is that today we do not know if the levy will differ between “good” or “bad” products, despite the fact that most stakeholders believe that this should be the case! |
| Daniel Justin Chambers | Saturday, November 23, 2002 - 12:51 pm
The Australian government is considering a policy wherein a carbon cost (or tax) is applied to products on the consumer end. This would mean that produts using large amounts of, energy, water, or leaving unreasonable waste, would have a greater tax than those not.
This should resault in good, or green products becoming substancially less to buy than the alternatives.
As the extra expense on Bad Prducts is a tax, the bussinesses responsible for their production will not only lose significant sales, but the sales that are made will give more money to the government, in tax, which will hopefully go towards repairing the damage caused by bad business ethics.
The outcome for any company ignoring the message behind these actions, will undoubtably find themselvs quickly out of business.
Hense companies will at least, minimise waste, energy consumption, and unreasonable produt life as this will be taxed to. |