There's a growing movement afoot to cut down on the amount of waste we toss out every year

Garbage trains to northern Ontario... incinerators and overflowing landfill sites across the country... These are some of the scenes that have been playing out in the news over the past few months as Canadians deal with a growing garbage problem.

The landfills are full — but no one wants a new one in their backyard.

Now, there's a growing movement to cut down on the amount of waste we toss out every year. The aim is to force manufacturers to pay for the cost of dealing with their packaging.

Products seem to be delivered to the consumer in ever more packaging these days. And the consumer is forced to pay for it in the end — not just environmentally but financially as well. Tax dollars go to pay to reuse or recycle excess packaging — or to truck it to a landfill site.

The Society Promoting Environmental Conservation is one of the groups pushing to make manufacturers more accountable for the packaging they produce.

"We've got to make it the manufacturer's responsibility, because once it is, they will find a way to minimize the packaging" David Cadman, Society Promoting Environmental Conservation

"We've got to make it the manufacturer's responsibility, because once it is, they will find a way to minimize the packaging so that we minimize the need for waste disposal," the group's David Cadman told Marketplace. "That would minimize the need for waste dumps."

The society recently urged Canada's environment ministers to hold industry responsible for the life cycle of its packaging, just like what happened in Europe.

The European model

Germany passed laws that force manufacturers to deal with the waste their packaging creates ten years ago. The manufacturers have to pay for companies to sort waste and deliver it for recycling. The idea has spread through Europe and Japan. But in North America, corporations are resisting.

"They don't want a two-way system," Cadman says. "They want a one-way system — where they sell, and it goes out the door, and they never see the packaging again."

European companies have cut down on their packaging. Because they have to pay to get rid of it, there is no incentive to double-pack items or go needlessly glossy.

Cereal maker Aaran Stephens sells his product in recyclable bags - because he ships to Germany. A side effect has been rising domestic sales

Less packaging can also mean lower costs for consumers. In Delta, BC, Nature's Path makes cereal in recyclable plastic bags. It costs 20 per cent less than its main competitor.

"Because we were shipping to Germany, and they said 'You know, you have to have everything recyclable. You have to take responsibility for the waste that you produce — in the form of your packaging,'" company owner Aaran Stephens told Marketplace.

Stephens says one of the by-products of reducing the packaging for the German market is that domestic sales have soared.

North American resistance

In North America, companies continue to resist calls for reduced packaging. When Marketplace asked our newsletter subscribers and website visitors to send in their overpackaging pet peeves, we were deluged.

Among your biggest complaints:

• toilet paper, paper towels double-wrapped in heavy plastic
  
• VHS coated in plastic then wrapped yet again in plastic
  
• individual serving sizes of convenience foods
  
• laundry detergent tablets , double boxed and then individually wrapped
  
• computer software

MORE: Viewers' overpackaging pet peeves »

Some firms encourage the use of refillable bottles

The Packaging Association of Canada contends that manufacturers are already responsible packagers.

"If the manufacturers of those products could get away with less, they'd be doing it today," the association's Larry Dworkin told Marketplace. "Their business is to sell product, not the package."

Dworkin says there is no need for legislation. He notes that most Canadians don't know that Canada created a national task force on packaging eleven years ago. The goal was to cut packaging waste in half by 2000. Dworkin says the goal was reached four years ahead of schedule.

"I don't think there is an issue to do with overpackaging," Dworkin says.

One Canadian program

"I don't think there is an issue to do with overpackaging," says Larry Dworkin, the Packaging Association of Canada

Dworkin is not alone in his plea not to force legislation on manufacturers. Dennis Kinsey of Overwaitea Food Stores in western Canada believes a voluntary program for manufacturers works best, like the one run by Overwaitea.

Several manufacturers have volunteered to pay the cost of recycling the packaging their products are sold in.

"They want us to help them take responsibility in this area and keep these materials out of the landfill," Kinsey says.

"And do it in a manner that's convenient for them, and cost effective for them."

The program works like this: shoppers can drop off their containers which are then sorted, packed in reusable bags, sucked out of the store and into a container bound for a recycling plant.

Dennis Kinsey of Overwaitea Foodstores favours a voluntary program. Manufacturers pay to have their goods recycled at his chain

Kinsey says the program has been such a success that some shoppers have changed supermarkets to take advantage of the recycling program.

B.C. steps in

While some manufacturers see political benefit in going green, others want municipalities (i.e., taxpayers) to keep paying for their packaging.

In BC, the government decided to step in three years ago and force the beverage industry to be responsible for its own packaging.

"We required them to do certain things," BC's former environment minister, Ian Waddell, told Marketplace. "You have to have some guts. The government has to require them. But once you do that, you have to let industry do it. It'll happen."

"They can do a lot better in packaging, but the public has to demand it. And if they don't, we should bring in some regulations nationally that change that" B.C. environment minister Ian Waddell

The beverage industry was forced to set up an umbrella company to run recycling programs.

But unlike the European programs, the beverage industry is taking only partial responsibility. The recycling costs are paid for by shoppers who are hit with a non-refundable fee on each beverage purchase.

Environmentalists call it a step in the right direction, despite grumbling by consumers, upset at being hit with the extra fee.

'Not all packaging is overpackaging'

Industry argues it is misunderstood. Some products need protection for health reasons or safety and preservation during long hauls.

"The product cannot be broken," Larry Dworkin of the Packaging Association of Canada points out.

"So there are a certain amount of things that may look like overpackaging, but in fact is required to make sure the product arrives safely."

"I would say there are three answers to that," BC's environment minister Ian Waddell counters.

"Excuses, excuses, excuses. They can do a lot better in packaging, but the public has to demand it. And if they don't, we should bring in some regulations nationally that change that."

While Canada's environment ministers try to figure out what to do next, people like Larraine Roulston are on a mission of their own.

Roulston is a freelance writer and self-professed enviro-keener. She's determined to educate consumers — one at a time.

Roulston thinks people should boycott irresponsibly packaged products.

"I think we have a lot of power, because we have the power of purchase," Roulston explains.

"And if our environmental consciousness rises, then I think we can do an awful lot."

At Grass Roots, Rob Grand did not boycott and overpackaged product shipped to his store. He mailed the packaging back. He thinks consumers should do the same.

"The consumer has a lot of power," Grand says. "And that power can be used very wisely to affect huge change."

NEXT: Your turn: Marketplace viewers air
their overpackaging pet peeves »

^TOP