NEWS

Most of the companies who design and sell the products you buy aren't paying to recycle them and actually design their products for disposal. State disposal bans do nothing to reduce the toxicity or total volume of waste.. Local recycling strategies are not enough to reduce the tons of waste disposed in California annually. California local governments spend over $100,000,000 a year collecting and properly managing household hazardous products alone. It's time to change that.

Hundreds of products make our lives easier... until we don't need them anymore. Then, if they're not disposed of responsibly, the acids, Mercury and other heavy metals they contain become a danger to our health and the environment.

A century ago, when local governments assumed responsibility for solid waste, it consisted mostly of coal ash left over from heating and cooking. The rest was mainly food, with a small amount of simple manufactured products like paper and glass. Today, manufactured products and associated packaging makes up 75% of what we throw away.

As more and more products are being deemed "hazardous" the state's response is to ban them from disposal. Products banned from disposal include arsenic-treated lumber, hypodermic needles, and universal waste. Universal wastes are products that are so universally used, like batteries and fluorescent lamps, that they have their own category. These universal wastes were banned from disposal in the normal household trash as of February 8, 2006. Treated lumber was banned in January 2007, and needles and other "sharps" will be banned in September 2008. Pharmaceuticals are expected to be added soon. Unfortunately, the state-mandated bans must be enforced by local governments. And they simply don't have the money to do it! It's the classic unfunded mandate--a government directive without the resources to enforce it. The intentions were good, but the responsibility is misplaced onto local governments.

We currently operate under two completely separate and disconnected systems: one system designs, manufactures and sells products to us and then effectively rides off into the sunset. Once the consumer is done with those products, the other system is engaged when local governments - and their taxpayers - become financially responsible for managing the disposal of these private goods, many of which are toxic and disposable by design. These two systems don't communicate with each other. Local governments don't have any input into how toxic or durable the products are, and manufacturers don't have to design creative and safe ways to dispose of them at the end of their useful life.

The California Product Stewardship Council, a non-profit made up of California local governments, is working towards Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) policies in California. EPR policies extend the responsibility and economics of end-of-life management for products to their manufacturers. The goal is to provide incentive for manufacturers to design products for the environment. For example, disposal of hazardous wastes cost an average of $1500/ton while solid waste ranges $50 to $100/ton. If a consumer had to pay for the disposal of a hazardous product at the time of purchase, they might take a second look at purchasing a product that is toxic, creating a market signal to the manufacturer and producer to make products that don't go into a waste stream. To learn more or become part of this movement, visit the California Product Stewardship Council's website at www.CalPSC.org.