Deposit return scheme (recycling)

Agreed but a simple system of the RVMs taking any bottle or can can't be hard to implement

How's it going to work at airports? If you buy in Ireland for consumption abroad do you still pay the levy despite having no chance to return the product?

One thing I am glad about for this system is a lot of the craft breweries might scrap their cans and go back to selling in glass bottles

For the schemes to allign you would have to have all RoI producers registered in GB not just NI, and vice versa. It is doable but it is not simple at all and it might well cost far more than it would be worth to implement. There will be some level of co-operation for sure though. Encouraging the UK system to use a compatable IT / data collection system would be a big help. In reality at this stage the UK scheme is going to be 2026 and possibly 27.

Could they not just barcode the bottom since it wouldnt get crushed? (at least for cans) and maybe the bottle cap for bottles?

The reason they want intact containers isn't just about reading the barcode. First up, part of the validation process the machine does to recognize what container it has is a visual inspection and comparison against a database. This (among other reasons) is to prevent people putting a 2L barcode onto a 500ml bottle, to get extra refund. So the machine will actually look at the bottle and be able to tell that it's a 2L one. It couldn't do that if it was crushed.

The other reason is that they want the machines to crush the containers themselves, which effectively invalidates the container for any future deposit refund. The last thing they want is people breaking into supermarket or recycling centre yards and stealing bin loads of returned containers, only to run them though the machines a second time for a healthy profit. Requiring them to be intact, and then crushing them on receipt. eliminates that.

Is that a known significant problem in other countries or a tiny percentage of the returns?

I don’t know, but I do know that the German system, for example, is quite different to ours, in that they have some specific reusable plastic bottles on the market that need to be taken in and stored fully intact in order to be refilled (multiple times), as well as one-use recyclable containers. So their requirements for intake, processing and storage will be quite different to the Irish system.

The first point I think they could counter by weight, a crushed anything weighs the same as the uncrushed version, but yeah I guess security would be a valid problem.

Its going to have to drive some change as some bottles (LIDL spring water for example) are effectively designed to crush at home when empty, they barely hold up under their own weight the plastic is so thin. Will there a different rate for thin 2L vs thick 2L? Seems like it should be based on the amount of plastic involved rather than the containers volume?

The machines will weigh the containers, but it’s to check that they’re empty.

Edit: Here's the specification document for the RVMs https://re-turn.ie/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/DRSI_CLG_RVM_Specification_V1.0.pdf

They will do

• Barcode Recognition (to determine that the container is registered as part of the scheme)
• Weight detection (to determine that the container is empty)
• Metal detection (Aluminium or Steel)
• Basic Shape Recognition
• Silhouette Shape Recognition

The machines must be able to validate that the container as identified by the barcode is indeed that container. They must also be ablate identify if the container is attached to something, or is travelling out of the machine, and therefore reject the transaction. Think of Top Cat's coin on a string.

Seems like it would just be easier to break into the machine and steal the blank vouchers :)

A nightmare from a consumer understanding perspective. Consumers find it hard to work out why the difference would be between products that ostensibly look the same. I've spent a fair bit of time on this and I dont think any scheme is working on bottle weight.

Also worth noting, a weight barrier could in theory bias against carbonated drinks as still drinks do not require the same bottle density. The thinner the bottle the greater the chance of carbonation loss more quickly.

I assume that , on error, the machine still accepts the bottle/can and you just dont get the credit, otherwise everyone of these places is going to look like a kip in about 2 days as there is no way people are bringing failures back home with them.

I guess the simple solution would be to equip delivery drivers for the supermarkets with with a scanner.

I see that now thanks, I didn't realize Adobe Reader only showed me the first few pages last night.

I see this requirement to have the details of each container in the master container file being a nightmare in practice. Every machine from every manufacturer needs an up to date file or else newly released products are going to be rejected. Each drink vendor in the market is going to have to supply the details of what their container looks like to each machine manufacturer, and apply for and receive a unique barcode from what is essentially a government organisation before they can release their product, and the machine manufacturers are going to have to roll out updates in a timely fashion. This is no easy feat, and repac being at the centre is this isn't going to speed up matters. It's another cost and administrative burden to small drinks producers which will stifle innovation, they'll all revert to glass or use a standard shaped container, which hopefully can use the same barcode across products from different suppliers.

Actually, Re-Turn is expressly NOT a Government organisation. The legalisation (https://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2021/si/599/made/en/print) required the drinks producers to establish and operate the scheme themselves:

Re-Turn is what they came up with.

The general targets and scope are in the legislation, but the nuts-and-bolts of how it is operated (such as how the containers are identified by the machines) were defined by the industry itself.

On the whole, the scheme is not going to be accepting containers that don't meet the requirements.

There is some scope for the RVMs to accept "non-scheme containers" (and not pay back a deposit), but this has to be agreed with the operators on an individual basis, and they will still go though the weight/visual inspection against the Container Masterfile.

Here's a selection of relevant quotes from the RVM spec document (I linked to previously) regarding rejecting containers:

• "If a container is identified as not empty, the container should be rejected."
• "The compactor should destroy the barcode and all compacted containers should be rejected when attempted to be returned again."
• "Every successful and rejected container represents a transaction, both of which must be registered and reported."
• "Rejections must be tracked and reported for each RVM. Rejections represent failed transactions and attempted deposit redemptions. This provides value for identifying fraud."

Maybe smart establishments will put a general recycling bin nearby if it becomes an issue, but ultimately, it's up to individuals to dispose of their own waste legally and responsibly.