Document Actions

Nordic deposit system costs too much

The Nordic Waste Group has conducted a new cost-benefit analysis of a joint Nordic deposit system for beverage containers. The results show that a Nordic system is not economically viable. On the other hand, it is profitable to do something about the vast numbers of beverage cans which are imported to the Nordic countries from Germany and Estonia without having paid a deposit.

Jun 04, 2013

The Nordic deposit schemes work well, and the return rate on packaging is high. Trade with beer, soft drinks and other beverages across country borders still constitutes a problem. Deposit is not paid back on beverages bought in another country, either within or outside the Nordic Region, and this leads to a lower return rate. To solve this problem the Nordic Council suggested introducing a joint Nordic deposit system for beverage containers.

Bi-lateral solutions with Germany and Estonia

The Nordic Waste Group under the Nordic Council of Ministers has carried out a cost-benefit analysis of such a system. The results of the analysis show that the costs of implementing and running a Nordic deposit system are greater that the benefits. In other words, the deposit system is not economically viable. On the other hand, it is viable to do something about private import of beverage cans from Germany and Estonia. Every year more than one billion beverage cans are imported to the Nordic Region in this way - without paying a deposit. At the moment negotiations are underway between the countries concerned on bi-lateral solutions for this problem.

Nordic Region prioritises the environment

There is a long tradition in the Nordic countries for recycling beverage containers. In Sweden the first scheme dates back to 1885. Paying a deposit for used containers was originally introduced by the breweries to recover the precious glass bottles. Today the schemes are first and foremost a means to prevent litter and to achieve a high degree of material recycling of packaging.

With regard to beverage containers and the problems of cross-border trade, work to achieve bi-lateral solutions with Germany and Estonia will be the most cost-effective model.

Read the report here (in Swedish): Cost-benefit analysis of a joint Nordic deposit system

The Nordic Council disagrees with the conclusion:

A Nordic deposit system is economically viable

The Nordic Council disagrees with the analysis from the Nordic Waste Group. In April 2013, Copenhagen Economics made new calculations which show that by increasing the CO2 price from 6 euros to 21 euros per tonne, a Nordic co-operation model would be economically viable. If you move up towards the level the EU is aiming for (30 euros), not to mention the environmental costs that the Stern report has calculated (65 euros), the economic benefits increase to a very high level, according to the Nordic Council.

"If the previous analysis from Copenhagen Economics was an argument for rejecting the Nordic Council's recommendation, then the Nordic governments can now draw the opposite conclusion, based on the new analysis", says Satu Haapanen, Chair of the Citizens' and Consumer Committee in the Nordic Council.