The new recycling system

i have no obsession with the date, i'm was merely pointing it out just to answer your question. it was the re-turn scheme in a nutshell, and proof of it. Which was denied. The whole "they're not going to do X thing" (x thing being manufactures initially saying no to redesigning their cans or being bulled into registering with the new re-turn scheme) their hands are tied now that the return bullies came back with back up (law). its like the gangsters/extortionists coming back a year later with back up and muscle behind them. They (manufactorers) had no choice but to comply, or risk losing doing businuess with ireland.

return scheme in a nutshell. other posts mentioned the same scenerio, but applying it to redeisgn of cans. was ironic because it was what return already did/had happened in a nutshell.

Also as for the rest of your post, it can be feasible but is against their own best interests and less profitable for them. its clear now that they would rather inconvenience the consumers for more profit, because why not? business is business. They're not gonna give control of the scheme or any of its planning up to the public. We are not in their best interests. Return is ireland exclusively and would not need a new can to be designed at all. There's ways around this, but they simply do not care. it does not have to cost millions, that would be a gross exaggeration and an assumption. Designs don't cost much at all, designs are technical art figured out in a practical and cost-effective way. Your only argument in that case can be "oh but they already made loads of cans with the old design", and that is already what we are experiancing with the non-logo non scheme eligable cans currently out on the shelves. No one lost money making them, and if anyone did it definately would not be ireland losing the money like you said, it would be the manufacturuer, but they didnt.. if a manufactoeror cotninues to make non-return label cans and insists on attempting to cotninue selling in this country, THEN they (the company) would lose out on money.

The importer can register the foreign barcode and pay the fees. Might not want to draw attention to themselves in some cases!

There's a spreadsheet here of ~2400 foreign barcodes registered by the 11th of January. Looked up a few and they're coming up as what you'd expect - M&S own-brand, Robinsons cordials, Moldovan canned beer etc.

I don't think you understand the cost associated with doing it. It's prohibitively expensive. You simply wouldn't be able to buy a can anymore.

See L1011’s post on the regulations as well.

A barcode on the bottom also achieves nothing. They would still require shap recognition for fraud otherwise people would get scrap metal of the right weight and slap a barcode on it.

Its a suggestion thats impractical and achieves nothing.

I was happy to take your point on vouchers earlier. I know what im talking about on this one, its a non-runner.

I commented previously about the machines being located inside stores, can anyone give a logical explanation for this because it stops people from going to them when shops are closed. Most if not all other recycling areas for other stuff are located outside stores so why have these locked away after business hours?

How would you get the vinyl wrap on it in a consistent crease proof way?

You've to design new technology for what others are suggesting. Redesigning a new coke or fanta can as we have seen requires no new technology.

You have an opinion but that's all you have. I have experience working in manufacturing and designing such systems.

My local Aldi have them outside. It's the stores decision.

When you say vinal wrap, are you saying the barcode MUST be on the wrap itself with all the other stuff? surely the barcode can be just printed or stamped underneath instead of being put on a vinal wrap. infact why not turn the barcode into a QR code, that way it can be smaller and placed virtually anywhere on the can. can it? if not, they can find some way to put the barcode on the base of cans. maybe have the barcodes made and placed BEFORE the can vinal itself, and the base attached last. would obviously require some modifications, but if other companies can make flat based cans, why not these too? the design already exists and is made, and is'nt copywrited. all the have to do is use that design and put the barcodes underneath. it cant be that hard for them to figure out.

"They would still require shap recognition for fraud otherwise people would get scrap metal of the right weight and slap a barcode on it" there's no fraud or loss there then, because re-turn sell the metal anyway. infact return may even make a profit if people tried that, aslong as the metal inserted is aluminum. There could be something to detect that metal where the machine rejects non-aluminum metal. even something as simple as a magnet test. who knows.

But then again the whole "They would still require shap recognition for fraud otherwise people would get scrap metal of the right weight and slap a barcode on it" thing is still doable with bottles, all it requires is removing the label off of a damaged bottle and putting it over a bottle that was not purchased intially with a deposit.

I'm not explaining it to you anymore.

Let's say they can put the barcode on the base, what would that achieve? What are you arguing for?

The scheme starts on Thursday with the new labelled cans/bottles, wondering will there be short supply of cans on Wednesday as some suppliers will run out of the "old" cans that day and won't be able to sell the "new" ones until the following day

Hmm, is there some sort of hack here... would they fit into an empty tube, something a little bigger than a pringles one? Keep an eye out, you might come across something light that will fit a can and protect it.

I dunno folks, there's zero onus on the producers to come up with a more sustainable way of packaging drinks or indeed for increasing the sustainability of the supply chain in general.

This scheme won't do anything for the environment on a general scale and net carbon used versus current situation from a consumer perspective is increasing greatly. All well see over the years based on this scheme is another cost to the consumer than can creep up every few years to do x y or z with no overall reduction of change in packaging.

Essentially let's our local authorities and the producers off the hook.

How would it achieve more cans in the machine? it still requires shape recognition. That requirement wouldnt be removed.

The 1 in 10 is something you've made up, it's not a stat.

That's what interesting. But what of the non presence of logo?

Can't see UK Heineken cans getting added as surely Heineken Ireland don't agree / are not involved with the grey imports?

I was always hoping more Austrian beers would emerge here in cans (Gosser, Zipper, Kaiser) but unlikely now.

i did'nt make the 1 in 10 thing up, you said 90% of people will inconvenienced, 1 in 10 is the same thing as 90%.

also the goal of 90% i did not make up either, that is from their own website, and the news paper articles that had been posted.

i was pointing out that the goal is realistically unreachable unless the 90% incovnienced people all jump on board, and also hoping that no more than 1 out of every 10 cans they can is damaged. Because if it is, there's no 90% possiblity of reaching 90%.

"How would it achieve more cans in the machine? it still requires shape recognition. That requirement wouldnt be removed."

The whole point ^ that is being suggested (barcodes on bottom) is so crushed cans can be inserted and damaged would'nt matter. Thats the whole point it was even brought up in this thread. Because the base of the can is the stronger and less able to be damaged part of the can.

EDIT: it would achieve more cans, because damaged cans + non damaged cans

most likely, but it depends on what methods the inhouse are willing to do. if you mean the indoor machine then yes, it will reject it. but if you mean the manual collection of cans over the counter, they may still accept them if it requires scanning only and is visible. or a quick head count. if it requires examining the cans and they fail a visual inspection then no they wont accept it either. We still have very little to no info on how over the counter can scheme is made to function, or if its still even a thing