Ban
3 July 2021
The Directive covers many different products and plastic packaging. The Dutch Government has produced an infographic showing the requirements for each type of product and when the ruling will be enforced.
The Directive uses different measures. Which measure will be enforced and when depends on the product. Sometimes several measures will apply to one product.
Below you find list of products taken from the infographic followed by our position (the abbreviation EPR stands for extended producer responsibility).
The guiding document Guidlines of the European Commission contain a list of products that fall under the SUP-Directive with references to the description in the Directive and the relevant measures for each product.
All products made of oxo-degradable plastics, and food and drink packaging made of expanded polystyrene (EPS).
PSF’s position
PSF believes that the ban should be extended to include all packaging made of polystyrene (EPS).
(with the exception of medical usage)
PSF’s position
PSF believes that this is now well regulated. What must be avoided is that plastic cotton swabs produced inside Europe will not be sold outside of Europe.
EPR for balloons, ban on balloon sticks
(with the exception of industrial applications)
PSF’s position
PSF supports the ban on plastic balloon sticks. Producers of balloons must not buy off their responsibility by passing on the costs of cleaning and awareness raising in the sales price. A national ban on the release of balloons in the open air should be enforced in the Netherlands. This would also clarify the current confusion caused by bans in some municipalities and not in others.
Tobacco products with filters, separate filters for use with tobacco products.
PSF’s position
PSF believes EPR and labelling cigarette filters to be a step in the right direction. All the costs of cleaning and processing of waste and of any damage to the environment should be charged in entirety to tobacco producers. These costs may not be passed on to tax payers.
However, only a ban on filters containing plastic will guarantee that these no longer end up in the environment.
Drink packaging of up to 3 litres.
PSF’s position
We assume that manufacturers will introduce the fixed caps well before 2024.
It is possible to make bottles entirely of recyclates. If this is combined with a collection system such as a deposit system, it should be possible to retain higher percentages of recyclate than at present. The higher the percentage, the greater the need for systems change in which the collected plastic must be highly suitable for reuse.
The collection targets should not only count for bottles, but for all drink packaging.
PSF’s position
Manufacturers of disposable cutlery are suddenly presenting their product as washable and thus as reusable and sustainable. PSF realises that this may be a way to avoid the legislation. Luckily the Guidelines clearly state that this is not permitted. Nevertheless, PSF will monitor this closely.
PSF’s position
There is no guarantee that these measures will definitely reduce the amount of drinking cups. For this reason, PSF believes that much more attention should be paid to reusable drinking cups. Paper cups with a plastic coating should be banned to pave the way for alternatives without plastic, such as reusable cups, to break onto the market.
Legal reduction targets should be defined.
PSF’s position
There is no guarantee that these measures will definitely reduce the amount of food packaging. For this reason, PSF believes that much more attention should be paid to reusable food packaging.
Legal reduction targets should be defined.
PSF’s position
There is no guarantee that these measures will definitely reduce the amount of bags and wrappers. For this reason, PSF believes that much more attention should be paid to alternative packaging such as sweets packed in paper.
Legal reduction targets should be defined.
PSF’s position
The ban on free lightweight plastic bags introduced in 2016 has proven successful, but there are too many exceptions. These exceptions should be drastically limited. The EPR does not give any guarantee that it will lead to a significant reduction.
If there won’t be is a complete ban on lightweight plastic bags, a legal reduction target should be defined in conjunction with a levy on each bag.
Wet wipes, sanitary pads, tampons, tampon applicators
PSF’s position
From now on manufacturers should state on the products whether they contain plastic or not. Under the SUP-Directive, wet wipes may still be sold even if they contain plastic and block sewage systems thereby causing damage. The only ruling that covers wet wipes is the EPR which does not guarantee that a significant reduction will be reached.
PSF’s position
The gradual increasing percentage of discarded nets having to be brought to shore does not prevent dolly rope washing up on beaches. Preventing dolly rope must explicitly be addressed and PSF believes that the only way to do this is to ban the use of dolly rope in bottom trawling. This will also give alternatives a chance on the market.