Another “Earth Day” is coming up and with it, the recurring thought that I wish we didn”t need an “Earth Day.”
I wish that conservation and environmental stewardship were so deeply ingrained in our society that designating a single day, or week, to focus on the importance of these things would be irrelevant. Every day should be Earth Day.
We”re bound to see a proclamation coming before the Lake County Board of Supervisors that will proclaim an Earth Day celebration — with an accompanying focus upon the importance of recycling.
Lake County has excellent recycling programs such as curbside single-stream recycling. But it”s frustrating to me, how much waste goes on in our society — waste that we have no control over.
Think of all the unnecessary and wasteful packaging that goes into a product in the first place — packaging that we wouldn”t have to recycle if the manufacturer hadn”t forced it on us. Think of some of those products themselves — designed to be used once and then discarded, supposedly in the name of “convenience.”
The United States”s approach to waste reduction is known as “extended product responsibility,” a concept in which manufacturers, retailers, consumers and waste management agencies are held “equally responsible” for the environmental impact of products throughout their life cycle (“What is Product Stewardship?” by the Environmental Protection Agency, www.epa.gov).
All of this is in striking contrast to Canadian provinces and the European Union, where “extended producer responsibility” holds corporations directly responsible for their products” environmental impact (“The Big Stick Approach” by Joel Bleifus, In These Times, April 17, 2000, www.inthesetimes.com).
“The beauty of (extended producer responsibility) is that by putting the financial burden on companies for the environmental impacts of products throughout their life cycle, industry has a natural economic incentive to act in an environmentally responsible manner,” writes Bleifus.
So why are we stuck trying to divert waste that should never have been created in the first place, instead of forcing manufacturers to actually take their share of the responsibility? For that, we can thank the Clinton administration, specifically the President”s Council on Sustainable Development, established in 1993 “to examine ways to encourage environmentally sustainable growth.”
Bleifus tells us that the council held heated discussions about extended producer responsibility, but in its proposed program, this “industry-dominated task force” substituted “product” for “producer.”
“Equally responsible” may have sounded good in committee, but in practical application, it seems like consumers receive more than their share of responsibility for actually getting the job done — and more than their share of blame.
“All products are designed with a consumer in mind,” the EPA states. “Ultimately, it is the consumer who makes the choice between competing products and who must use and dispose of products responsibly … Consumers must make responsible buying choices which consider environmental impacts.”
The end result of “equal responsibility” is that manufacturers are let off the hook if they opt not to participate in what is, for them, strictly a voluntary challenge. For other “equally responsible” entities, however — counties and municipalities like Lake County, Clearlake and Lakeport — there is nothing voluntary about it.
In California, the Integrated Waste Management Act requires that governments divert at least 50 percent of waste that is generated in their jurisdictions, from going into the public landfill. This effort depends entirely upon the diligence of consumers, partnering with local government. Nowhere is there allocated any responsibility toward the original producers of this waste.
Lake County residents can at least act locally by bringing reuseable canvas sacks to our local retailers. We can also purchase products that keep packaging at a minimum and that use post-consumer content.
But in addition to taking these measures, we must lobby all levels of government to adopt policies that are more in line with extended producer responsibility. Until “equally responsible” actually means what it”s supposed to, there”s only so much we can do by ourselves.
Contact Cynthia Parkhill at acparkhill@clearlakeobserver.com.
