As industry-run paint EPR has grown to operate across 10 states, it offers lessons that might apply to state packaging EPR proposals.
Permission granted by Hannah Rosengren
By Leslie Nemo, Contributor, WasteDive
While debates over extended producer responsibility (EPR) programs for packaging have been firing up state legislatures recently, a smaller system for architectural paint has been quietly gaining scale. Lessons from that 20-year effort may not be directly applicable to today’s packaging debates, but they offer a unique case study on navigating producer involvement.
“It has been the standby. It’s always been consistent, there’s always interest. But each year, there’s something new that just far surpasses paint” as a priority for end-of-life product management, said Scott Cassel, the CEO and founder of the Product Stewardship Institute (PSI).
The American Coatings Association (ACA) manages PaintCare with funding from paint manufacturers, who pass the costs on to stores stocking their products. The stores charge customers fees that hover around 75 cents per gallon; those fees essentially reimburse the manufacturers. PaintCare uses the money to collect leftover paint and find businesses to make use of it.
The U.S. generates roughly 75 million gallons of excess architectural paint every year, according to PSI estimates. In 2020, that was about 9% of all architectural paint sold, according to an October 2020 ACA forecast. (While excess industrial paint also requires management, industry experts say it’s less of a concern because usage needs are more closely calculated.) Since the first state law passed in Oregon in 2009, PaintCare has collected 50 million gallons of leftover paint and spent about $240 million.
If you liked this post you’ll love our daily newsletter, EnviroPolitics. It’s packed with the latest news, commentary, and legislative updates from New Jersey, Pennsylvania, New York, Delaware…and beyond. Don’t take our word for it, try it free for an entire month. No obligation.
