I take it that the question refers to the United Nations Environment Programme’s (UNEP) 2021 study entitled, Single-use beverage cups and their alternatives - Recommendations from Life Cycle Assessments, which has previously been cited by my Department in relation to the enactment of the Circular Economy Miscellaneous Provisions Act 2022 (‘the Act’).
This UNEP study is a meta-analysis of ten life cycle assessments (LCA’s) of the comparative environmental impacts of single-use beverage cups and their reusable alternatives. The various LCA’s included in the meta-analysis consider the impacts of single-use cups made from a variety of materials (including paper-based materials) and reusable alternatives composed of plastic, ceramic, glass, bamboo and stainless steel. In doing so, a range of assumptions regarding end-of-life disposal of single-use cups (e.g. recycling vs landfilling) are also included, as are considerations of various methods of washing reusable cups (e.g. dishwashing vs hand-washing in hot or cold water). The UNEP study therefore represents a comprehensive analysis of the range of factors determining the environmental impacts of different cup types.
The broad conclusions of the UNEP study can be summarised as being that reusable cups have a lower overall environmental impact than single-use cups, provided the reusable cup is used enough times and washed efficiently. The ‘breakeven’ number of uses required will vary depending on the material a reusable cup is made from, and the type of single-use cup it is compared to, but can be as low as between 10 to 25 uses.
All relevant data is considered when introducing environmental reforms; and this includes the levy on disposable cups for hot drinks. Last year following the signing of the Circular Economy Act, I published the draft regulations, together with a comprehensive Regulatory Impact Assessment (RIA) for public consultation.
The RIA includes a lifecycle assessment of cups which considers the methodologies and results from a number of LCA studies in determining the break-even point. The RIA suggests a breakeven point of 10 to 20 uses which aligns with the broad conclusions of the UNEP study.
