End users paying for end of life costs up front on products.. it seems inefficient in some ways but here is an example of it working .
Companies getting involved and not having government force their hand? How could this be?????
Non-profits taking a path to deal with waste.
Creating an organization to provide disposal service.
(http://www.rbrc.org/call2recycle/corporate/index.html )-about recycler
Then industry paying for and using the service with out any direct government intervention??
We just can’t get along without government guidance can we??
No its common sense.. if environmentalists want companies to reduce out put they can work out a deal . Demanding legislation is not always an efficient way to go about affecting change its like the person down river paying the polluter for each unit of pollution reduced. It gets to an optimal level..with no outside intervention….
Large companies like black and Decker etc.
( http://www.bdk.com/environment/faq.htm )
can afford to participate and are proud to do so they feel it will influence customer choice.
Small company’s who can’t swing it don’t pay in but the non-profit will still take their batteries because the bigger companies have footed the bill so there is a balance.
If government had stepped in and forced all producers into a command and control situation there would be small companies put out of market , government agencys to support to maintain and all the associated costs with government waste..
The current situation has come about with minimal government legislation and this is optimal I think… take a look
Links to related data :
http://www.bdk.com/environment/faq.htm link to policy
http://www.rbrc.org/call2recycle/ link to battery recycler…
http://www.rbrc.org/call2recycle/corporate/index.html about recycler
http://www.rbrc.org/call2recycle/docs/batteryalert.pdf EPA action