Title: [GreenYes] Re: National Asscoiation of Counties adopts Framework EPR policy
My concern about EPR has always been "be careful what you wish for".
The toxics in a product are a small snapshot of a product's
lifecycle. If you replace toxic lead with non-toxic tin or silver,
you increase toxics released into the environment (tin and silver
mining release huge amounts of mercury, and not in a lined landfill
environment). Moreover the net costs of extraction are different, tin
especially tends to be mined in very sensitive regions (rain forests
and coral reef areas), there are very few places to find it (the rare
metals tend to be found in volcanic areas, which tend to correlate
with rain forests).
A careful and wise EPR policy can fine tune and improve the net
environmental costs, but it's not to be done in a cavalier manner.
Baby seal pelts are organic and non-toxic, a written EPR policy which
doesn't screen out baby seal pelts will need to be rewritten, and
risks a backlash against environmental "stewards" who have not done
their environmental math. I wonder if county government is the place
for that math. I am concerned that local government is anxious to
adapt any revenue stream at the moment, and that a policy which
produces revenue may not be looked at closely at all.
On Jul 15, 2:28 pm, "Bill Sheehan" <b...@no.address> wrote:
> PRODUCT POLICY INSTITUTE:
> FIRST NATIONAL POLICY SUPPORTING FRAMEWORK FOR
> SUSTAINABLE PRODUCTION ADOPTED BY
> NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF COUNTIES
> Kansas City, Missouri (July 15, 2008) - The National Association of Counties
> today adopted the first national policy supporting a "framework" approach to
> Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR). The groundbreaking national
> resolution exemplifies growing support and momentum toward sustainable
> "NACo's adoption of the Extended Producer Responsibility framework is a
> great step forward for our environment," says Commissioner Victoria
> Reinhardt, Ramsey County, Minnesota. "Smart design protects the environment
> and saves money by preventing costly waste."
> Extended Producer Responsibility is a concept whereby product manufacturers
> are primarily responsible for the life cycle impacts of their products. The
> "framework" concept goes beyond product-by-product approach and establishes
> consistent principles and procedures for product makers in order to achieve
> producer-lead responsibility for sustainable product design and management.
> Reinhardt was the author of the framework resolution for NACo, in addition
> to three other product-specific producer responsibility resolutions for
> paint, electronics, and mercury-containing lamps.
> "NACo's resolution signals the beginning of the end of local governments
> providing "free" disposal services to producers of toxic and throw-away
> products," says Bill Sheehan, Executive Director, Product Policy Institute.
> The Product Policy Institute works with local governments to support state
> producer responsibility and comprehensive framework policies.
> In January 2008, the California Integrated Waste Management Board was the
> first state agency in the United States to adopt a framework for an Extended
> Producer Responsibility system. With EPR implementation legislation expected
> to be considered in California and several other states, and now with the
> first national association of elected officials supporting the EPR
> Framework, the effort toward achieving sustainable production gains
> significant momentum.
> "We are delighted that county elected officials from California and across
> the country are united in supporting the need for product producers to
> become part of the waste management solution," says Heidi Sanborn, Executive
> Director, California Product Stewardship Council.
> Both the California Product Stewardship Council (CPSC) and the Product
> Policy Institute are dedicated to reversing the trend of manufacturers
> producing more disposable and toxic products every year.
> The National Association of Counties adopted the resolution in support of an
> EPR Framework approach at their annual meeting in Kansas City, Missouri.
> Contact: Commissioner Victoria Reinhardt, 651-247-9958,
> victoria.reinha...@no.address Bill Sheehan, Product Policy Institute,
> 706-613-0710, <mailto:b...@no.address> b...@no.address (
> <http://www.productpolicy.org>www.productpolicy.org). Heidi Sanborn, CPSC
> <mailto:he...@no.address> he...@no.address (
> See text at <http://www.productpolicy.org/resources/index.html>http://www.productpolicy.org/resources/index.html
> Bill Sheehan
> Executive Director
> Product Policy Institute
> P.O. Box 48433
> Athens, GA 30604 USA
> Tel: 706-613-0710
> Email: <mailto:b...@no.address> b...@no.address
> Web: <http://www.productpolicy.org/>www.productpolicy.org