deposit refund scheme for plastic bottles?

Plastics: A Hazard to Humans

Plastics have been around for a very long time and have been used by humans for many years. Due to their diverse application in packaging a variety of items, living without plastics is currently unfathomable. Single-use plastics are hazardous to humans, and this is most often seen when they are used to package food. Since water bottles contain bisphenol and phthalates, drinking them has an immediate impact. Furthermore, because single-use items are non-biodegradable, they sometimes end up in water bodies where they continue to leak harmful chemicals for a long time. This happens when they are illegally disposed of. Systems that combine product charges with subsidies for proper disposal or subsidy for proper disposal or recycling. Vendors for products subject to the deposits incur extra costs for handling returned products. However, the expenses are partially offset by the interests earned on the deposits, sales of the collected products and unclaimed deposits. Some of these systems are implemented by industries voluntarily while others by state or local authorities. The English and Welsh government should introduce this system formally for plastic bottles.

Deposit Refund Schemes

The system is a surcharge on the price of potentially polluting products. If a state can avoid pollution by returning the products or their residuals with a refund of the tax granted, the process is deposit refund scheme (DRS). DRS encourage consumers to replace plastic containers into an organized recycling, treatment or reuse processes. Producers like companies owning products packet in plastic containers finance the whole process through payment of an administration fee to each bottle. The typical targets for DRS include drinks containers since they have a high usage both locally and internationally (Hogg, Elliott & Eye, 2010). Since poorly disposed of vessel shortly, become litter, the system encourages recycling hence fighting pollution and subsequently minimizing production costs. Additionally, through the schemes, there is a likelihood of effects on the efficiency of logistics concerning DRS. While reducing the dependence on single-use plastics, people need to have a decrease in their reliance on single-use plastics. The vendors are at the forefront to introduce alternatives to plastics shopping bags and water bottles.

Economic Rationale for the Deposit Refund Schemes

DRS consist of a particular form of product tax or recycling subsidy. Through such schemes, consumers pay a deposit that works as a tax on a container at the time of purchase. In a theoretical perspective, the system performs as a set of extra social cost for improper disposal over the maximum recycling cost. In reality, if a person disposes of the container, he/she pays the external price of improper disposal (Walls, 2011). Alternatively, the consumer can choose the right action through going for a refund and returning the container to the vendor. Although the unit measure for restoring one vessel seems minimal, a $45/ton deposit/refund would reduce all wastes by 10%. When a government in either England or Wales absorbs this idea, they can increase the percentage of saving scraps in the whole democrats by up to 50%. An essential resolution of the system is that it creates incentives for both source reduction and recycling. Scholars such as Palmer and Walls acknowledge that if administered, the system could have significant administrative costs associated with refunding deposits hence reducing the efficiency of the approach.

Impacts of plastic bottles on vulnerable population

Due to their intermolecular bond, plastics degrade very slowly in nature and may persist in the environment for an extended period. They also have a low density hence tend to float in water. When discarded in watershed areas, they assemble in the rainwater sewers and sometimes can choke the outlets due to the prolonged intervals of retrieval. Additionally, the hardened plastics often find ways rivers and subsequently in oceans and seas. Other than in water bodies, there is warning everywhere that plastics should not be treated as toys. Therefore, the immediate risk of plastics is their ability to suffocate individual hence deserves a careful handling in the presence of kids in the household. Since it is the national order to decrease environmental hazards, plastics remain in the front line of the commodities posing a challenge to achieving a pollution free environment.

Recommendation for UK government to use Deposit Refund System

The UK government should introduce a deposit refund system since even when three are other systems to meet the recycling rates achieved through DRS; there is no evidence that the means can deliver the same benefits in reduction of litter. The dominant subject in the analysis of why the government should utilize the system is that there are environmental benefits associated with liter reduction ((Zaman, 2010). The outcome indicates that the government should consider a DRS from the point of achieving high return rates for recyclable beverage containers, hence significantly solving he beverage container littering problem. Through various researches carried out to determine the benefits of DRS, several clear advantages came out such as increasing recycling rates of beverage containers via return rewarding. The system reduces litter through generating an incentive that makes people not specifically consumers not to throw away bottles hence creating environmental gains. Moreover, DRS is a vital mechanism that helps to deal with beverage containers which reduce the central government costs, local authorities and saves the taxpayers on dealing with packages.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the increasing use of plastic bottles increase environmental risks hence calling for measures to recycle them, therefore, reducing the amount of litter resulting from their disposal. Deposit refund systems is an initiative that helps reduce the littering caused by poor placement of water bottles, through enticing the consumers to acquire a refund once they return the bottles to the vendor. The adverse effects created by the inadequate disposal of the containers is far much adverse compared to the advantages of getting a refund on returning a bottle and cutting production cost in organizations. Responsible citizens would choose to have the rebate and save the environment. The UK government should, therefore, adopt the DRS system and reduce the situation through a significant reduction of litter, same as keeping the cost of litter disposal and collection by the local government. When comparing the economic rationale and advantages of using DRS to the accumulation of litter, the former has a vast significance that out way the latter.

References

Hogg, D., Fletcher, D., Elliott, T. and von Eye, M., 2010. Have we got the bottle? Implementing a deposit refund scheme in the UK. Eunomia research and consultancy.

Walls, M., 2011. Deposit-refund systems in practice and theory.

Zaman, T., 2010. The Prevalence and Environmental Impact of Single-Use Plastic Products. Public Health Management & Policy: An Online Textbook, 11th edition Retrieved November, 23, p.2011.

Toufique, M.M.K., and Masoom, M.R., 2015. The Economics of Deposit-Refund Systems: Exploring the Market-Based Environmental Policies to Sustain the Ecological Balance of Dhaka City. Asia Pacific Journal of Energy and Environment, 2(2), pp.61-66.

Mail Online, 2017. Bottle deposits could start next year in the war on plastic. [online] Available at: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-4930354/Bottle-deposits-start-year-war-plastic.html [Accessed 21 Nov. 2017].