• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

CM Consulting

Waste Reduction Information & Analysis

TIME FOR RECYCLED-CONTENT MANDATES? Find out Now

  • Home
  • About
    • Our Team
    • Our Services
    • Projects
    • Clients & Funders
  • Articles and Publications
  • In the Media
  • Reports
  • Contact
You are here: Home / Packaging / What the National Packaging Protocol Really Reduced (1999)

What the National Packaging Protocol Really Reduced (1999)

February 16, 2001 By CMC

National Packaging Protocol
Click to launch full article in PDF

Caught NaPPing

A look at the National Packaging Protocol’s data shows the program failed to reduce post consumer packaging waste.

“Celebration is called for!” declared a Canadian packaging newsletter in reference to the National Packaging Protocol’s (NaPP) early success in diverting 51 per cent of packaging waste from disposal by 1996 — four years ahead of schedule. However, a close look at the actual NaPP data reveals there may be little cause for celebration, at least for consumers and ratepayers. The data shows that post-industrial packaging was greatly reduced via things like greater reuse of wooden pallets and other reusable containers (See sidebar, page 12). This achievement is good news for the environment and the companies that will save money. But there was little advancement in the reduction of post-consumer packaging — the ubiquitous aluminum cans, plastic containers, bags and so on that people thought were targeted. NaPP press releases didn’t draw attention to this serious shortcoming. NaPP’s obfuscation over reductions in post-industrial packaging waste versus post-consumer waste has created a dilemma for provincial and municipal governments as well as environment and consumer groups. Since NaPP supposedly “dealt with the problem,” national pressure for packaging reduction has all but disappeared.

 

What does CM Consulting do?

Find out now

Primary Sidebar

Featured Posts

Dispatches from Europe: A Step to Stem the Plastic Tide

October 31, 2018

Single-use plastics are everywhere, with most of us regularly relying on the convenience … [Read More...] about Dispatches from Europe: A Step to Stem the Plastic Tide

Who Pays What Report 2018

Who Pays What 2018 Now Available

October 5, 2018

5 October 2018 - CM Consulting is pleased to announce the release of the 2018 Who Pays … [Read More...] about Who Pays What 2018 Now Available

Deposit Return: How it Works

June 19, 2017

If we look internationally—Europe, US, Canada, Middle East, China, and Australia—massive … [Read More...] about Deposit Return: How it Works

CM Consulting Releases Global Overview of Deposit Return Systems

May 25, 2017

Press Release 31 May 2017 - As the problem of marine litter has steadily grown worse, … [Read More...] about CM Consulting Releases Global Overview of Deposit Return Systems

Is Access Everything?

February 7, 2017

7 February 2017 - "If you build it, they will come." Over the years, this classic line … [Read More...] about Is Access Everything?

Topic Categories

  • Access to Recycling (6)
  • Batteries (11)
  • Beverage (66)
  • Circular Economy (27)
  • Composting (5)
  • Dispatches from Europe (14)
  • E-waste (6)
  • Embodied Energy (7)
  • Energy from Waste (7)
  • EU Policy (17)
  • Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) (46)
  • Featured (17)
  • Food waste (1)
  • Garbage (8)
  • Guidelines (3)
  • Jobs (13)
  • Life Cycle Assessment (14)
  • Mercury (7)
  • Packaging (46)
  • Paper (12)
  • Plastics (36)
  • Recent news (36)
  • Recycling (76)
  • Refillables (22)
  • Reloop (13)
  • Reuse (8)
  • Single Stream (10)
  • Tires (1)
  • Uncategorized (7)
  • Used Oil (1)

Global Deposit Book

https://youtu.be/SJMEZGVrawQ

Do We Need Deposit Return?

https://youtu.be/-lT6r7vMtxI

Opposition to Deposit Return

https://youtu.be/IEbkgZi061g

  • Twitter
  • YouTube

Copyright © 2023 · Development Support · Log in