Laserfiche WebLink
- 9- <br /> <br /> ' ' t <br />Mandatory deposit measures have been enacted by Connectlcu , <br />Oregon, Vermont, Michigan, Delaware, Iowa and Maine, and have <br />proven to be effective as a method of waste reduction. Similar <br />action by the Minnesota Legislature would be required to implement <br />mandatory deposit programs in Minnesota. <br />National estimates indicate that container deposit legislation can <br />reduce the solid waste stream by an average of two to four per- <br />cent. Michigan has experienced one of the highest reductions in <br />their waste stream--six percent--due to recent deposit legislation. <br /> Additional benefits of container deposits include reduction of <br /> roadside litter, energy savings for container production, reduc- <br /> tion of virgin material consumption, and an increase in recycling <br /> and redistribution of containers. Disadvantages of container <br /> deposit legislation include higher consumer costs when the con- <br /> tainer is not returned, potentially higher costs due to added <br /> handling, added handling and storage requirements for the <br /> retailer, consumer convenience is reduced, and reduction of <br /> material available for other recycling systems. <br /> <br />PACKAGING REDUCTION <br />Three basic approaches to packaging reduction exist: the regula- <br />tory approach, standardized packaging laws and the industrial <br />education aproach. The regulatory approach allows the state to <br />review and suspend the use of packaging that constitutes a serious <br />solid waste or environmental problem. Minnesota StatuteS, Chapter <br />116.06 and Minnesota Rules SR-1 through SR-6 represent one form of <br />the regulatory approach. <br />The second approach--standardized packaging laws--would require <br />certain products to be sold in packages meeting requirements for <br />standard size, weight, durability and reusability. For example, <br />based on national data for both the United States and Canada, <br />generation rates (measured as packaging weight per capita) experi- <br />enced in 1958 could be achieved today using alternative manufac- <br />turing technologies to produce lighter packages and through elimi- <br />nation of "over-packaging" (Love, 1974). These accomplishments <br />could potentially reduce the solid waste stream by five percent. <br />Lighter packages can be produced simply by using thinner packaging <br />materials where customer specifications allow. ~owever, <br />Minnesota's current packaging law will not be able to reduce waste <br />to a comparable degree since the majority of wasteful packaging is <br />outside the scope of the law. <br /> The third approach--industrial education--seeks to provide indus- <br /> try with information and assistance in researching and.developing <br /> packaging methods that reduce solid waste. It is difficult to <br /> know how effective industrial education will be in reducing solid <br /> waste since information is not available on such a program in the <br /> United States. <br /> <br /> <br />