Original illustration inspired by the Symbolist art of Lithuanian painter and composer M. K. Čiurlionis (1875–1911) - link
Last time, I wrote about Brazil's extraordinary success in recycling aluminium drinks cans; an excellent example of what can be achieved when a material has genuine commercial value and a well established collection network.
This time, I'm visiting a different country, with a significantly different approach - Lithuania - a Baltic nation with a population of approximately 2.9 million people, Lithuania has spent the past decade demonstrating something that should interest everyone involved in waste management, not least, Britain. Give people a simple, convenient reason to return their empty packaging and the results can be remarkable; and in Lithuania, it all started with ten cents.
A Small Deposit, an Enormous Difference
On 1 February 2016, Lithuania introduced a Deposit Return Scheme (DRS) covering eligible plastic, metal and glass drinks containers. The principle was effectively the same as most DRS schemes; when someone purchased a drink they paid an additional €0.10 deposit, return the empty container to a participating collection point and they received their ten cents back - no complicated environmental philosophy - no requirement for consumers to understand polymer chemistry - just a simple financial transaction.
Before the scheme was introduced, approximately 34% of Lithuania's PET drinks containers were being collected through the existing system. For comparison, Britain is already starting from a considerably stronger position; according to recycling charity RECOUP's 2024 UK 'Household Plastic Packaging Collection Survey', an estimated 70–80% of plastic drinks bottles were collected for recycling in 2023, without a Deposit Return Scheme.
Although the figures are not perfectly like for like, they highlight an important distinction. Lithuania was attempting to transform a poorly performing collection system. Britain is proposing to introduce an entirely new collection infrastructure into a country where a substantial majority of plastic drinks bottles are already being recovered. This doesn't mean Britain's DRS can't deliver environmental benefits, particularly through reduced littering and improved material quality, but it raises the question whether the additional material recovered justifies the considerable investment in new machines, transport, collection and processing infrastructure, particularly when much of that material is already being collected through existing recycling services?
34 to 92
By the end of 2016, the new Lithuanian scheme had achieved a 74.3% return rate across eligible drinks containers. By the end of 2017, that figure had climbed to 91.9% and this wasn't simply an impressive opening performance followed by a gradual decline. According to reverse vending technology company TOMRA, Lithuania's return rates at the end of 2025 were:
• 90% of PET drinks containers
• 91% of metal drinks cans
• 84% of non-reusable glass drinks containers
Across the scheme as a whole, the reported return rate was approximately 90% and ten years after its introduction, the system continues to deliver.
More Than 700 Million Reasons to Celebrate
According to Lithuania's deposit system administrator, Užstato Sistemos Administratorius (USAD), consumers returned approximately 708.58 million drinks containers during 2024 which included nearly 360 million PET bottles, approximately 303 million aluminium cans, more than 45 million glass bottles and around 800,000 steel cans.
For a country of fewer than three million people, that represents an extraordinary volume of material being returned through a dedicated collection system and there's another benefit; much of this material is collected separately from household mixed recycling, helping preserve its quality and making it more attractive to reprocessors. Anyone who has spent time around a Materials Recovery Facility (MRF) will understand why this matters.
There's a considerable difference between receiving relatively clean, identifiable drinks containers and attempting to recover them from a mixture of food contaminated packaging, shredded paper, broken glass and whatever else somebody has bizarrely decided is recyclable. Optical sorting equipment is clever but it isn't magic.
Making Recycling Convenient
One of Lithuania's strengths is the accessibility of its return network. The system operates largely through retailers, with reverse vending machines allowing consumers to return eligible containers and recover their deposits. Like Britain's DRS, larger shops and rural retailers have return obligations while smaller retailers can also participate. Importantly, the deposit isn't simply lost if someone doesn't want to spend it immediately. Refund vouchers can be used towards shopping or redeemed for cash.
There's a commercial incentive running through the entire arrangement. Consumers want their deposits back - retailers participate in the return infrastructure - material processors receive valuable, relatively uncontaminated feedstock and the system administrator coordinates the money, information, logistics and materials. It's a practical example of how environmental objectives and commercial interests can work in harmony with one another.
There Are Qualifications
As impressive as the Lithuanian figures are, there's an important distinction between a container being returned for recycling and confirmation that every gram of that material has actually been recycled into another product. Return rates are not the same measurement as final recycling rates. Processing losses still exist, contamination, rejected material and the efficiency of downstream recycling operations all influence the eventual outcome.
Nor does a 90% return rate mean that the remaining 10% has necessarily been littered. Some containers may still enter other waste or recycling collections; and a deposit system isn't free to operate. Machines require investment, space and maintenance. Containers must be collected and transported - sorting and counting facilities need staff, equipment and energy. Retailers have responsibilities and somebody has to pay the operating costs. These aren't arguments against deposit systems; simply reminders that successful recycling requires considerably more than putting a machine outside a Sainsbury's.
What About Britain?
Our Deposit Return Scheme is scheduled to launch on 1 October 2027, introducing a refundable 20p deposit on eligible single use PET plastic bottles and aluminium and steel drinks cans between 150ml and 3 litres. Wales is taking a slightly different approach by including glass in its scheme, although glass containers will initially carry a zero-pence deposit during a four-year transition period. The scheme administrator, Exchange for Change, has appointed five major recycling and waste management operators to provide logistics and processing services across the country, with new collection vehicles and processing infrastructure planned, but the real test will come when the system becomes operational.
• Will return points be convenient?
• Will the machines be reliable?
• Will retailers have sufficient space?
• Will the collection logistics work efficiently across cities, towns and rural communities?
• What happens to existing kerbside and commercial recycling services when millions of valuable PET bottles and aluminium cans are diverted into a completely separate collection network?
Having worked in waste management for more than four decades, I've learned that there's a substantial difference between a scheme that looks excellent on paper and one that works efficiently on a wet Tuesday morning in November and Lithuania's achievements demonstrate what's possible.
Two Countries, Two Different Approaches
What interests me most is the contrast between Brazil and Lithuania. Brazil has developed an exceptionally effective aluminium can recycling system, supported by the inherent commercial value of aluminium and the people and businesses who collect it. Lithuania has used a modest refundable deposit, retailer participation and coordinated infrastructure to encourage consumers to return their drinks containers. The collection models are different, as are the social and economic circumstances but both demonstrate something fundamental. Recycling performance improves when the people handling the material have a practical reason to recover it and an accessible system for doing so. We can produce all the environmental slogans, targets and sustainability reports we like but ultimately the results depend on what happens to the packaging after the consumer has finished with it. Lithuania has shown that ten cents, backed by a properly organised collection system, can make an enormous difference.
The United Kingdom is preparing to find out what twenty pence can achieve. I shall be watching with considerable interest and knowing the waste industry as I do, I suspect the first twelve months will provide more than enough material for several more articles. More like this (Lithuania) - link - more like this (Brazil) - link - more like this (DRS) - link
According to Lithuania's deposit system administrator, Užstato Sistemos Administratorius (USAD), consumers returned approximately 708.58 million drinks containers during 2024 which included nearly 360 million PET bottles, approximately 303 million aluminium cans, more than 45 million glass bottles and around 800,000 steel cans.
For a country of fewer than three million people, that represents an extraordinary volume of material being returned through a dedicated collection system and there's another benefit; much of this material is collected separately from household mixed recycling, helping preserve its quality and making it more attractive to reprocessors. Anyone who has spent time around a Materials Recovery Facility (MRF) will understand why this matters.
There's a considerable difference between receiving relatively clean, identifiable drinks containers and attempting to recover them from a mixture of food contaminated packaging, shredded paper, broken glass and whatever else somebody has bizarrely decided is recyclable. Optical sorting equipment is clever but it isn't magic.
Making Recycling Convenient
One of Lithuania's strengths is the accessibility of its return network. The system operates largely through retailers, with reverse vending machines allowing consumers to return eligible containers and recover their deposits. Like Britain's DRS, larger shops and rural retailers have return obligations while smaller retailers can also participate. Importantly, the deposit isn't simply lost if someone doesn't want to spend it immediately. Refund vouchers can be used towards shopping or redeemed for cash.
There's a commercial incentive running through the entire arrangement. Consumers want their deposits back - retailers participate in the return infrastructure - material processors receive valuable, relatively uncontaminated feedstock and the system administrator coordinates the money, information, logistics and materials. It's a practical example of how environmental objectives and commercial interests can work in harmony with one another.
There Are Qualifications
As impressive as the Lithuanian figures are, there's an important distinction between a container being returned for recycling and confirmation that every gram of that material has actually been recycled into another product. Return rates are not the same measurement as final recycling rates. Processing losses still exist, contamination, rejected material and the efficiency of downstream recycling operations all influence the eventual outcome.
Nor does a 90% return rate mean that the remaining 10% has necessarily been littered. Some containers may still enter other waste or recycling collections; and a deposit system isn't free to operate. Machines require investment, space and maintenance. Containers must be collected and transported - sorting and counting facilities need staff, equipment and energy. Retailers have responsibilities and somebody has to pay the operating costs. These aren't arguments against deposit systems; simply reminders that successful recycling requires considerably more than putting a machine outside a Sainsbury's.
What About Britain?
Our Deposit Return Scheme is scheduled to launch on 1 October 2027, introducing a refundable 20p deposit on eligible single use PET plastic bottles and aluminium and steel drinks cans between 150ml and 3 litres. Wales is taking a slightly different approach by including glass in its scheme, although glass containers will initially carry a zero-pence deposit during a four-year transition period. The scheme administrator, Exchange for Change, has appointed five major recycling and waste management operators to provide logistics and processing services across the country, with new collection vehicles and processing infrastructure planned, but the real test will come when the system becomes operational.
• Will return points be convenient?
• Will the machines be reliable?
• Will retailers have sufficient space?
• Will the collection logistics work efficiently across cities, towns and rural communities?
• What happens to existing kerbside and commercial recycling services when millions of valuable PET bottles and aluminium cans are diverted into a completely separate collection network?
Having worked in waste management for more than four decades, I've learned that there's a substantial difference between a scheme that looks excellent on paper and one that works efficiently on a wet Tuesday morning in November and Lithuania's achievements demonstrate what's possible.
Two Countries, Two Different Approaches
What interests me most is the contrast between Brazil and Lithuania. Brazil has developed an exceptionally effective aluminium can recycling system, supported by the inherent commercial value of aluminium and the people and businesses who collect it. Lithuania has used a modest refundable deposit, retailer participation and coordinated infrastructure to encourage consumers to return their drinks containers. The collection models are different, as are the social and economic circumstances but both demonstrate something fundamental. Recycling performance improves when the people handling the material have a practical reason to recover it and an accessible system for doing so. We can produce all the environmental slogans, targets and sustainability reports we like but ultimately the results depend on what happens to the packaging after the consumer has finished with it. Lithuania has shown that ten cents, backed by a properly organised collection system, can make an enormous difference.
The United Kingdom is preparing to find out what twenty pence can achieve. I shall be watching with considerable interest and knowing the waste industry as I do, I suspect the first twelve months will provide more than enough material for several more articles. More like this (Lithuania) - link - more like this (Brazil) - link - more like this (DRS) - link
No comments:
Post a Comment