DRAFT MINUTES. Development of ecolabelling criteria for printed matter; Minutes of the first AHWG meeting

Transcription

1 1(7) DRAFT MINUTES Kerstin Sahlén SIS Ecolabelling Development of ecolabelling criteria for printed matter; Minutes of the first AHWG meeting The first ad Hoc Working Group (AHWG) meeting was held in Stockholm on November 21 st Participants: Helene Markusson Danske Dagblades Forening Denmark Peter Andersen Danske Dagblades Forening Denmark Hans Johansson Grafiska Företagens Förbund Sweden Eva Kjellström CEPE, European Technical Sweden Committee Printing Ink Annette Hellman Sun Chemical Sweden Henrik Jansson SVEFF Sweden Jesper Gruvmark Danish Ecolabelling Denmark Leena Nyqvist-Kuusola SFS Ecolabelling Finland Ingrid Haglind CEPI, Swedish Forrest Industry Sweden Sam Cross AEAT, UK Competent Body UK Steinar Webjørnsen Mediebedrifternes Landsforening Norway Michele Accardo European Commission EU Carin Wahren Ministry of Agriculture Sweden Ninna Johnsen Grafisk Arbetsgiverforning Denmark Carsten Bøg Grafisk Arbetsgiverforning Denmark Per K Hansen Stilbo Graphic Denmark Henrik Fred Larsen The Technical University of Denmark Denmark, The Department of Manufacturing Engineering and Management Jaana Villikka-Storm The Federation of the Printing Finland Industry in Finland Anders Fryxell Interprint Sweden Lars Bjälkvall IBM Sweden Maria Enroth STFI Sweden Martin Johansson STFI Sweden Nina Haglund Frantschach Sweden Ulla Sahlberg SIS Ecolabelling Sweden Ingela Hellström SIS Ecolabelling Sweden Ragnar Unge SIS Ecolabelling Sweden Kerstin Sahlén SIS Ecolabelling Sweden Lill Brodin Milgraf AB Sweden Minutes_21Nov03.doc

2 Minutes of the first AHWG meeting on the development of ecolabelling criteria for printed matter 2(7) Malin Möller SIS Ecolabelling Sweden Anders Jacobsson SIS Ecolabelling Sweden Svetlana Sopa SIS Ecolabelling Sweden Chair was Mr Ragnar Unge, SIS Ecolabelling 1 Adoption of the agenda, introduction and presentation of the participants Mr Unge welcomed the participants, and presented the agenda for the meeting. The participants accepted the agenda. The participants presented themselves. 2 Scope of the project and time schedule The European Commission decided in 2002 to investigate the possibility to develop ecolabelling criteria for printed matter and SIS Ecolabelling was appointed to take the lead for this work. The scope of the project was presented. The first phase of the project contains the different steps specified in point 30 of the EUEB procedures (Decision 2000/730/EC). Some steps are still remaining. According to the time schedule, the second and third AHWG meetings are scheduled to March respectively June 2004 in Brussels. A report about the work up to now will be given at the EUEB meeting in December. If nothing unforeseen turns up, it might be possible for the Committee to vote on this new category of product group during the December meeting Presentation of the background facts There have been problems to find relevant European statistics of the market situation in the different countries. The information that can be found is based on different kind of data and information from separate countries can therefore not be compared. The main printing substrates are graphic paper, printing paper, newsprint and wrapping paper/board. By using official statistics from CEPI and from CEPE, a rough estimation of the production of printed matter could however be done. The delegate from the paper industry was of the opinion that the packaging paper was included in the paper statistics, but was missing in the statistics of dyes and inks. This would therefore be further clarified in the relevant chapter in the background report % of all printing within EU is produced in four countries, DE, FR, UK and IT. It was a proposal that the estimated printing per country should also be expressed as amount printed matter per inhabitant and per country.

3 Minutes of the first AHWG meeting on the development of ecolabelling criteria for printed matter 3(7) There was also presented a survey of the European legislation affecting the printing industry. 4 Presentation of printing technologies and the environmental analysis The consultant made a presentation of the most used printing technologies and also the trends and changes in technologies. The differences between and characteristics for these technologies were briefly presented. The Offset, Gravure and Flexographic printing technologies are today the most frequently used, but the market for Digital printing technology is growing. The Letterpress technology is more and more replaced by other technologies. A survey was presented of the environmental load from the different phases and technologies. In the exposition the emissions to air and water as well as the kind of waste was described. The expected improvements and presumed future improvements were estimated too. This survey covered the pre-press, printing and finishing phases for all mentioned printing technologies. 5 Experiences from the ecolabelling of Printed matter in the Nordic scheme The first generation of ecolabelling criteria for the Nordic Swan was launched in It was a success with about 250 licenses. After the first revision of the criteria all the licenses were renewed and the total number of licenses was increased to about 555. Last year the criteria were revised for the second time and the licenses had to be renewed again. Today the number of licenses after the renewals is already about 450 in the Nordic scheme and the number is still growing. The license holders are located in all the Nordic countries as well as in Germany, the Netherlands and Austria. Requirements on the printing paper for the printed matter have also influenced the graphic paper production. The technical development has been influenced by requirements on the wastewater, and the use of chemicals by the requirements on the environmentally hazardous chemicals. 6 Ecolabelling criteria in other ecolabelling schemes The possibility to ecolabel printed matter is possible in ecolabelling schemes over the world. Most of these schemes has a narrow product group definition. None of the criteria cover the whole range of technologies and all phases in

4 Minutes of the first AHWG meeting on the development of ecolabelling criteria for printed matter 4(7) the production of printed matter. The schemes found to have criteria are the Japanese, Canadian, Taiwan, Austrian and Nordic Swan. The offset printing is covered in all schemes, and the Nordic scheme has the widest definition, and is possible to use for all technologies except for screen-printing. The Canadian scheme is ecolabelling the printing service while the other schemes are labelling the printing product. 7 Discussion, Scope of the criteria 7.1 Which printing technologies should be covered? There was a question if all printing technologies were covered in the survey or if there is any missing technology. Another question was if all technologies should be covered by the criteria. To make sure that all possibilities should be taken into account as much as possible, the recommendation from the project group should be to continue with the wide scope. The Paper Industry was of the opinion that the de-inking properties of the products printed with the different technologies must be taken into account. For instance is the flexo printing not useable for the products that are to be deinked for newsprint production. The requirements should not be set in a way that forces the 20% of the best producers to improve their production but rather the 20% of the worse producers. Other participants were of the opinion that it should first be decided what products could be included and then choose the technologies. As for example, the packaging material might not be suitable for the definition of the product group. The letterpress and screen technologies should also be studied more thoroughly. As the market share of ecolabelled products is quite high in Denmark, the Danish participants were of the opinion that the requirements for the Flower should be harder than in the Swan scheme otherwise there will be no environmental impact of the criteria in Denmark. The requirements should also be based on LCA. Before the criteria are proposed, it must be investigated how the situation is in the countries in Southern part of Europe. Which requirements could be realistic for these printing houses or products? The Commission made a comment that even if the producers are not interested in ecolabelling their products, there is potential for environmental improvement in this product group and the ecolabelling criteria could be used as a benchmark. 7.2 Choice of substrates

5 Minutes of the first AHWG meeting on the development of ecolabelling criteria for printed matter 5(7) The question was if different substrates as paper, plastics (for example envelopes), textiles or fabrics, metals (as cans) etc, should be able to use for ecolabelled products. One problem is that the knowledge differs very much for the different substrates. The best known substrate is paper. The paper industry was of the opinion that there is too much focus on the paper. The substrate should according to their opinion be left outside the criteria. Other participants claimed that there should be criteria on the substrate but it is not possible to develop different criteria for each different substrate now. The packaging criteria is growing therefore it should be developed a criteria for the printing process and not for the substrate. The packaging industry as well as other participants thought that if the packaging is labelled there may be a confusion about what is ecolabelled; the packaging or the content. About 50 % of all the packagings produced are made of plastics. When the share of the print on the packaging is calculated the calculations should be based on the surface area instead of tonnage because the weights of the different substrates are different. If 80% of the environmental impact of the product origin from the substrate it cannot be left outside. Fabrics and plastics have also big impact according to LCA. 7.3 Choice of printing phases, service or product label? In some of the other ecolabelling schemes with criteria for printed matter, the scope was limited to only the printing phase and the pre-press as well as the finishing was excluded. In one scheme, the scope was the service printing. The printing industry was of the opinion that if the product itself is labelled it can be analysed. If the whole printing house is labelled there might be difficulties to know how the product was produced. It cannot be checked afterwards. Other participants claimed that if the product is labelled the whole production process have to be covered. The Danish participants reminded that for the Nordic scheme, the scope was something between a product label and a service. The Danish project would hopefully generate the answers to the question. The paper industry supported the idea of labelling the printing service. Finally, the comment was made that the LCA should be considered as a tool and not as the truth.

6 Minutes of the first AHWG meeting on the development of ecolabelling criteria for printed matter 6(7) 7.4 Possible parameters Some possible parameters were highlighted as technical requirements for the printed product, production requirements, energy use and transportation. The packaging industry thought that there should be requirements on the printed product that it is possible to recycle. It is only question of money and technology to make them recyclable. Other participants were of the opinion that there are some finishing materials that makes the recycling difficult and there should therefore be restrictions for what material is allowed to be used in the finishing. For the energy the participants thought that it is relevant to have requirements on the energy use. There are values available for the energy consumption of the printing machines for offset. It was proposed to investigate if it might be possible to introduce some kind of index values for the energy use. The participants were of the opinion that the transportation is important, but that the issue is very complicated and the possibility to control the transportation varies a lot over Europe. Transports are therefore too complicated to be taken in to account. The graphical companies cannot choose their customers and the kind of transportation of the products. The discussion concluded that all the problems in the world couldn t be solved by the criteria for printed matter. Therefore the issue might be taken into account in a future revision. 7.5 Requirements on the printing paper Three possibilities were outlined, to require ecolabelled paper, require that the paper used conforms to the ecolabelling requirements and the third possibility should be to require basic requirements. A proposal during the discussion was to make the use of ecolabelled paper mandatory and only have minor requirements on the printing phase. The problem with paper that conforms with the ecolabelling criteria but without a license is that the body making the assessment of an application including the documentation requirements for the printing paper, has to be reimbursed in one way or another. The paper industry was willing to support the idea of basic requirements based on LCA. The discussion didn t turn out in a final recommendation. 7.6 Design of the criteria

7 Minutes of the first AHWG meeting on the development of ecolabelling criteria for printed matter 7(7) As most of the printing houses are SME-s, the system must be easy. It must also be fairly cheap and the costs must be reduced as much as possible for both tests and for the application itself. The costs must be justified by the environmental improvements. 8 Brief summary Printing technologies The possibility to include all technologies should be investigated Substrates No requirements on the substrates were proposed by the packaging industry Ecological criteria should be developed for substrates too Which phases should be included All stages should be reflected, but the LCA from the Danish investigation should be studied first Possible parameters The possibility to recycle is missing, the rest of the proposed ones are mainly accepted The energy requirement is relevant The transport requirement is relevant but considered too complicated to include in this first generation of criteria Paper requirements This is a strategic discussion. None of the participants supported to require ecolabelled paper, but it seemed as if the third option got the main support Structure of the criteria Some of the participants were supporting a positive score system The cost for ecolabelling must be taken into consideration Product or service? No clear signal was given