Tesco and Sainsbury’s are facing scrutiny over their recycling schemes, sparking a debate on sustainability. The following points highlight the issue:
- Plastic waste from the supermarkets’ recycling schemes was sent overseas and incinerated.
- Investigations tracked 40 bundles of plastic, revealing their journey across 25,000 kilometers.
- Out of these, a significant portion was converted into fuel pellets or burned for energy.
- Both supermarkets claim efforts toward packaging recyclability, with some plastic repurposed in the UK.
- Critics argue these schemes distract from the excessive plastic packaging production problem.
The recycling schemes implemented by Tesco and Sainsbury’s have come under fire for allegedly misleading their customers. An in-depth investigation by the Everyday Plastic campaign group and the Environmental Investigation Agency (EIA) revealed that plastic soft waste collected at the front-of-store points was shipped overseas and incinerated instead of being recycled locally. This revelation prompted significant public concern regarding the transparency and effectiveness of these schemes.
The investigation provided detailed insights by using Apple tracking devices, which were embedded in 40 bundles of plastic packaging from the supermarkets. Tracking these bundles from July 2023 to February 2024, the devices recorded a staggering collective travel distance of over 25,000 kilometers, spanning the UK and other countries. This extensive journey of the plastic waste raises questions about the genuine impact of the recycling initiatives.
As the tracking results indicate, seven of the plastic packages were transformed into fuel pellets, while five others were incinerated for energy recovery. Surprisingly, a mere singular package was repurposed in the UK, while a majority were dealt with abroad in countries like Turkey, where some materials were downcycled into lower-value products. This reality challenges the supermarkets’ claims of environmental responsibility.
Sainsbury’s and Tesco have been vocal about their efforts toward meeting packaging recyclability targets. Notably, Sainsbury’s acknowledged limitations by stating that while most collected plastics are in suitable condition for recycling, damaged or soiled materials are sometimes diverted for energy recovery. Tesco admitted an error in sending materials to Turkey and assured that they utilize non-recyclable plastics for energy purposes to avoid landfill. Despite these efforts, both retailers recognize the need for improved recycling infrastructure in the UK and the EU.
Critics from the Everyday Plastic campaign argue that these take-back schemes are a diversion from the root issue of excessive plastic production. They emphasize that addressing the production level should be a priority to manage plastic waste effectively. Alison Colclough, the research director, pointed out that presenting these schemes as a solution detracts attention from this core problem.
The ongoing debate highlights a critical need to reassess plastic waste management strategies towards more sustainable practices.
