Latest news with #NickLapis
Los Angeles Times
30-05-2025
- Business
- Los Angeles Times
Want to understand CalRecycle's chemical recycling rules? You'll need to pay
Sacramento — Want to know what constitutes an acceptable form of recycling in California under CalRecycle's new draft guidelines for the state's landmark plastic waste law? It'll cost you roughly $187, and even then you may not find your answer. The issue arose this week when CalRecycle held a Sacramento workshop on its proposed regulations to implement Senate Bill 54, the 2022 law designed to reduce California's single-use plastic waste. In the regulations' latest iteration, the agency declared that it will only consider recycling technologies that follow standards issued by the International Organization for Standardization, or ISO, the Geneva-based group that sets standards for a variety of industries, including healthcare and transportation. According to the draft regulations: 'A facility's use of a technology that is not a mechanical recycling technology ... shall not be considered recycling unless the facility operates in a manner consistent with ISO 59014:2024.' To access ISO 59014:2024, one must purchase the report for about $187. That's not fair, said Nick Lapis, director of advocacy for Californians Against Waste. 'Copies of those ISO standards should be publicly available,' he said. Lapis and others also noted that the law, as written, expressly prohibits chemical and nonmechanical forms of recycling. Officials at CalRecycle, also known as the California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery, didn't respond to the criticism or to questions from The Times. ISO 59014:2024 turns out to be a 38-page report titled 'Environmental management and circular economy — Sustainability and traceability of the recovery of secondary materials — Principles, requirements and guidance.' A copy of the report reviewed by The Times offered no specifics on recycling technologies, or information about the operation of a recycling plant. The word 'recycling' is only used five times in the 'Annex,' a 13-page supplementary section of the report. And there it is mentioned only in the context of establishing definitions or examples of 'organizations engaged in the recovery of secondary materials' or 'collection system types.' For instance, 'Commercial waste and recycling companies' are listed as examples of a type of organization that collects waste. Other waste collectors, according to the report, include municipalities, retailers and reuse organizations such as nonprofit reuse operators. 'The draft calls on aligning facilities with this ISO standard,' said Monica Wilson, senior director of global programs at the Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives. 'That ISO standard is not about recycling. It's not about chemical recycling, it's just not an appropriate comparison for us to be referring to.' Lapis also found the report hard to decipher. 'Maybe I should go back and look at it again, but it'd be helpful if you're citing ISO standards ... that you identify what parts' are being cited, he said. Karen Kayfetz, chief of CalRecycle's Product Stewardship branch, didn't respond to questions or concerns about the inclusion of a report that is not freely available to the public to review. During this week's workshop, she said the agency's use of the ISO standard 'is not meant ... to be a measure of whether you are recycling, but rather just one of multiple criteria that an entity needs to be measured against.' She said the SB 54 statute requires that CalRecycle exclude recycling technologies that produce significant amounts of hazardous waste and tasks the agency with considering environmental and public health impacts of these technologies. 'The ISO standard for the operation of facilities does address some of the best practices that would help to ameliorate and measure those impacts. ... It is meant to be one of multiple criteria that can be utilized as a measure and to help set a floor but not a ceiling,' she said. Ana Ferreira, a spokeswoman for the Wine Institute, which represents more than 1,000 wineries and affiliates across the state, was among those with no complaints about the proposed new regulations. 'We believe it incorporates common-sense changes that would reduce costs and ensure that products are appropriately recycled,' Ferreira said. Tina Andolina, the chief of staff for state Sen. Ben Allen (D-Santa Monica), SB 54's author, said the inclusion of the report and other items in the draft regulations suggests that CalRecycle is considering how to manage these polluting technologies — instead of forbidding them, as the law requires. 'The regulations unlawfully shift the standard from the production of hazardous waste as required by the statute to its management,' she said, reading from a letter Allen had written to the staff. Anja Brandon, director of plastic policy at the Ocean Conservancy, added that along with not being freely available, the ISO standard 'does not satisfy SB 54's requirements to exclude the most hazardous technologies and to minimize the generation of hazardous waste and environmental, environmental justice and public health impacts.' SB 54, which was signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom in 2022, requires that by 2032, 100% of single-use packaging and plastic food ware produced or sold in the state must be recyclable or compostable, that 65% of it can be recycled, and that the total volume is reduced by 25%. The law was written to address the mounting issue of plastic pollution in the environment and the growing number of studies showing the ubiquity of microplastic pollution in the human body — such as in the brain, blood, heart tissue, testicles, lungs and various other organs. Last March, after nearly three years of negotiations among various corporate, environmental, waste, recycling and health stakeholders, CalRecycle drafted a set of finalized regulations designed to implement the single-use plastic producer responsibility program under SB 54. But as the deadline for implementation approached, industries that would be affected by the regulations including plastic producers and packaging companies — represented by the California Chamber of Commerce and the Circular Action Alliance — began lobbying the governor, complaining that the regulations were poorly developed and might ultimately increase costs for California allowed the regulations to expire and told CalRecycle that it needed to start the process over. These new draft regulations are the agency's latest attempt at issuing guidelines by which the law can be implemented.
Yahoo
22-03-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
California banned polystyrene. So why is it still on store shelves?
Styrofoam coffee cups, plates, clamshell takeout containers and other food service items made with expanded polystyrene plastic can still be found in restaurants and on store shelves, despite a ban that went into effect on Jan. 1. A Smart and Final in Redwood City was brimming with foam plates, bowls and cups for sale on Thursday. Want to buy these goods online? It was no problem to log on to to find a variety of foam food ware products — Dart insulated hot/cold foam cups, or Hefty Everyday 10.25" plates — that could be shipped to an address in California. Same with the restaurant supply shop KaTom, which is based in Kodak, Tenn. Smart and Final and KaTom didn't respond to requests for comment. A spokesperson for Amazon said the company would look into the matter. The expanded polystyrene ban is part of a single-use plastic law, Senate Bill 54, that Gov. Gavin Newsom signed into law in 2022 but bailed on earlier this month. And while the full law now sits in limbo, one part remains in effect: A de facto ban on so-called expanded polystyrene, the soft, white, foamy material commonly used for takeout food service items. Nick Lapis, director of advocacy for Californians Against Waste — one of the many stakeholder organizations that worked with lawmakers to craft SB 54 — said the law had been written in a way that insured the polystyrene ban would go into effect even if the rest of the package failed. "So, it's still in effect whether or not there are regulations for the rest of the bill," he said. CalRecycle, the state's waste agency, is tasked with overseeing and enforcing the law. Asked why styrofoam food service products are still widely available, CalRecycle spokesperson Melanie Turner said in an email that her agency is in the process of identifying businesses producing, selling and distributing the products in the state and considering "ways to help them comply with the law." SB 54 called for plastic and packaging companies to reduce single-use plastic packaging by 25% and ensure that 65% of that material is recyclable and 100% either recyclable or compostable — all by 2032. The law also required packaging producers to bear the costs of their products' end-life (whether via recycling, composting, landfill or export) and figure out how to make it happen — removing that costly burden from consumers and state and local governments. In December, representatives from the plastic, packaging and chemical recycling industry urged the governor to abandon the regulations, suggesting they were unachievable as written and could cost Californians roughly $300 per year to implement — a number that has been hotly contested by environmental groups and lawmakers, who say it doesn't factor in the money saved by reducing plastic waste in towns, cities and the environment. Their pressure campaign — joined by Rachel Wagoner, the former director of CalRecycle and now the director of the Circular Action Alliance, a coalition for the plastic and packaging industry — worked. Newsom let the deadline for the bill's finalized rules and regulations pass without implementation and ordered CalRecycle to start the process over. However, the bill's stand-alone styrofoam proviso — which doesn't require the finalization of rules and regulation — makes clear that producers of expanded polystyrene food service ware "shall not sell, offer for sale, distribute, or import into the state" these plastic products unless the producer can demonstrate recycling rates of no less than 25% on Jan. 1, 2025, 30% by Jan. 1, 2028, 50% by Jan. 1, 2030 and 65% by 2032. And on Jan. 1, that recycling target hadn't been met and is therefore banned. (Recycling rates for expanded polystyrene range around 1% nationally). Neither CalRecycle or Newsom's office has issued an acknowledgment of the ban — leaving plastic distributors, sellers, environmental groups, waste haulers and lawmakers uncertain about the state government's willingness to enforce the law. "I don't understand why the administration can't put out a statement saying that," said Lapis. "At this point, silence from the administration only creates additional legal liability for companies that don't realize they are breaking the law." At a state Senate budget hearing on Thursday, lawmakers questioned the directors of CalEPA and CalRecycle about its lack of action regarding the polystyrene ban. CalRecycle is a department within CalEPA. "Why hasn't Cal Recycle taken steps to implement the provisions of SB 54 that deal with the sale of expanded polystyrene?" Sen. Ben Allen (D-Santa Monica), the sponsor and author of the bill, asked Yana Garcia, the secretary of CalEPA. "You know, the product has not met the strict requirements under SB 54, so there's now steps that need to be taken to prohibited sale." Garcia responded that in terms of the messaging around polystyrene, her agency and CalRecycle "possibly need to lean in more there as well, particularly at this moment." Jan Dell, the founder and president of the Laguna Beach-based environmental group Last Beach Cleanup, said the continued presence of expanded polystyrene on store shelves throughout the state underscores one of the major problems with the law: CalRecycle cannot easily enforce it. This "proves that CalRecycle is incapable of implementing and enforcing the massive scope of SB 54 on all packaging," she said in an email, suggesting the whole law should be repealed "to save taxpayer money and enable strict bans on the worst plastic pollution items to pass and be implemented." Turner said via email that the agency could provide "compliance assistance," initiate investigations and issue notices of violation. According to one state analysis, 2.9 million tons of single-use plastic and 171.4 billion single-use plastic components were sold, offered for sale or distributed during 2023 in California. Single-use plastics and plastic waste more broadly are considered a growing environmental and health problem. In recent decades, the accumulation of plastic waste has overwhelmed waterways and oceans, sickened marine life and threatened human health. On March 7, Newsom stopped the landmark plastic waste law from moving forward — rejecting rules and regulations his own staff had written — despite more than two years of effort, negotiation and input from the plastic and packaging industry, as well as environmental organizations, waste haulers and other lawmakers. This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.
Los Angeles Times
22-03-2025
- Business
- Los Angeles Times
California banned polystyrene. So why is it still on store shelves?
Styrofoam coffee cups, plates, clamshell takeout containers and other food service items made with expanded polystyrene plastic can still be found in restaurants and on store shelves, despite a ban that went into effect on Jan. 1. A Smart and Final in Redwood City was brimming with foam plates, bowls and cups for sale on Thursday. Want to buy these goods online? It was no problem to log on to to find a variety of foam food ware products — Dart insulated hot/cold foam cups, or Hefty Everyday 10.25' plates — that could be shipped to an address in California. Same with the restaurant supply shop KaTom, which is based in Kodak, Tenn. Smart and Final and KaTom didn't respond to requests for comment. A spokesperson for Amazon said the company would look into the matter. The expanded polystyrene ban is part of a single-use plastic law, Senate Bill 54, that Gov. Gavin Newsom signed into law in 2022 but bailed on earlier this month. And while the full law now sits in limbo, one part remains in effect: A de facto ban on so-called expanded polystyrene, the soft, white, foamy material commonly used for takeout food service items. Nick Lapis, director of advocacy for Californians Against Waste — one of the many stakeholder organizations that worked with lawmakers to craft SB 54 — said the law had been written in a way that insured the polystyrene ban would go into effect even if the rest of the package failed. 'So, it's still in effect whether or not there are regulations for the rest of the bill,' he said. CalRecycle, the state's waste agency, is tasked with overseeing and enforcing the law. Asked why styrofoam food service products are still widely available, CalRecycle spokesperson Melanie Turner said in an email that her agency is in the process of identifying businesses producing, selling and distributing the products in the state and considering 'ways to help them comply with the law.' SB 54 called for plastic and packaging companies to reduce single-use plastic packaging by 25% and ensure that 65% of that material is recyclable and 100% either recyclable or compostable — all by 2032. The law also required packaging producers to bear the costs of their products' end-life (whether via recycling, composting, landfill or export) and figure out how to make it happen — removing that costly burden from consumers and state and local governments. In December, representatives from the plastic, packaging and chemical recycling industry urged the governor to abandon the regulations, suggesting they were unachievable as written and could cost Californians roughly $300 per year to implement — a number that has been hotly contested by environmental groups and lawmakers, who say it doesn't factor in the money saved by reducing plastic waste in towns, cities and the environment. Their pressure campaign — joined by Rachel Wagoner, the former director of CalRecycle and now the director of the Circular Action Alliance, a coalition for the plastic and packaging industry — worked. Newsom let the deadline for the bill's finalized rules and regulations pass without implementation and ordered CalRecycle to start the process over. However, the bill's stand-alone styrofoam proviso — which doesn't require the finalization of rules and regulation — makes clear that producers of expanded polystyrene food service ware 'shall not sell, offer for sale, distribute, or import into the state' these plastic products unless the producer can demonstrate recycling rates of no less than 25% on Jan. 1, 2025, 30% by Jan. 1, 2028, 50% by Jan. 1, 2030 and 65% by 2032. And on Jan. 1, that recycling target hadn't been met and is therefore banned. (Recycling rates for expanded polystyrene range around 1% nationally). Neither CalRecycle or Newsom's office has issued an acknowledgment of the ban — leaving plastic distributors, sellers, environmental groups, waste haulers and lawmakers uncertain about the state government's willingness to enforce the law. 'I don't understand why the administration can't put out a statement saying that,' said Lapis. 'At this point, silence from the administration only creates additional legal liability for companies that don't realize they are breaking the law.' At a state Senate budget hearing on Thursday, lawmakers questioned the directors of CalEPA and CalRecycle about its lack of action regarding the polystyrene ban. CalRecycle is a department within CalEPA. 'Why hasn't Cal Recycle taken steps to implement the provisions of SB 54 that deal with the sale of expanded polystyrene?' Sen. Ben Allen (D-Santa Monica), the sponsor and author of the bill, asked Yana Garcia, the secretary of CalEPA. 'You know, the product has not met the strict requirements under SB 54, so there's now steps that need to be taken to prohibited sale.' Garcia responded that in terms of the messaging around polystyrene, her agency and CalRecycle 'possibly need to lean in more there as well, particularly at this moment.' Jan Dell, the founder and president of the Laguna Beach-based environmental group Last Beach Cleanup, said the continued presence of expanded polystyrene on store shelves throughout the state underscores one of the major problems with the law: CalRecycle cannot easily enforce it. This 'proves that CalRecycle is incapable of implementing and enforcing the massive scope of SB 54 on all packaging,' she said in an email, suggesting the whole law should be repealed 'to save taxpayer money and enable strict bans on the worst plastic pollution items to pass and be implemented.' Turner said via email that the agency could provide 'compliance assistance,' initiate investigations and issue notices of violation. According to one state analysis, 2.9 million tons of single-use plastic and 171.4 billion single-use plastic components were sold, offered for sale or distributed during 2023 in California. Single-use plastics and plastic waste more broadly are considered a growing environmental and health problem. In recent decades, the accumulation of plastic waste has overwhelmed waterways and oceans, sickened marine life and threatened human health. On March 7, Newsom stopped the landmark plastic waste law from moving forward — rejecting rules and regulations his own staff had written — despite more than two years of effort, negotiation and input from the plastic and packaging industry, as well as environmental organizations, waste haulers and other lawmakers.
