Evidence of meeting #154 for Environment and Sustainable Development in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was packaging.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:35 p.m.
Director, Sustainability, PAC Packaging Consortium
Yes, because the residents are not necessarily good at cleaning everything the way you want them to. The other four plastics, typically the 3, 6 and 7, PVC, polystyrene and other plastics—that grand category of everything else—tend not to get recycled.
There is a lot of work being done, for example, in British Columbia. I was running the program out there. All of it was collected; we recycled all of it. The stuff that we couldn't recycle we turned into an alternative fuel that went to Lafarge, and we were actually cleaning the air in the Lower Mainland by substituting out the coal. So it isn't that something can't be done with it.
By the way, the PVC was pulled out. There was a system just to pull PVC out, so we were not burning it.
4:35 p.m.
Director, Sustainability, PAC Packaging Consortium
But the idea is that it can be cleaned, it can be used, it can be recycled or it can be recovered.
4:35 p.m.
Conservative
Ben Lobb Conservative Huron—Bruce, ON
Okay.
I want to ask the retail fellows here, and maybe the environmental guys if they want to chip in too. I've never been to the Beer Store. They tell me you go there for something. But the Beer Store in Ontario has the most successful recycling program in North America. That's what I understand.
4:35 p.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, PAC Packaging Consortium
Maybe in the world....
4:35 p.m.
Conservative
Ben Lobb Conservative Huron—Bruce, ON
Maybe in the world.... If Coca-Cola wants to sell their plastic two-litre bottles, why not put a 10¢ deposit on them? I don't drink pop, but it doesn't seem right to me that one little bottle of pop is two dollars. So does it matter if it's two dollars or $2.10? That's something we should do, because we know that the bottles and the wine bottles and the aluminum beer cans all get picked up. Is that what we need to do?
4:40 p.m.
Director, Eco-conception, Circular Economy, Éco Entreprises Québec
If I may comment on this issue, we have to look at the rate of recovery. It was mentioned earlier: the rate of recovery of PET bottles, for example, is nearly 70%. A deposit will not strongly encourage people to bring the bottle back, especially if the bottle ends up in the same type of system.
If the government starts to fund parallel systems, costs will skyrocket. If recycling and a deposit system were implemented in parallel and the return rates were not optimal, we would end up with two parallel systems through which infrastructure, transportation and greenhouse gas are potentially being generated.
What is interesting in returning to deposit systems is reusable packaging that has been cleaned, decontaminated and refilled, such as the brown beer bottle. However, if the packaging has to be crushed or if the plastic has to be decontaminated and recycled in the same way as a bottle or a product that currently does not require a deposit, all we are doing is opening other avenues, but not engaging in densification.
Earlier, you asked what is happening in the system when it comes to flexible packaging. The system is based on tonnage and our packaging is currently becoming increasingly light and small. So the recycling system must evolve to target and deal with packaging by volume and by unit.
4:40 p.m.
Conservative
Ben Lobb Conservative Huron—Bruce, ON
Okay. I have one quick last question for the environmental guys again.
It irks me. I buy a big box of McDonalds Keurig cups, for example—the little things you put in your coffee machine—and they're compostable, but they're wrapped in plastic. What sense does that make? What is the possible logic? Do you guys not call up McDonalds and ask them what's going on, what they're doing there?
4:40 p.m.
Programs Director, Environmental Defence Canada
There are some organizations that take on the producers. I think Greenpeace is actually the most successful with that. For all the litter that's ending up on the beaches, they point a finger at who's responsible—Tim Hortons, McDonalds, these companies.
I wanted to say, though, that we are very much in favour of the deposit-return program for plastic bottles. Ontario and Manitoba are the only provinces that don't have them. We have the worst recycling rates in these provinces. We throw out 1.5 billion bottles in Ontario every year because we recycle only a half of the bottles we use. We can get a deposit. It's a very strong system and it does work well with the rest of the extended producer responsibility systems. It's in place in many European countries where they have advanced EPR systems. It's in place in many provinces in Canada, too.
4:40 p.m.
Conservative
Ben Lobb Conservative Huron—Bruce, ON
I'm not saying put a deposit on it; I'm asking whether that is a possibility.
I don't want to get any negative attack ads here; I'm just asking a question.
4:40 p.m.
Some hon. members
Oh, oh!
4:40 p.m.
Liberal
4:40 p.m.
Director, Sustainability, PAC Packaging Consortium
One great observation from Europe and one reason their deposit return rates are so high, especially Germany's, is that they have two deposit systems, one for single-use bottles. You want to attack the single-use plastic issue—the one-way water bottle, for example. The deposit is about 43¢, whereas on a refillable glass bottle it's only about 25¢ or 30¢ or something like that. It really does encourage a push to something like what Tom Szaky is promoting now with refillables and getting away from single use by creating a disincentive financially, or at least getting them back into the loop.
4:40 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John Aldag
I'm going to jump over Ms. Dzerowicz just to keep the discussion going.
There may be a chance, Mr. Downham, to bring in your comments.
Ms. Dzerowicz, you have six minutes.
4:40 p.m.
Liberal
Julie Dzerowicz Liberal Davenport, ON
I'm going to continue with that line, since it was one of my questions anyway.
The thing about Germany is that they have so many more people in their country than we have. In terms of economies of scale, you have to take that into consideration. One thing we've been told quite a bit is that there's a missed economic opportunity, that there's a $150 billion market in not reusing plastic. It's a huge economic loss for us right now.
It's rather along the lines you're talking about here. I think we'd like to recycle; we'd like to give more producer responsibility. Given the number of people we have, however, and given our large country, what is your recommendation about how we can best capture more of that $150 billion opportunity?
Who wants to start first?
4:40 p.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, PAC Packaging Consortium
Without repeating myself, and with what everybody else has said, it is, simply put, “harmonization”, in my mind.
4:40 p.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, PAC Packaging Consortium
If you can get to that and can give the CCME some teeth to help or direct them to mandate harmonization downwards, so that the provinces and the territories take this back, then we can be recovering all the same thing in all the provinces with the same message to every single consumer—and we're all consumers in the room—so there's no confusion in your household between your daughter and you. You know exactly what you're going to do with that package.
Harmonization is the biggest thing you can do.
4:45 p.m.
Liberal
Julie Dzerowicz Liberal Davenport, ON
I have two other questions, and they're completely different. In Davos this year, the consumer products industry was fairly much eviscerated because of plastic pollution. I was reading through some of the articles and I know that Unilever promised to ensure that all its plastic packaging would be recyclable, reusable or compostable by 2025.
Is this a big deal? Is this actually a significant promise, or is the devil in the details? If it is significant, how do they stay competitive, and how can we as a government encourage more companies to follow that path?
We'll start with Ms. Dionne and then we'll go down the row.
4:45 p.m.
Director, Eco-conception, Circular Economy, Éco Entreprises Québec
Those are indeed ambitious objectives for the industry.
It must be understood that there is a change in the industry. When we talk about retailers or manufacturers, they can all put undue pressure on themselves. Will Unilever wait for those targets or will it put pressure on its suppliers to be able to reach those targets in terms of recyclability and recycled content?
As we illustrated earlier, if we want the industry to reach those targets, major players like Unilever are capable of teaming up with companies like Loop Industries for the molecular recycling of their PET packaging.
However, we are talking about a Canadian industrial fabric that is full of small and medium-sized businesses that don't really have the luxury of teaming up with major players in molecular recycling to get their share. So the government must support innovation in recycling technologies and techniques.
4:45 p.m.
Liberal
Julie Dzerowicz Liberal Davenport, ON
I was going to get to that. Just tell me what you think the government can do to help encourage this.
4:45 p.m.
Director, Eco-conception, Circular Economy, Éco Entreprises Québec
It can provide financial support for research and development on end of life, sorting and recycling of packaging. It can also facilitate transparency through a traceability system for recycled content, a bit like what's being done with sustainable fishing and other sectors.
We should know where the recycled material comes from through quality controls to secure a quality-based supply. That is something the government should support.
4:45 p.m.
Liberal
Julie Dzerowicz Liberal Davenport, ON
We'll go over to Environmental Defence. I haven't heard from them.
Go ahead.
May 6th, 2019 / 4:45 p.m.
Vito Buonsante Plastic Program Manager, Environmental Defence Canada
Thank you.
I only have a couple of comments. One is on the size of the country. I wanted to point out that Norway is quite big and has a population that is quite sparse. It has only five million people, yet it manages with its deposit return scheme to achieve a 97% return rate. That is possible. It's a full, extended producer responsibility.
On the issue of recyclability and compostability, that is really something desirable, but I would just point out that if we want to tackle plastic pollution, making things more recyclable is not necessarily going to make things not leak into the environment. We need to make sure, first of all, that we avoid things getting into the environment. How do we do that? We do it by reducing not only the multiplication of plastics and types of plastics but also by making sure that the producers ensure that all of the plastics put on the market are collected.
If we are thinking about composting, for example, or even chemical recycling, all of these innovations seem to be great, but they're not going to change the fact that plastics keep getting into the oceans and waterways. That's not going to help if we don't decrease the amount of plastic we have on the market by having high collection rates and increasing the recycled content of new materials. We need to decrease the amount of plastic we produce.
Thanks.