36 ms·
The cost of returning containers whole, washing, inspecting, rejecting breakages outweighs the benefits. It would be much more efficient to use extremely light
by kwhitefoot 7y ago
The cost of returning containers whole, washing, inspecting, rejecting breakages outweighs the benefits.
It would be much more efficient to use extremely lightweight containers that can be crushed in a reverse vending machine in any supermarket.
That's how returnable bottles and cans work here in Norway (and several other European and Scandinavian countries). At the moment it only covers drinks containers but that is probably because they are the only ones that pose a major littering problem.
See https://www.tomra.com/en/collection/reverse-vending https://www.tomra.com/en/collection/reverse-vending
This way the energy cost of returning the containers is minimised and the returned material is suitable for immediate, industrial scale, automated recycling.
But of course that doesn't allow the producer to use just any container so it limits their branding opportunities.
Edit: removed repeated link.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- martokus 7y agoYeah but it locks you in. Another example of how the hysteria around climate change is exploited by companies for profit. Once you buy Tide washing liquid in a returnable container there's a higher cost barrier switching to another brand. Unless they standardize the packaging this is a pure profit move. On a broader note I often wonder if all the talk about climate change and plastics is not fueled by corporations ready to exploit it. I just cannot believe that a topic can suddenly become so big without an agenda behind it.