SuperSize my packaging
The other day when hunger struck me after a long hard graft in the office I gave into the final biggest temptation that exists in the post super size world. I eat at Maccy D’s. But I didn’t just have a Big Mac. No I decided to gorge myself on a whole meal. Unfortunately they didn’t serve supersize anymore so I had to make do with a large one instead.
What struck me as I sat devouring this unnutritional, calorific meal, apart from the nauseous smell and rather chewy meat, was the amount of packing there is. Before I could photograph the table that had now become a (not so little) landfill site, the efficient staff cleared it away. It seems the staff have less to do now that fewer of us are willing to eat this cardboard food, where more often than not the packaging looks more edible than what’s inside.
The amount of packaging in a normal McDonald’s meal looks something like this. If we work on the basis that McDonald’s servers around 35 million customers a day, that’s a hell of a lot of packaging. Of course it’s not just McDonalds…how many of us have had similar stories to these folks?
But it also seems like the government isn’t doing enough to “encourage” companies to cut down on packaging that is overfilling our landfills and destroying the environment. As Ms Abbott MP found out:
Non-recyclable Packaging
Ms Abbott: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what measures the Government have taken to discourage the use by manufacturers of non-recyclable packaging?
Mr. Sutcliffe: The Packaging (Essential Requirements) Regulations 2003 (as amended) require that all items of packaging shall be designed, produced and commercialised in such a way to permit its reuse or recovery, including recycling, and to minimise its impact on the environment when packaging waste or residues of packaging waste operations are disposed of.
The UK regulations make no distinction between reusable, recoverable or recyclable packaging as life cycle analysis indicates that differences between such processes are negligible.
Voxpolis thinks we need a “one layer rule.” All packaging should only consist of one layer around the package, therefore reducing the amount of packaging thrown away.
March 14th, 2006 at 9:08 pm
Some more thoughts from our environmentally friendly govenrment: Supermarkets (Packaging)
Dr. Kumar: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what plans she has to introduce legislation (a) limiting the amount of packaging that can be used for products sold in supermarkets and (b) to require supermarkets to use easily recyclable packaging. [56119]
Mr. Bradshaw: We have no plans to introduce further legislation on packaging.
There are two sets of Regulations which cover packaging in the UK and which encourage businesses (including supermarkets) to minimise packaging and to manufacture packaging which can be recycled.
The Packaging (Essential Requirements) Regulations 2003 (as amended) include a requirement that packaging should be manufactured so that the volume and weight are limited to the minimum adequate to maintain the necessary level of safety, hygiene and acceptance for the packed product and for the consumer. These Regulations also require that
“packaging . . . be designed, produced and commercialised . . . to permit its . . . recovery, including recycling, and to minimise its impact on the environment . . .”.
The Producer Responsibility Obligations (Packaging Waste) Regulations 2005 are intended to increase the recovery and recycling of packaging waste. Because the amount of packaging waste recycling businesses have to do is determined, in part, by the amount of packaging they handle, they can cut costs if they reduce the packaging used around their products.
Legislation is one way of reducing packaging, but consumers have a part to play. For example, if consumers made a point of choosing goods that are not heavily packaged, or bought ‘loose’ food rather than pre-packaged, or used their own shopping bags or boxes, manufacturers might be encouraged to reduce the quantity of packaging on their products.
July 15th, 2006 at 12:22 pm
[...] The answer: “we aim to make sure that as much of our packaging as possible is made from renewable resources”. No mention of any attempt to reduce packaging. And they certainly need to make an effect to reduce it - see my post on packaging. [...]
August 29th, 2006 at 9:37 am
[...] But the real “concern” is how this information is going to be used. Clearly it is a precursor to a “pay as you throw” scheme where households are charged for not recycling. Although I believe this is inevitable, i’m not convinced it will work (people will just dump their waste elsewhere) and should only be implemented with an equal policy to get producers to reduce packaging- perhaps the “one layer” scheme I blogged here. [...]
November 14th, 2006 at 9:52 am
[...] One way forward would be the one layer policy i’ve mentioned before - but this won’t tackle the above problem. For that you have to convince people to dump their packaging at the checkout. That incentive isn’t present yet. [...]