Ref. Ares(2021)5737909 - 20/09/2021
DG ENVIRONMENT
Daniel Calleja
Director-General DG ENV
Private Dinner with UNESDA (soft-drink industry)
(Stanhope Hotel, Rue du Commerce 9, Brussels
4 March, 19:30)
BRIEFING NOTE
Scene setter / Context:
You are attending a private dinner at the invitation of UNESDA Soft Drinks Europe,
representing 11 corporate members and 23 national associations of the European soft
drinks industry. It will be an unofficial, off the record setting, however they will likely
take the occasion to ask many questions. A list of expected participants is included in
the background of this briefing.
On the same day, UNESDA will have presented to HoC Marius Vaščega their views
on the CE Action Plan (their position paper is attached to this briefing) and their
Sustainability Strategy, aimed at making plastic packaging more sustainable:
commitments around increased uptake of recycled content, investments into recycling
schemes and processes, etc. They also highlight the potential of “enhanced
recycling”, the need for a supportive framework and concerns over recent legislative
developments on single use plastics in France. They will have discussed with the HoC
the new CEAP and the Commission’s expectations towards the industry. The content
of this briefing is in line with the HoCs briefing.
Name of main contact person:
Ruben DEKKER
Telephone number:
64019
Directorate/Unit:
ENV/B.1
Lines to take
The
transition to a circular economy is an opportunity to transform and
strengthen our economy, stimulate innovation, protect the environment by using
limited resources more efficiently, create jobs and generate competitive advantages
for Europe in a world that is undergoing profound changes.
Welcome UNESDA’s sustainability strategy. As regards “
expectations”, as a general
rule they should strive to design their packaging to be easily recyclable and re-design
it where this is not currently the case. A switch to reuse systems should be envisaged
where this makes sense from an environmental perspective.
Encourage them to take all necessary steps to achieve the
targets set in the SUP
with regard to attached caps, recycled content and achieving the collection rates
for beverage containers.
Invite them to engage constructively in upcoming stakeholder consultations towards
revising the Packaging and Packaging Waste Directive as well as in the context of the
Circular Plastics Alliance (CPA) in the context of which they pledged they would
take up recycled content.
You could usefully ask them what would be, in their view, the key elements of a
supportive framework at an EU level for their investments in closed loops.
[European Green Deal and CEAP 2.0]
The
European Green Deal puts the transition towards a circular economy at the
heart of Europe’s ambition to achieve transforming Europe into a climate neutral
continent by 2050 and halting biodiversity loss, while reinforcing EU
competitiveness.
In this vein,
in March 2020 the Commission will adopt a new circular economy
action plan (CEAP), together with an industrial strategy.
We will make
the regulatory framework fit for a circular future and maximise
new opportunities from the transition.
The
new CEAP will look at the whole lifecycle of products, fostering sustainable
resource use and tackle sectors of high circularity potential such as packaging,
textiles, construction and electronics.
It will in particular
promote an ambitious product policy that will incentivise
consumers and producers to use more sustainable business models that will
increase durability, reuse, remanufacturing and recycling of products
(as opposed to
short-lived products).
The
European Green Deal acknowledged the importance of reliable, comparable
and verifiable information in making more
sustainable decisions and
reducing the
risk of
greenwashing. The new
Action Plan will
empower consumers through an
initiative on tackling misleading green claims by using a standard
methodology like
the Environmental Footprint methods
developed by the Commission.
2
We will also ensure the
swift implementation of the 2018 EU Plastics Strategy and
will take follow-up measures:
-
implementing measures on
single use plastics (SUP);
-
requirements to ensure that
all plastic packaging in the EU market is
reusable or recyclable in an economically viable manner by 2030;
-
requirements on
recycled content and waste reduction measures taking into
account the activities of the Circular Plastics Alliance;
- a
policy framework regarding
biodegradable and bio-based plastics;
- address microplastics.
We also
intend:
-
further measures on waste prevention, and possibly targets. -
to propose to harmonise separate waste collection systems and to assess the
feasibility of introducing EU wide labelling that facilitates the correct
separation of packaging waste at source.
[Revision of Essential Requirements for packaging]
Packaging will be one of the product groups to be addressed as a matter of
priority in the CEAP in light of its environmental impact and the potential to
reduce it.
The Commission will work towards
a proposal in 2021 to:
o reinforce the
Packaging and Packaging Waste Directive’s ‘
Essential
Requirements’ to
ensure that all packaging on the EU market is
reusable or recyclable in an economically viable way by 2030.
o take
further measures to reduce (over) packaging and packaging
waste, including through setting targets and other waste prevention
measures.
The reinforced requirements will be complemented with the
eco-modulation of
the fees producers pay to the Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR)
schemes for the end of life management of their product.
Guidelines will be adopted before the summer in support of the
implementation of the minimum requirements for EPR included in the Waste
Framework Directive. These will cover the eco-modulation of fees, so to adjust
the contribution paid by the producers to the true costs of the end-of-life
management of their products, which provides incentives to design their products
in a more sustainable and circular way. It will also deal with other aspects
including costs coverage, equal treatment and free-riding.
In addition, if agreed in the context of the EU budget the Commission will work
to support effectively implementing the
own resource contribution from
Member States based on the amount of non-recycled plastic packaging waste.
3
[Single Use Plastics Directive]
Under the
Single Use Plastics (SUP) Directive, consulting with Member States
and stakeholders, the Commission is working to put in place the necessary
implementing acts and guidance to support a harmonised implementation of the
Directive across the EU. Your contribution to this process is much appreciated.
There is
no plan to re-open the Directive before the evaluation foreseen by July
2027.
The implementing acts and guidance will include
the calculation of separate
collection, measuring consumption reduction, marking of certain SUP items.
First, we will adopt
guidelines on the SUP items covered by the Directive and
later guidelines on
Extended Producer Responsibility for litter clean-up.
The Directive also sets ambitious
targets for the separate collection of bottles
and for recycled content.
We are
glad to see that the sector is taking the lead on recycled content since,
even before the mandatory recycled content obligation for beverage bottles
defined in the SUP Directive, the
beverage industry has already set their own
voluntary targets.
We
are also aware of the important role that UNESDA is playing in the
Circular Plastics Alliance.
[Attached (“tethered”) caps (in SUP context)]
I know that you had some concerns in particular concerning the requirements on
attached caps. The Directive gives more time for industry to adapt as originally
required and we are pleased to see that the sector is collaborating in a very
positive way in the preparation of the standard on attached caps.
We believe that it is important that a standard is indeed worked out and
approved quickly to allow industry to adapt in time to the new requirements on
attached caps.
It was
unfortunate that European Committee of Standardization (CEN)
rejected the standardisation request in spite of the permanent dialogue the
Commission always had with industry and CEN.
A
revised version of the request, that, in our view, accommodates the major
concerns of CEN, will be shared with CEN shortly We are confident to have a
mandate ready and approved by CEN in the third quarter of 2020.
[Recycling – including chemical recycling]
The European Commission is also revising the
food contact legislation in order
to expedite the procedures to approve recycling of plastics that can be used for
food contact, while preserving the necessary requirements for food safety.
As regards chemical recycling we are looking also at the complementary
roles that chemical and mechanical recycling can play in closing the circle for
plastics.
Chemical recycling could play an important role in increasing the recycled
content in plastic products, while maintaining their quality. However, issues
such as high energy requirements need to be closely observed.
It could in particular help reach the target of placing 10 million tons of recycled
plastics on the EU market every year.
4
[Biodegradable packaging]
Generally, the
Commission will continue to take a careful approach towards
biodegradability and composability packaging.
We are currently working on
a policy framework for bio-based plastics and
plastics with biodegradable properties and expect to adopt it next year.
The Commission’s work aims at
determining the criteria to identify the
applications that can be beneficial to the environment and
how such products
should be labelled to avoid consumer confusions as regards their disposal.
[French Circular Economy law -provisions relating to single use plastics]
With regard to the French law on single use plastics:
we are looking at this
matter and having discussions with the French authorities.
In order to implement the legislation the French authorities informed us that the
will have to adopt various decrees and implementing acts which will be
notified to the Commission as technical measures before their adoption.
5
Defensives points/Q&A
Biobased plastics
1. What is the Commission’s take on new innovative materials such as bio-based
plastics? Should we invest in those alternatives?
- Bioplastics can help us reduce our dependency on fossil fuels, but again, the
sustainability claims of these plastics need to be verified. In the EU Plastics Strategy,
the Commission committed itself to understand better their life-cycle impacts,
including CO2 emissions and land use impacts. Consequently, the JRC is preparing a
Life Cycle Assessment of alternative feedstock i.e. 1) biomass, 2) recycled plastics,
compared to conventional plastics, with input from industry (results Q4 2020).
- Based on the above, the Commission will develop a
policy framework for bio-based
and biodegradable plastics which, as regards biobased plastics, will focus on
s
ourcing and use of bio-based plastics, based on assessment where the use of bio-
based feedstock results in genuine environmental benefits, going beyond reduction in
using fossil resources.
Chemical recycling
2. What is the Commission opinion on chemical recycling? Will it support it?
- The Commission notes with interest the new developments on this field. Chemical
recycling shows promising signs for the future in some sectors, while environmental
impacts need to fully assessed.
- However, its current level of development makes difficult to consider it as an
alternative to mechanical recycling, but it could constitute a good complement in
some areas.
- We shall be clear as to what counts as ‘recycling’. Under the Waste Framework
Directive, transforming waste into fuels is energy recovery, not recycling. We do not
expect any change on this.
- Transforming waste into products, materials and substances such as chemicals,
plastics or lubricants is recycling.
- We are confident that open and transparent collaboration will be the best way to
progress towards capturing the benefits of chemical recycling without compromising
on overall environmental impacts. We would welcome reliable data on industrial-
scale chemical recycling processes that would feed into a comprehensive
environmental assessment such as Life Cycle Assessment.
- A crucial issue to take into consideration is the energy consumption. A life-cycle
approach needs to be followed in order to consider all the possible benefits and risks
of this new approach, including climate concerns.
- Finally, the results of pilot projects still need to be expanded to have a representative
picture of the possibilities of this technology.
- The Commission will continue supporting innovation through its research
programmes, including Horizon 2020 and the upcoming Horizon Europe, including
life-cycle analysis.
6
Packaging
3. What measures will the Commission take to support that all packaging
placed on the EU market can be either reused or recycled?
- The Commission is currently reviewing of the Packaging and Packaging Waste
Directive’s (PPWD) requirements packaging has to meet in order to be allowed on the
EU market (“Essential Requirements”). The broad, abstract nature of the current
requirements makes them difficult to enforce.
- The recently revised PPWD tasks the Commission with reinforcing these requirements
with a view to improving design for re-use and promoting high quality recycling, as
well as strengthening their enforcement. In addition, the European Green Deal
commits the Commission to developing requirements to ensure that all packaging in
the EU market is reusable or recyclable in an economically viable manner by 2030. As
announced in the European Green Deal the ongoing work towards a legislative
proposal to be adopted by the Commission in 2021 will also cover measures to tackle
over-packaging and prevent packaging waste generation, including targets.
- A first scoping study carried out with broad stakeholder involvement has been carried
out (to be published soon) and followed by an impact assessment support study - put
in the broader context of the new CEAP. A roadmap for this initiative will be
published in the coming weeks.
4. What kind of key measures do you plan to propose in the new Circular
Economy Action Plan? Will the CEAP 2.0 further promote reuse?
- We will be looking at a wide range of measures.
- We intend to further address waste prevention and promoting product design towards
more durable, reusable products, as opposed to single-use or short-lived products.
- Building on the first Circular Economy Action Plan, we need to go further in tapping
the potential of the life-cycle approach.
- We will need to address the production phase, e.g. through new eco-design approaches
and a more active promotion of reuse and repair.
Single Use Plastics
5. Why the requirements for Tethered caps?
- Beverage bottles and their caps and lids are the most found item on our beaches. And
caps and lids are found twice more than the bottles. If the caps are attached, it almost
eliminates the possibility to litter them. Tethered caps are a smart and innovative
solution – it is an eco-design measure.
- The final agreement, following the industry request, does not distinguish between still
and carbonated drinks and gives additional time for industry to comply (5 years after
the entry into force of the Directive);
6. Will the Commission support the introduction of the Deposit Refund
Schemes (DRS)?
- In general, we are not prescriptive in the solutions MS find to achieve high recycling
rates and circular systems.
7
- DRS have proved highly effective in some MS, with over 90% return of plastic bottles
and reduced litter but there also other approaches that allow to reach high collection
rates.
- In relation to beverage bottles made of plastic, it is worth noting that the Directive on
the reduction of the impact of certain plastic products on the environment (SUP
Directive), sets out in its Article 9 that Member States shall take the necessary
measures to collect separately for recycling 77% of beverage bottles made from plastic
by 2025 and 90% by 2029. In order to achieve that objective, Member States may
inter alia establish deposit-refund schemes, or establish separate collection targets for
relevant extended producer responsibility schemes.
- Many EU MS are currently considering or are in the process of introducing DRS in
order to implement this directive, which is explicitly mentioned as an option under the
Directive, next to, for instance, separate collection targets for relevant extended
producer responsibility schemes.
- The Commission has acknowledged in its European Strategy for Plastics in a Circular
Economy that deposit systems can boost recycling levels and help reduce littering, and
have helped several countries achieve high collection rates for beverage containers.
However, other systems can also achieve high collection rates.
- DRS are instrumental also for promoting the reuse, which contribute to waste
prevention objective and should, as such, be prioritised over waste management
operations, in line with the principles and objectives of the circular economy.
- While the Commission is currently not developing concrete proposals for harmonising
the DRS systems across the EU, further examination of the issue would be required in
the context of measures to promote reuse and in view of the possible barriers to trade
related to national DRS labelling requirements. In the meantime, the Commission
welcomes and supports cooperation between the Member States in order to enhance
the interoperability of different national deposit systems.
To be noted: a 2011 study for the European Commission on ‘Options and Feasibility of a
European Refund System for Metal Beverage Cans’ concluded that the cost of an EU-
wide DRS were disproportionally high and exceed the environmental benefits when
compared to other options such as bilateral agreements, requirement that all existing and
future DRS be interoperable and/or requirement for DRS to form a single system.
However, the study’s underlying assumption, in addition to being based on a limited
segment of beverage containers, and the scale of the issue to be addressed might have
changed since 2010/2011, in particular as regards the PET bottles.
7. The percentage of recycled content is too high, in particular for small
producers.
- The final agreement on the Plastics Directive foresees that 25% of recycled content
will need to be included in PET beverage bottles. This obligation reflects a pledge
made by most of the companies in the food and drink sector.
- It will become applicable by 2025 and leaves time for all businesses to adapt their
production processes.
8. How will the Commission ensure that the SUP Directive will be transposed
and implemented in the same way across EU Member States?
- The Commission is in close consultation with the MS to support them in the process
of transposing and implementing the new rules.
8
- To support a harmonised interpretation of the scope and definitions, the Commission
is developing Guidelines on single use plastics, including interpretation of the term
‘single use’, definition of plastic and distinction of the different product categories.
- In addition, the Commission will be developing a number of implementing acts,
which should provide for harmonised criteria and methods.
9. Are you going to propose an EU tax on plastics?
- Like any measure, a lot of careful thinking went into the so-called “Plastics Tax”.
- When the Commission came out with a Plastic Strategy, all institutions agreed the
most effective solution was instead a ban on selected single-use products made of
plastic for which alternatives exist on the market such as for example cotton bud
sticks, cutlery, plates, straws, stirrers, sticks for balloons.
- In the context of the MFF 2021-2027, the Commission made proposals to better align
the EU budget to the transition towards a circular economy.
- In particular, we proposed a Plastic-based Own Resource. It is not a tax, but a levy. It
would be directly proportional to the quantity of non-recycled plastic packaging
waste generated in each Member State. It would provide an incentive to reduce
plastic waste.
- It remains small compared to other Own Resources categories, however, it could
mobilise about 4% of the revenues for the EU budget.
- I hope the Parliament and the Council will consider this in their final negotiations on
the MFF, which as you know are ongoing and difficult.
10. EPR schemes are not the right instrument to tackle clean-up measures.
Consumers are equally responsible and should share the financial burden.
- Currently local authorities – with their very limited budgets – pay for out of home
collection and treatment and clean-up of litter. This is not in line with the polluter
pays principle and that is why we have proposed EPR obligations.
- EPR schemes are established for various products in the EU and they work. It is the
right instrument to regulate obligations of producers - be it for collection, recycling,
clean-up of litter or awareness raising.
- The producers are instrumental in improving the way waste is collected, in particular,
on-the-go consumption waste. Also, the producers can pass on those costs to their
consumers.
11. The bans should allow for substitution by biodegradable versions of the
concerned products.
- The Commission strongly disagrees, the Directive tackles plastic items that are litter
prone and harmful for the environment. There are no commercially available plastics
that are properly biodegradable in the marine environment nor the related standards.
- For this reason biodegradable plastics are considered to be plastic under the Directive
and the issue of biodegradability will only be addressed at the time of evaluating the
Directive (in 6 years).
- Additionally, biodegradable plastics confuse consumers who do not know anymore
where to throw away which plastic and might be tempted to litter biodegradable
plastics. To reduce marine litter, let us first look for sustainable alternatives and
promote reusable items not containing plastic.
9
Background
UNESDA Soft Drinks Europe
Established in 1958, UNESDA represents the European soft drinks industry. Its members
produce drinks including squashes, still drinks, carbonates, powders, fruit drinks, iced
teas, iced coffees, syrups, energy drinks and sports drinks. Based in Brussels, UNESDA
members include both corporations and national associations from across the EU and
beyond. UNESDA is a signatory to the EU Transparency.
Participants to the dinner
The following guests will participate:
- Tim Brett, CEO The CocaCola Company Western Europe
- Zoran Bogdanovic, CEO CocaCola Hellenic Bottling Company
- Ian Ellington, CCO PepsiCo Europe
- Vincent Deloziere, CCO Refresco
- Andreas Kadi, Executive Board Member, Red Bull
- Agathe Cury, Director General, French Soft Drinks Association (member of the
Unesda ExCom representing all national associations)
- Wouter Vermeulen, Senior Director Public Policy, The CocaCola Company
- Paul Skehan, Head of EU Affairs, PepsiCo Europe
- Michelle Norman, Director Sustainability, Suntory Beverage and Food Europe
- Nicholas Hodac, Director General, Unesda – Soft Drinks Europe
10
Electronically signed on 20/09/2021 14:15 (UTC+02) in accordance with article 11 of Commission Decision C(2020) 4482