Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

Container deposit schemes reduce rubbish on our beaches. Here’s how we proved it

News Feed
Monday, September 25, 2023

ShutterstockOur beaches are in trouble. Limited recycling programs and a society that throws away so much have resulted in more than 3 million tonnes of plastic polluting the oceans. An estimated 1.5–1.9% of this rubbish ends up on beaches. So can waste-management strategies such as container deposit schemes make a difference to this 50,000–60,000 tonnes of beach rubbish? The Queensland government started a container deposit scheme in 2019. We wanted to know if it reduced the rubbish that washed up on beaches in a tourist hotspot, the Whitsundays region. To find out, our study, the first of its kind, used data from a community volunteer group through the Australian Marine Debris Initiative Database. It turned out that for the types of rubbish included in the scheme – plastic bottles and aluminium cans – the answer was an emphatic yes. Read more: Spotting plastic waste from space and counting the fish in the seas: here's how AI can help protect the oceans Container deposit schemes work After the scheme began, there were fewer plastic bottles and aluminium cans on Whitsundays beaches. Volunteer clean-up workers collected an average of about 120 containers per beach visit before the scheme began in 2019. This number fell to 77 in 2020. Not only that, but those numbers stayed down year after year. This means people continued to take part in the scheme for years. Rubbish that wasn’t part of the scheme still found its way to the beaches. However, more types of rubbish such as larger glass bottles are being added to the four-year-old Queensland scheme. Other states and territories have had schemes like this for many years, the oldest in South Australia since 1971. But we didn’t have access to beach data from before and after those schemes started. So our findings are great news, especially as some of these other schemes are set to expand too. The evidence also supports the creation of new schemes in Victoria this November and Tasmania next year. These developments give reason to hope we will see further reductions in beach litter. Read more: Spin the bottle: the fraught politics of container deposit schemes The data came from the community To find out whether the scheme has reduced specific sorts of rubbish on beaches we needed a large amount of data from before and after it began. The unsung heroes of this study are the diligent volunteers who provided us with these data. They have been recording the types and amounts of rubbish found during their cleanups at Whitsundays beaches for years. Eco Barge Clean Seas Inc has been doing this work since 2009. In taking that extra step of counting and sorting the rubbish, they may not have known it at the time, but they were creating a data gold mine. We would eventually use their data to prove the container deposit scheme works. The rubbish clean-ups are continuing. This means we’ll be able to see how adding more rubbish types to the scheme will further reduce rubbish on beaches. The long-term perspective we can gain from such data is testament to this sustained community effort. Read more: Local efforts have cut plastic waste on Australia's beaches by almost 30% in 6 years There’s still more work to do So if we recycle our plastics, why do we still get beaches covered in rubbish? The reality is that most plastics aren’t recycled. This is mainly due to two problems: technological limitations on the sorting needed to avoid contamination of waste streams inadequate incentives for people to reduce contamination by properly sorting their waste, and ultimately to use products made from recycled waste. Our findings show we can create more sustainable practices and a cleaner environment when individuals are given incentives to recycle. However, container deposit schemes don’t just provide a financial reward. Getting people directly involved in recycling fosters a sense of responsibility for the environment. This connection between people’s actions and outcomes is a key to such schemes’ success. Read more: The new 100% recyclable packaging target is no use if our waste isn't actually recycled Our study also shows how invaluable community-driven clean-up projects are. Not only do they reduce environmental harm and improve our experiences on beaches, but they can also provide scientists like us with the data we need to show how waste-management policies affect the environment. Waste management is a concern for communities, policymakers and environmentalists around the world. The lessons from our study apply not only in Australia but anywhere that communities can work with scientists and governments to solve environmental problems. The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

Volunteers have been collecting and sorting washed-up rubbish on the beach for years. Thanks to their efforts, we have data on whether container deposit schemes help the issue.

Shutterstock

Our beaches are in trouble. Limited recycling programs and a society that throws away so much have resulted in more than 3 million tonnes of plastic polluting the oceans. An estimated 1.5–1.9% of this rubbish ends up on beaches.

So can waste-management strategies such as container deposit schemes make a difference to this 50,000–60,000 tonnes of beach rubbish?

The Queensland government started a container deposit scheme in 2019. We wanted to know if it reduced the rubbish that washed up on beaches in a tourist hotspot, the Whitsundays region.

To find out, our study, the first of its kind, used data from a community volunteer group through the Australian Marine Debris Initiative Database.

It turned out that for the types of rubbish included in the scheme – plastic bottles and aluminium cans – the answer was an emphatic yes.


Read more: Spotting plastic waste from space and counting the fish in the seas: here's how AI can help protect the oceans


Container deposit schemes work

After the scheme began, there were fewer plastic bottles and aluminium cans on Whitsundays beaches. Volunteer clean-up workers collected an average of about 120 containers per beach visit before the scheme began in 2019. This number fell to 77 in 2020.

Not only that, but those numbers stayed down year after year. This means people continued to take part in the scheme for years.

Rubbish that wasn’t part of the scheme still found its way to the beaches.

However, more types of rubbish such as larger glass bottles are being added to the four-year-old Queensland scheme. Other states and territories have had schemes like this for many years, the oldest in South Australia since 1971.

But we didn’t have access to beach data from before and after those schemes started. So our findings are great news, especially as some of these other schemes are set to expand too. The evidence also supports the creation of new schemes in Victoria this November and Tasmania next year.

These developments give reason to hope we will see further reductions in beach litter.


Read more: Spin the bottle: the fraught politics of container deposit schemes


The data came from the community

To find out whether the scheme has reduced specific sorts of rubbish on beaches we needed a large amount of data from before and after it began.

The unsung heroes of this study are the diligent volunteers who provided us with these data. They have been recording the types and amounts of rubbish found during their cleanups at Whitsundays beaches for years.

Eco Barge Clean Seas Inc has been doing this work since 2009. In taking that extra step of counting and sorting the rubbish, they may not have known it at the time, but they were creating a data gold mine. We would eventually use their data to prove the container deposit scheme works.

The rubbish clean-ups are continuing. This means we’ll be able to see how adding more rubbish types to the scheme will further reduce rubbish on beaches.

The long-term perspective we can gain from such data is testament to this sustained community effort.


Read more: Local efforts have cut plastic waste on Australia's beaches by almost 30% in 6 years


There’s still more work to do

So if we recycle our plastics, why do we still get beaches covered in rubbish? The reality is that most plastics aren’t recycled. This is mainly due to two problems:

  • technological limitations on the sorting needed to avoid contamination of waste streams
  • inadequate incentives for people to reduce contamination by properly sorting their waste, and ultimately to use products made from recycled waste.

Our findings show we can create more sustainable practices and a cleaner environment when individuals are given incentives to recycle.

However, container deposit schemes don’t just provide a financial reward. Getting people directly involved in recycling fosters a sense of responsibility for the environment. This connection between people’s actions and outcomes is a key to such schemes’ success.


Read more: The new 100% recyclable packaging target is no use if our waste isn't actually recycled


Our study also shows how invaluable community-driven clean-up projects are. Not only do they reduce environmental harm and improve our experiences on beaches, but they can also provide scientists like us with the data we need to show how waste-management policies affect the environment.

Waste management is a concern for communities, policymakers and environmentalists around the world. The lessons from our study apply not only in Australia but anywhere that communities can work with scientists and governments to solve environmental problems.

The Conversation

The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

House Republican weighs voting against funding bill over electric vehicles

Rep. Lisa McClain (R-Mich.) said she’d consider voting against a bill to fund the government if it does not bar a Biden rule aiming to bolster electric vehicles. McClain, during a press conference on Wednesday said it’s “a hard line for me” to prevent an Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rule that would be expected to...

Rep. Lisa McClain (R-Mich.) said she’d consider voting against a bill to fund the government if it does not bar a Biden rule aiming to bolster electric vehicles.  McClain, during a press conference on Wednesday said it’s “a hard line for me” to prevent an Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rule that would be expected to make two-thirds of new car sales electric in 2032.  “I am tired of the government telling me what I can do, what I can drive, what I can cook my food with,” she said.  Asked directly if she would vote against an appropriations bill that did not block the EPA rule, McClain told The Hill that she would “look at any bill before I’m going to tell you how I’m going to vote” but that “I won’t take that option off the table.” She added that she would “absolutely” consider not voting for a funding bill over the issue.  Her comments add a potential complication to the already difficult task before appropriators of piecing together a bill that will get buy-in from both the Democratic-controlled Senate and the House, where Republicans hold a slim majority.  Republicans have had a number of internal clashes over budget issues and ousted former Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) after he moved to avert a shutdown. In recent days, members of the hard-right Freedom Caucus softened their demands on spending. But at the same time, they have also reportedly pushed Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) to fight aggressively for their priorities, even by risking a government shutdown. Last week, more than 200 Republicans signed onto a letter led by McClain calling for incorporating language to bar the EPA rule in an appropriations bill. It’s unclear whether any others would consider voting against a funding bill over the issue.

US plastic bag recycling directory site taken down after ‘abysmal failure’

Investigation by ABC News found some materials were ending up in landfills, incinerators and other waste facilitiesA national online recycling directory for plastic bags and films has been taken offline, six months after an investigation by ABC News found some materials were ending up in landfills, incinerators and other waste facilities.The directory previously directed users to some 18,000 store drop-off locations around the country where they could bring used plastic bags and packaging to be recycled, including Walmart and Target locations. The initiative was promoted by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and local and state governments across the country. Continue reading...

A national online recycling directory for plastic bags and films has been taken offline, six months after an investigation by ABC News found some materials were ending up in landfills, incinerators and other waste facilities.The directory previously directed users to some 18,000 store drop-off locations around the country where they could bring used plastic bags and packaging to be recycled, including Walmart and Target locations. The initiative was promoted by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and local and state governments across the country.In May, ABC News and affiliates used digital tracking devices to monitor plastic waste dropped off at Walmart and Target stores listed on the directory. Of the 46 trackers placed, the vast majority never ended up at locations associated with plastic bag recycling.“Plastic film recycling had been an abysmal failure for decades and it’s important that plastic companies stop lying to the public,” said Judith Enck, president of advocacy group Beyond Plastics. “Finally, the truth is coming out.”Plastics are a major contributor to the climate crisis. Made from oil and gas, the materials are set to drive nearly half of oil demand growth by midcentury, according to the US International Energy Agency.Producing the materials requires fossil fuel extraction, refining and “cracking” in special high-heat facilities, and plastic waste often ends up in landfills and waste incinerators. Each step produces planet-heating and toxic emissions.Already, the production and disposal of plastics account for 3.4% of global greenhouse gas emissions, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development says, and that number is slated to rise.Nina Bellucci Butler, CEO of Stina Inc, which managed the directory, cited a serious lack of commitment from industry partners in the decision to shutter the initiative, as well as meager demand for recycled plastics.“It’s a fine line between maintaining a credible resource to help people find the best option for the common household items that are not easy to eliminate … and enabling greenwashing,” she wrote in an email.She said a lack of adequate funding for the project and the plastic recycling sector at large also contributed to the decision to take down the site. The project was initially funded by the American Chemistry Council, a plastic industry lobbying group which has lobbied against many US environmental regulations, but Butler said it had been self-funded for almost a year before closing down last month.The directory’s demise is indicative of a larger problem in the plastics recycling sector. Of the 51m tons of plastic waste US households generated in 2021, just 2.4m tons – or 5% – was recycled, a Greenpeace report found last year.A major hurdle: plastic materials are expensive to collect and sort. There are thousands of different kinds of the material, and none of them can be melted down together. Even plastics of the same category often can’t be recycled together – bottles that are dyed green or blue, for instance, can’t be processed with clear bottles made of the same kind of plastic, and few facilities have the capacity to sort so many different materials, the Greenpeace report found.Industry interests have long insisted that plastic recycling can be improved, yet report after report shows recycling is failing to rein in the problem.skip past newsletter promotionThe planet's most important stories. Get all the week's environment news - the good, the bad and the essentialPrivacy Notice: Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. For more information see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.after newsletter promotionPlastic waste is also a major contributor to terrestrial and marine pollution, and can leach toxins into the environment.Experts say plastic production must be curbed in an effort to curb toxic and planet-heating pollution. And Enck, who is also a former Environmental Protection Agency regional administrator, said rather than relying on plastic recycling programs, “it’s better for people to shift to reusable bags”.Butler said Stina also encourages the public to recycle plastic goods with the Trex Company, which still runs a recycling program with retailers. But ultimately, she said, she hopes the decision to end the program “results in more support for recyclers”.“It’s past time to rethink business as usual,” she said.Last month, world leaders met in Kenya to negotiate plans to tackle the plastic pollution crisis. And at the international climate talks known as Cop28 in the UAE this week, Inger Andersen, the executive director of the United Nations environment program, urged nations and plastic producers to change their behavior.“The world is ready to break its addiction to both fossil fuels and plastics,” she said.

Lawmakers in Norway Make a Deal Opening up for Deep Sea Mining in Arctic Ocean

Norway’s government has made a deal with two large opposition parties to open the Arctic Ocean to seabed mineral exploration despite warnings by environmental groups that it would threaten the region's biodiversity

COPENHAGEN, Denmark (AP) — Norway’s minority center-left government and two large opposition parties made a deal Tuesday to open the Arctic Ocean to seabed mineral exploration despite warnings by environmental groups that it would threaten the biodiversity of the vulnerable ecosystems in the area.“This is a disaster for the sea,” said Frode Pleym, head of the local chapter of Greenpeace. “Norway is now allowing irreversible interventions in areas where nature is completely unknown.”Martin Sveinssønn Melvær of the Norwegian Bellona environmental group said it was “completely contrary to scientific recommendations" and believes “it is a dangerous derailment in the fight against climate change to open up seabed minerals.”The government – made up of the Labor and the Center Party – made the deal with the conservatives from Hoeyre and the Progress Party, Norwegian news agency NTB said.It said they had agreed on a step-by-step opening process where the Norwegian parliament, or Stortinget, will approve the first development projects, in the same way as it has done for certain extraction projects in the petroleum sector. The Scandinavian country, which is one of the world’s wealthiest countries due to its vast oil and gas reserves, says there are significant mineral resources on the seabed of the Norwegian continental shelf.According to the Norwegian Petroleum Directorate, there are sulphides and manganese crusts containing metals and minerals that are crucial for making batteries, wind turbines, PCs and mobile phones. If proven to be profitable, and if extraction can be done sustainably, seabed mineral activities can strengthen the economy, including employment in Norway, while ensuring the supply of crucial metals for the world’s transition to sustainable energy, the Ministry of Petroleum and Energy said in June. The planned area is located southwest of the Arctic island of Svalbard. Copyright 2023 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Airlines face formal complaints over contested sustainability claims

Virgin Atlantic and British Airways are accused of misleading customers about claims on carbon emissions from ‘sustainable’ jet fuelVirgin Atlantic and British Airways are facing formal complaints over their sustainable flight claims after being accused of misleading potential customers about the environmental credentials of aviation.This week, a Virgin plane took off on the first transatlantic flight by a commercial airliner fully powered by “sustainable” jet fuel, largely comprising cooking oil. The flight, partly funded by the UK government, flew to great fanfare from airlines and ministers as a potentially guilt-free way to fly. However, scientists and environmental groups are more sceptical. Continue reading...

Virgin Atlantic and British Airways are facing a formal complaints over their sustainable flight claims after being accused of misleading potential customers about the environmental credentials of aviation.This week, a Virgin plane took off on the first transatlantic flight by a commercial airliner fully powered by “sustainable” jet fuel, largely comprising cooking oil. The flight, partly funded by the UK government, flew to great fanfare from airlines and ministers as a potentially guilt-free way to fly. However, scientists and environmental groups are more sceptical.Now, climate charity Possible and law firm Leigh Day have filed formal complaints against the two major airlines over their claims about reducing emissions from flights.The senior campaigner at Possible, Alethea Warrington, said: “The reality is that technologies for cleaner flight either don’t work, or don’t even exist yet. We think that airlines’ misleading claims about their emissions are unfair on people who want to do the right thing when they travel. It’s time for airlines to start being honest about their sky-high emissions.”The complaints, filed under the National Contact point mechanism run by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), set out that both airlines are misleading consumers over their claims on reducing carbon emissions from flights as the layperson does not have the expertise to discern the limits of decarbonisation technology.Airlines claim they can use biofuels made from crops or green hydrogen made from renewable energy, but recent research from the Royal Society has found the UK would have to devote half its farmland or more than double its total renewable electricity supply to make enough aviation fuel to meet its ambitions for net zero flying.The filing highlights that BA claims to be “driving urgent action towards net-zero emissions” and said it has a “clear roadmap to achieving net-zero carbon emissions by 2050”. However, analysis has found BA’s emissions from jet fuel have increased year-on-year between 2016 and 2019.Virgin Atlantic features its “mission to net zero” on its promotional materials but fails to mention it is falling short of its emissions targets, which Possible has argued is crucial information for consumers.The charity also points out scientific literature comparing the lifecycle emissions from biofuels compared to conventional jet fuel, “which is clear that these fuels may produce even more emissions and be worse for the climate than kerosene”. Both feedstocks produce fuels with similar tailpipe emissions to kerosene, and the emissions reductions are claimed to be created at a systemic level.“For fuels derived from biomass, land is not available to produce crops for biofuels in sufficient quantities to power aviation without causing hugely damaging deforestation, which increase emissions and makes biofuels just as bad for the climate as kerosene, if not worse,” the charity said.A British Airways spokesperson said: “In 2019, we committed to net-zero emissions by 2050 and, while there is no single solution to this challenge, as part of our BA Better World programme, we have a clear roadmap of initiatives to get there.skip past newsletter promotionSign up to Business TodayGet set for the working day – we'll point you to all the business news and analysis you need every morningPrivacy Notice: Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. For more information see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.after newsletter promotion“In the short-term, this means improving our operational efficiency, investing in new, more fuel-efficient aircraft and progressively introducing sustainable aviation fuels (SAF) with partnerships in the UK and US, while for the medium to longer term, we’re continuing to invest in the development of SAF – a critical path to decarbonise, and looking at how we can help with the growth of zero-emissions hydrogen-powered aircraft and carbon-removal technology.“We were the first airline to report our carbon footprint more than two decades ago and were the first airline to voluntarily participate in the UK emissions trading scheme.”A Virgin Atlantic spokesperson said: “At Virgin Atlantic, we are committed to achieving Net Zero 2050 and have set interim targets on our pathway to get there, including 10% sustainable aviation fuel by 2030.“There are two levers for delivering in-sector carbon reductions in the short to medium term: the fleet we operate and fuel we burn. We already fly one of the youngest and most efficient fleets across the Atlantic.“Beyond fleet renewals, SAF presents an immediate opportunity to deliver lifecycle carbon reductions of up to 70% and is something we have been pioneering for over 15 years.”

Net zero by 2050 and interim target of 70% emissions reduction by 2035 passed by NSW parliament

Greens and Coalition band together to force Labor to pass stronger greenhouse gas legislation than original policyGet our morning and afternoon news emails, free app or daily news podcastThe New South Wales government’s greenhouse gas emission reduction targets have been passed into law after the Greens and Coalition joined forces to strengthen the legislation to include interim targets.The state’s target of cutting emissions 70% compared with 2005 levels by 2035, and reaching net zero emissions by 2050, are now enshrined in law, and an independent advisory panel to monitor progress will be established.Sign up for Guardian Australia’s free morning and afternoon email newsletters for your daily news roundup Continue reading...

The New South Wales government’s greenhouse gas emission reduction targets have been passed into law after the Greens and Coalition joined forces to strengthen the legislation to include interim targets.The state’s target of cutting emissions 70% compared with 2005 levels by 2035, and reaching net zero emissions by 2050, are now enshrined in law, and an independent advisory panel to monitor progress will be established.Following a raft of amendments, the targets will be able to be reviewed and increased over time, and the Net Zero Commission will be able to provide independent advice on projects and policies, including approvals of any new coal and gas projects.The state environment minister, Penny Sharpe, said Labor was taking “serious action on climate change” and governments would be held accountable for delivering on emissions targets into the future.“This bill provides the framework for NSW to embark on the essential journey to net zero emissions and resilience to climate change,” she said.“It shows business and industry they are not alone in responding to this challenge.”Sharpe said she welcomed the cross-party support to get the bill passed before the parliament rises for the year.“[I] look forward to accelerating the transition to renewable energy that will deliver cleaner and more affordable energy to households and businesses,” she said.The legislation was a centrepiece of Labor’s election campaign. The former Coalition government had committed to the ambitious interim target – although insisted it didn’t need laws to achieve the goal.The Minns government was roundly criticised by environmental groups for initially excluding the 2035 target from its bill. Australia’s former chief scientist Prof Penny Sackett last month urged the government to include it.The chief executive ot the Nature Conservation Council of New South Wales, Jacqui Mumford, described it as a milestone in the shift to energy “powered by the wind and sun”, and thanked the opposition and crossbench for strengthening the legislation.skip past newsletter promotionSign up to Afternoon UpdateOur Australian afternoon update breaks down the key stories of the day, telling you what’s happening and why it mattersPrivacy Notice: Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. For more information see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.after newsletter promotion“The establishment of the independent Net Zero Commission will be critical to ensuring NSW is guided by the science and continues to increase ambition,” she said.“Rarely do we see governments able to secure such broad support for reforms. The NSW parliament should be celebrated for this show of multi-partisanship for our collective future.”Earlier in the year government confirmed it would negotiate with Origin Energy, the owner of the 2,880-megawatt coal-fired Eraring power plant near Newcastle, for a “temporary” extension of its operating life past its 2025 closure date.The chief executive of Bushfire Survivors for Climate Action, Serena Joyner, said it was relieving to see the Coalition and government work together on the bill.“While more needs to be done to protect our communities and environment from worsening climate change-driven events like the 2019-20 Black Summer bushfires, these sorts of commitments, that have support from all parties, are important,” she said.“Now, as we head into another potentially devastating summer and fires already destroying homes and lives, it is vital that we see greater climate action.”

Suggested Viewing

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

Our team is always growing.
Become a partner, volunteer, sponsor, or intern today.
Let us know how you would like to get involved!

CONTACT US

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Subscribers receive a free day pass for streaming Cinema Verde.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.