4 ms·

The redesign of the plastic bottle cap was one of the weirdest recent directives in EU. How did this micro optimization make sense? How can we take people that

The redesign of the plastic bottle cap was one of the weirdest recent directives in EU. How did this micro optimization make sense? How can we take people that pushed for it seriously? They made regulations on separating waste that did not put a requirement on recycling. Many cities, to avoid fines, provide separate containers, but in the end just throw everything on the same pile. This new bottle cap design requirement must have created a new economy for producing these bottle caps for all of the containers, someone profited. The need for it was created in EU institutions. There are massive problems around waste that no one there dares to approach, so they make these weird directives that just smell of corruption and incompetence.

oezi 3y ago
Quote: The single-use plastics legislation will address 70 percent of marine litters items, avoiding environmental damage that would otherwise cost €22 billion by 2030. It may seem weird to you, but we need to develop good regulations to deal with all the negative externalities. For instance, I think we could have also added a recycling fee per plastic item sold (say 5 cents). This would have made it more economical to sell bigger units and avoid technically unnecessary items such as the tear-off rings on bottles.
- vjerancrnjak 3y ago
  Croatia already has that ~7 cent tax on the container. Don’t know how that worked out. I know the capital has no recycling infrastructure. The tourists make no effort to collect that tax. But the paper straw legislation was botched by allowing forever chemicals.
- coldtea 3y ago
  I seriously doubt the accuracy of their estimations.
- flir 3y ago
  > technically unnecessary items such as the tear-off rings on bottles. Aren't they a tamper-proofing mechanism?
- nvm0n2 3y ago
  Virtually all plastic in the oceans comes from Asia. For the rest, there are ways to filter it from river outflows using bubble barriers. There's a demonstration project in Amsterdam that successfully capture floating plastic garbage without inhibiting boat traffic.
Iulioh 3y ago
Honestly i don't really see the problem Is just a minor adjustments for the industry, isn't like your mom and pop store is making handmade plastic bottles Really , i fail to see the problem behind just "ahaha, stupid eu regulations"
cypress66 3y ago
Instead of all this cookie mess, they could have simply required websites to respect the do not track header.
eddtests 3y ago
So this is related to EU Directive 2019/904: """ The EU states, “beverage containers that are single-use plastic products should only be allowed to be placed on the market if they fulfil specific product design requirements that significantly reduce the dispersal into the environment of beverage container caps and lids made of plastic.” Article 6 of the directive gives a more detailed insight. According to this article, caps and lids made out of plastic may be placed on the market only if the caps and lids remain attached to the containers during the products’ intended use stage. Tethered caps will become mandatory in the EU in July 2024. """ Why is this a thing? Because plastic lids are made of a harder plastic that doesn't degrade as quickly and is much less recycled than the bottles themselves. How prevalent is this? In the last 30 years 20 million bottle caps have been found on beaches alone in Europe during clean-up work. They are in the top 5 ocean trash items that ultimately kill wildlife. This is only a small snapshot of the ultimate number of bottle caps not recycled aside their bottles. To fix this, the EU suggest tethering the lid to the bottle so they're less easily lost and more likely to be recycled properly. 20 companies are responsible for the majority of throwaway plastics in the world, so this change is required in only a few places but could have a large net-benefit. Ultimately this is something that can only come from top-down optimization - why? Because it increases costs for each bottle. > This new bottle cap design requirement must have created a new economy for producing these bottle caps for all of the containers, someone profited. Companies lost money from this and tried to lobby to avoid it by trying ideas first, and then tethering if those failed. > There are massive problems around waste that no one there dares to approach, so they make these weird directives that just smell of corruption and incompetence. Why can't we tackle the small and the large? > Many cities, to avoid fines, provide separate containers, but in the end just throw everything on the same pile. Depends on the city/country, but the primary issue with lids is wildlife harm in my opinion so this does fix that issue.
foldr 3y ago
IMO the soft drinks industry in it's present form is pretty lucky that it's allowed to exist at all. There are circumstances where there's a valid case for being able to sell drinks packaged in plastic bottles, but overall, it's very difficult to see how the benefits outweigh the externalities.
jsnell 3y ago
Sure, that seems like a reasonable example to look at. The directive[0] isn't long and is pretty readable. The first thing to note that it was not a "redesign of the bottle cap" directive, that's just how you're spinning it to make it sound ridiculous. Instead it was just a minor part of the Single-Use Plastics Directive. Second, it doesn't look like the primary purpose of that directive was to increase recycling, but to reduce marine litter. The product groups that were in scope for the directive were chosen based on being the cause of the majority of marine plastic litter. For a lot of the product groups, they just banned the use of plastics entirely because there were viable sustainable alternatives. Bottle caps aren't being arbitrarily picked on here, it just appears that beverage bottles + caps are the one thing with no good alternative. The directive did indeed set up goals for separate collection, you're right about that part. But it also set up requirements for the recycling, unlike what you claim. Does the micro-optimization make sense? Think of how many plastic bottles must be sold in the EU each year. I couldn't find numbers quickly, but I would bet it's on the order of magnitude of 100 billion. Even the tiniest bit of optimization in something so common will pay of really quickly. None of this seems particularly off. It's legislation addressing a specific concrete problem with solutions that seem pretty proportionate and actually solving the problem they set out to solve. [0] https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2019/904/oj https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2019/904/oj
- vjerancrnjak 3y ago
  Fishing nets are 30%+ of waste. Switching to glass solves the problem instantly. It puts pressure on the companies and not the public. Tourists in Croatia do not bother collecting the 7 cent tax on plastic containers. Having a different bottle cap won’t improve that. A small percentage of collected plastic waste is recycled. All of the infrastructure that will never be built requires public funding and is more expensive than just switching to glass. Do we want to solve the marine waste problem or do we just want to spend money every year to try to avoid it? The paper straws with forever chemicals is a side effect of this single use plastic directive. How was this not predicted?
  - jsnell 3y ago
    Yes, fishing gear is a major contributor to marine plastic litter. It's not a coincidence that this directive then tackled that as well, not just bottle caps like you originally claimed. But obviously the solutions for fishing gear are very different than the solutions for plastic bottles. The tethered bottle cap is not supposed to solve the problem of making people recycle the bottles, other parts of the directive do that. It solves the problem of the bottle being separated from the cap, such that if the bottle gets recycled so does that cap. Or if the bottle gets thrown in the trash, so does the cap.

oezi 3y ago

Quote: The single-use plastics legislation will address 70 percent of marine litters items, avoiding environmental damage that would otherwise cost €22 billion by 2030. It may seem weird to you, but we need to develop good regulations to deal with all the negative externalities. For instance, I think we could have also added a recycling fee per plastic item sold (say 5 cents). This would have made it more economical to sell bigger units and avoid technically unnecessary items such as the tear-off rings on bottles.

vjerancrnjak 3y ago
Croatia already has that ~7 cent tax on the container. Don’t know how that worked out. I know the capital has no recycling infrastructure. The tourists make no effort to collect that tax. But the paper straw legislation was botched by allowing forever chemicals.
coldtea 3y ago
I seriously doubt the accuracy of their estimations.
flir 3y ago
> technically unnecessary items such as the tear-off rings on bottles. Aren't they a tamper-proofing mechanism?
nvm0n2 3y ago
Virtually all plastic in the oceans comes from Asia. For the rest, there are ways to filter it from river outflows using bubble barriers. There's a demonstration project in Amsterdam that successfully capture floating plastic garbage without inhibiting boat traffic.

Iulioh 3y ago

Honestly i don't really see the problem Is just a minor adjustments for the industry, isn't like your mom and pop store is making handmade plastic bottles Really , i fail to see the problem behind just "ahaha, stupid eu regulations"

cypress66 3y ago

Instead of all this cookie mess, they could have simply required websites to respect the do not track header.

eddtests 3y ago

So this is related to EU Directive 2019/904: """ The EU states, “beverage containers that are single-use plastic products should only be allowed to be placed on the market if they fulfil specific product design requirements that significantly reduce the dispersal into the environment of beverage container caps and lids made of plastic.” Article 6 of the directive gives a more detailed insight. According to this article, caps and lids made out of plastic may be placed on the market only if the caps and lids remain attached to the containers during the products’ intended use stage. Tethered caps will become mandatory in the EU in July 2024. """ Why is this a thing? Because plastic lids are made of a harder plastic that doesn't degrade as quickly and is much less recycled than the bottles themselves. How prevalent is this? In the last 30 years 20 million bottle caps have been found on beaches alone in Europe during clean-up work. They are in the top 5 ocean trash items that ultimately kill wildlife. This is only a small snapshot of the ultimate number of bottle caps not recycled aside their bottles. To fix this, the EU suggest tethering the lid to the bottle so they're less easily lost and more likely to be recycled properly. 20 companies are responsible for the majority of throwaway plastics in the world, so this change is required in only a few places but could have a large net-benefit. Ultimately this is something that can only come from top-down optimization - why? Because it increases costs for each bottle. > This new bottle cap design requirement must have created a new economy for producing these bottle caps for all of the containers, someone profited. Companies lost money from this and tried to lobby to avoid it by trying ideas first, and then tethering if those failed. > There are massive problems around waste that no one there dares to approach, so they make these weird directives that just smell of corruption and incompetence. Why can't we tackle the small and the large? > Many cities, to avoid fines, provide separate containers, but in the end just throw everything on the same pile. Depends on the city/country, but the primary issue with lids is wildlife harm in my opinion so this does fix that issue.

foldr 3y ago

IMO the soft drinks industry in it's present form is pretty lucky that it's allowed to exist at all. There are circumstances where there's a valid case for being able to sell drinks packaged in plastic bottles, but overall, it's very difficult to see how the benefits outweigh the externalities.

jsnell 3y ago

Sure, that seems like a reasonable example to look at. The directive[0] isn't long and is pretty readable. The first thing to note that it was not a "redesign of the bottle cap" directive, that's just how you're spinning it to make it sound ridiculous. Instead it was just a minor part of the Single-Use Plastics Directive. Second, it doesn't look like the primary purpose of that directive was to increase recycling, but to reduce marine litter. The product groups that were in scope for the directive were chosen based on being the cause of the majority of marine plastic litter. For a lot of the product groups, they just banned the use of plastics entirely because there were viable sustainable alternatives. Bottle caps aren't being arbitrarily picked on here, it just appears that beverage bottles + caps are the one thing with no good alternative. The directive did indeed set up goals for separate collection, you're right about that part. But it also set up requirements for the recycling, unlike what you claim. Does the micro-optimization make sense? Think of how many plastic bottles must be sold in the EU each year. I couldn't find numbers quickly, but I would bet it's on the order of magnitude of 100 billion. Even the tiniest bit of optimization in something so common will pay of really quickly. None of this seems particularly off. It's legislation addressing a specific concrete problem with solutions that seem pretty proportionate and actually solving the problem they set out to solve. [0] https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2019/904/oj https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2019/904/oj

vjerancrnjak 3y ago
Fishing nets are 30%+ of waste. Switching to glass solves the problem instantly. It puts pressure on the companies and not the public. Tourists in Croatia do not bother collecting the 7 cent tax on plastic containers. Having a different bottle cap won’t improve that. A small percentage of collected plastic waste is recycled. All of the infrastructure that will never be built requires public funding and is more expensive than just switching to glass. Do we want to solve the marine waste problem or do we just want to spend money every year to try to avoid it? The paper straws with forever chemicals is a side effect of this single use plastic directive. How was this not predicted?
- jsnell 3y ago
  Yes, fishing gear is a major contributor to marine plastic litter. It's not a coincidence that this directive then tackled that as well, not just bottle caps like you originally claimed. But obviously the solutions for fishing gear are very different than the solutions for plastic bottles. The tethered bottle cap is not supposed to solve the problem of making people recycle the bottles, other parts of the directive do that. It solves the problem of the bottle being separated from the cap, such that if the bottle gets recycled so does that cap. Or if the bottle gets thrown in the trash, so does the cap.