Deposits on single use containers - a social cost-benefit analysis of the Danish deposit system for single use drink containers

Abstract

This study compares the social costs and environmental benefits of collecting single use drink containers through the Danish deposit system with the social costs and benefits of treating the containers as part of the municipal waste-disposal system. It focuses on single use polyethylene terphthalate and glass bottles, and steel and aluminium cans. The social costs of handling these containers in the deposit system includes the costs of collection, sorting, and transportation, adjusted against the profit from selling the collected material for recycling. The social cost of incinerating these containers as municipal waste consists of the expenses for the collection, incineration of the containers and disposal of ashes. If there is any income from energy generation accompanying incineration, this is adjusted against costs. The main environmental effects related to both strategies are quantified, valuated and included in the assessment. The results of the analysis show that there are significant social costs compared to the benefits connected with the new deposit system. This is true for all four types of single use drink containers examined. All in all, Denmark bears a net social cost of 6.7 to 8.1 million Euros per year compared to a baseline of incineration with energy recovery.

Keywords

Waste management waste policy social cost-benefit analysis environmental economics deposit systems recycling aluminium cans steel cans polyethylene terphthalate bottles glass bottles wmr 725-1

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

AEA Technology (2002): Benefits Table (BeTa) Database: Estimates of the marginal external costs of air pollution in Europe. Netcen for DG Environment, Brussels .

Aluminium Association (1999): Summary of Electricity supply for Worldwide Primary Aluminium Smelting Expansions. Unpublished document cited in Weidema, B.P. (1999): A reply to the aluminium industry: Each market has its own marginal . International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 4, 309-310 .

Bartone, C. (1990): Economic and policy issues in resource recovery from municipal solid wastes . Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 4, 7-23 .

Brisson, I.E. (1997): Assessing the “Waste Hierarchy”: A Social Cost-Benefit Analysis of MSW Management in the European Union. AKF Publishing, Copenhagen .

Economic Council, The (2002): Dansk Økonomi. Forår 2002 (The Danish Economy. Spring 2003). The Economic Council, Copenhagen .

Ekvall, T. , Person, L. , Ryberg, A. , Widheden, J. , Frees, N. , Nielsen, P.H. , Weidema, B.P. , & Wesnæs, M. (1998): Life Cycle Assessment of Packaging Systems for Beer and Soft Drinks, Main Report. Environmental Project 399. Ministry of Environment and Energy, Copenhagen .

European Commission (1997): Cost-benefit Analysis of the Different Municipal Solid Waste Management Systems: Objectives and Instruments for the year 2000. European Commission, Bruxelles

Frees, N. , Ryberg, A. , & Ekvall, T. (1998): Life Cycle Assessment of Packaging Systems for Beer and Soft Drinks, Steel Cans. Environmental Project No. 403. Ministry of Energy and Environment, Copenhagen .

Frees, N. & Weidema, B.P. (1998): Life Cycle Assessment of Packaging Systems for Beer and Soft Drinks - Energy and Transport Scenarios. Environmental Project No. 406. Ministry of Energy & Environment, Copenhagen .

10.

Johansen, P.-O. (1993): Cost-benefit Analysis of Environmental Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge .

11.

Ministry of Finance (1999): Vejledning i udarbejdelse af samfundsøkonomiske konsekvensvurderinger (Handbook in Preparation of Socio-economic Feasibility Assessments). Ministry of Finance, Copenhagen .

12.

Ministry of Finance, Ministry of Trade and Industry, Ministry of Energy and Environment, Ministry for Taxation, & Ministry of Economic Affairs (2001): Miljøpolitikkens økonomiske fordele og omkostninger (The Economic Costs and Benefits of Environmental Policy). Schultz, Copenhagen .

13.

Møller, F. , Andersen, P. , Grau, P. , Huusom, H. , Madsen, T. , Nielsen, J. , & Strandmark, L. (2000): Samfundsøkonomisk vurdering af miljøprojekter (Social Economic Assessment of Environmental Projects). Danish Environmental Research Institute, The Danish Environmental Protection Agency, Danish Forest and Nature Agency, Copenhagen .

14.

Person, L. , Ekvall, T. , & Weidema, B.P. (1998): Life Cycle Assessment of Packaging Systems for Beer and Soft Drinks - Disposable PET Bottles. Environmental Project No. 405. Ministry of Energy & Environment, Copenhagen .

15.

Pommer, K. & Wesnæs, M.S. (1995): Miljømæssig kortlægning af emballager til øl og læskedrikke. Hovedrapport. Arbejdsrapport 62. (Environmental Analysis of Packaging for Beer and Soft Drinks. Main Report. Working paper No. 62). Ministry of Energy & Environment, Copenhagen .

16.

Ryberg, A. , Ekvall, T. , Person, L. , & Weidema, B.P. (1998): Life Cycle Assessment of Packaging Systems for Beer and Soft Drinks-Aluminium Cans. Environmental Project No. 402. Ministry of Energy & Environment, Copenhagen .

17.

The Ministry of Taxation (2002): Prisen på dåseøl vs. på øl returflaske. Regneeksempel på prisforskellen mellem dåseøl vs. øl på returflaske (The price of canned beer and bottled beer. Estimate of the difference in price between beer in cans and beer in refillable bottles.). Ministry of Taxation, Copenhagen .

18.

Strandmark, L. , Jørgensen Kjær, B. , & Østergaard, V. (2002): Samfundsøkonomisk analyse af bortskaffelse af plastflaske- og dunkeaffald fra husholdninger. Miljøprojekt 695. (Socio-economic Analysis of Plastic Bottle Waste from Households). Ministry of Environment, Copenhagen .

19.

US Environmental Protection Agency (2000): Guidelines for Preparing Economic Analyses. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Washington, DC 20460

20.

Vigsø, D. & Andersen, H.T. (2002): Pant på engangsemballage? En samfundsøkonomisk analyse af pantordningen for engangsemballage til øl og soda- vand (Deposits on single use Containers? - A social economic assessment of the Danish deposit system for single use containers for carbonated beverages). Environmental Assessment Institute, Copenhagen .

21.

Vigsø, D. & Højgaard, B. (2003): Tillægsnotat om forbrænding af aluminiumsdåser - tillægsnotat til “Pant på Engangsemballage?” (Amendment to the EAI’s Report on Deposits on single use Containers). Environmental Assessment Institute, Copenhagen .

22.

Vigsø, D. , Lynge, M. T. , Larsen T. , & Egense A. (2002): Miljøets pris. Danske miljøudgifter og -indtægter (The Cost of Danish Environmental Policy). Environmental Assessment Institute, Copenhagen .

23.

Walls, M. & Palmer, K. (2000): Upstream Pollution, Downstream Waste Disposal, and the Design of Comprehensive Environmental Policies. Discussion Paper 97-51-REV. Resources for the Future, Washington, USA.

24.

Widheden, J. , Ekvall, T. , & Nielsen, P.H. (1998): Life Cycle Assessment of Packaging Systems for Beer and Soft Drinks - Disposable Glass Bottles. Environmental Project No. 401. Ministry of Energy & Environment, Copenhagen .