The New EU Law That’s Looking to Stamp out Greenwashing

April 11, 2023

April 11, 2023


Today's guest blog is authored by Tom Howarth of GreenBiz Group. The original post can be read here.


Consumers today face a barrage of eco-friendly messaging from the corporate world as it hopes to cash in on increasing concern for the environment. At the same time, an absence of common rules for companies making voluntary green claims has left the door open to greenwashing, making it increasingly difficult to gauge the fact from fiction when it comes to sustainable business practice. This is not just a problem for the eco-conscious shopper, who must now sift through reams of "sustainable" products to find one with bona fide green credentials — it is a problem for businesses, too. 


Companies making a genuine effort to reduce their environmental impacts, often at significant cost, are having to compete against others making the same claims but without putting in the work. This effectively negates the economic rewards for caring about the planet, particularly in industries with complex supply chains, where clearly communicating environmental impacts can be tricky. 

Conversely, businesses caught practicing greenwashing, or even those who are perceived to be, can expect drops in customer satisfaction and serious financial repercussions.


At the extreme end, the case of German car manufacturer Volkswagen springs to mind, after it saw profits tumble 20 percent following revelations in 2015 that the company had installed software to cheat U.S. emissions tests. Whilst sympathy for a company purposefully trying to dupe regulators should be limited, the case highlights the toxicity of greenwashing for all parties involved; businesses, consumers and, of course, the planet. 


The Green Claims Directive, proposed by the European Commission in late March, seeks to address this issue by establishing "common criteria against greenwashing and misleading environmental claims." The hope is that by homogenizing the standards for claims made by businesses across the trading bloc, consumers will have "more clarity, stronger reassurance that when something is sold as green, it actually is green, and better quality information to choose environment-friendly products and services." Businesses will also benefit, "as those that make a genuine effort to improve the environmental sustainability of their products will be more easily recognized and rewarded by consumers … rather than face unfair competition."


The need for the legislation is clear. An assessment of environmental claims carried out by the Commission in 2020 across a broad range of industries found that 53.3 percent "provided vague, misleading or unfounded information" about products’ environmental characteristics, while 40 percent had no supporting evidence at all.


What’s more, there are currently 230 sustainability labels and 100 green energy labels in use in EU markets, each with different criteria and levels of transparency. Even if some labeling schemes provide genuine sustainability credentials, it's unlikely the average person on the street would have any idea which ones they are.


Virginijus Sinkevičius, European commissioner for Environment, Oceans and Fisheries, put it well: "We want to help consumers become more confident about their choices and ensure that those companies that make genuine efforts to reduce their impacts on nature, resource use, climate emissions or pollution are rewarded."


How will the new rules work?


The objective of the new proposal is simple — prevent greenwashing by enforcing clear and harmonized rules and labels. Specifically, the measures will target explicit claims, examples of which might include: "T-shirt made of recycled plastic bottles," "CO2 compensated delivery," "packaging made of 30 percent recycled plastic" or "ocean friendly sunscreen."


Under the new rules, companies will need to have any such claims independently verified and proven with scientific evidence. Possible trade-offs will also need to be highlighted, to give a full and accurate picture of a product’s impacts.


Environmental labeling schemes, in the form of trust and quality marks that certify that a product or business meets the requirements set up by the scheme, are another target of the legislation. Such schemes can lack transparency and are not always credible; in response, the new proposal suggests banning the proliferation of new public labeling schemes unless they are developed at EU level, preventing individual Member States from developing their own. Private labeling schemes, on the other hand, can be approved at Member State level, but will need to demonstrate that they provide "added value" in terms of environmental ambition before going through the approval process. Labeling schemes from third countries (those that are not members of the EU, including the U.S.) will also need to be submitted for approval before products brandishing them are admitted into the EU market.


An assessment of environmental claims carried out by the European Commission in 2020 across a broad range of industries found that 53.3% 'provided vague, misleading or unfounded information' about products’ environmental characteristics ...


The penalties for non-compliance will not be cheap, either. Rogue traders caught making unfounded claims can expect fines of at least 4 percent of total annual revenue within any region in which they have been in breach of the rules — the same level as the penalties to be doled out under the EU’s recent law on deforestation-free products, set to be implemented next year.


Does the proposal go far enough?


Despite a warm reception from businesses and trade organizations, including the International Chamber of Commerce, the new proposal has drawn some criticism from environmental groups that claim months of lobbying by companies have left the rules "substantially watered down."


In particular, the new laws will not cover phrases such as "carbon neutrality," a favorite term used by companies looking to give their image a green makeover, according to the watchdog and think tank Carbon Market Watch. Others have argued that because the bill does not outline a single methodology to substantiate green claims, businesses will simply "cherry-pick" the ones that suit them best.


"Sadly, without harmonized methodologies at the EU level, the new Directive will provide little clarity to consumers and business, and will only complicate the job of market surveillance authorities," said Margaux Le Gallou, program manager for environmental information and assessment at the Environmental Coalition on Standards.


How successful the Green Claims Directive will be at stamping out greenwashing in the European Union market remains to be seen. Indeed, the bill is still subject to the approval of the European Parliament and Council before it becomes law, which will take at least a few months. However, if you consider this proposal in its broader context — as part of a package of recent legislation being pushed by the EU — then it’s clear that the world’s third largest economy is becoming an increasingly hostile environment for unsustainable businesses. Where the EU is succeeding is in making rules that must be followed by any company, operating anywhere in the world that wishes to sell to the half a billion or so customers who reside within its borders.


Disclaimer: Guest blogs represent the opinion of the writers and may not reflect the policy or position of the Northeast Recycling Council, Inc.

Share Post

By Chaz Miller January 5, 2026
2025 was not a good year for recycling markets. Prices went down for everything in your bin. The only real difference is how badly each material got hit and why. Let’s start with paper, the most important recyclable in terms of weight and volume. Old Corrugated Container (OCC, boxes) prices started rising in the spring of 2023, peaking for several months in the summer of 2024. A long slide then began and lasted for almost all of 2025. Prices for Residential Mixed Paper (RMP) did the same. Nationally, OCC is now at $46.88 per ton and RMP is $20.31 a ton. OCC went down by a third while RMP went down by half. The “good” news is that these prices have been lower in the last five years. RMP, after all, had a negative value early in 2020 and then for a few months in late 2022. (All prices in this article are national prices from RecyclingMarkets.net as of December 31). The 2023 rise and then fall of recycled paper prices was the result of increased capacity to use OCC and RMP as raw materials along with declining overall demand for boxes. New recycled content paper capacity started coming online in 2017, peaking in 2023 when five new mills opened. Those new mills, eager to build up supply lines, caused prices to go up. Existing capacity had no choice but to also pay more. At the same time, demand for new boxes was going down. In fact, box demand has been going down for four years. Something had to give. In 2025, nine existing paper mills announced they would be closing. Old, more expensive, and less efficient to operate, they couldn’t compete with the new mills. All four plastic resins lost value but the impact varied by resin. Natural HDPE, (mostly milk jugs) lost a third of its value. Polypropylene (mostly dairy products) went down by 40 percent. Color HDPE (consumer products such as detergent and shampoo) went down by 48 percent and PET beverage bottles went down by two thirds. Natural HDPE is 46.81 cents a pound. Even at the lower price, this resin remains in a good price range. PET and polypropylene are both 5.38 cents a pound. Recycled PET rose steadily from the summer of 2023 to the summer of 2024. Then it declined equally steadily until it reached a record low of 4.19 cents in early October of this year. Cheap recycled resin imports, too much domestic virgin PET resin and lower summer beverage demand gave prices nowhere to go but down. Recycled PET resin imports are now subject to tariffs, which may be responsible for its recent increase. Nonetheless, its price remains in the doldrums. Polypropylene generally has a low price except when new capacity is coming online and building up capacity. For 46 of the 72 months since January 2020, its price has been less than a dime a pound. For 17 months, it’s been at its current not very good price or less. Color HDPE is 2.81 cents a pound. This resin depends on construction markets because the color can’t be taken out of the resin. New housing starts have been in decline for four years. It also set a record low price in 2025. Aluminum and steel cans are recycling market’s happy place. Their prices went down by 9.3 and 8.7 percent. Aluminum cans have a national average price of 78.75 cents while steel cans go for $158.75 a ton. Over the last few years, the aluminum industry smartly expanded into non-alcoholic beverages such as water and fruit juices. Those new uses keep demand up. After sliding last year, steel can prices stabilized. As for glass, it’s price rarely changes. Clear glass bottles go for $38.56 a ton, brown for $27.19 and green for $10.31. Those prices all rose slightly in the spring of 2023. Mixed glass from single stream curbside collection has a “negative tipping fee” of $25.31 a ton. In other words, the MRF pays the end market to buy it. That price became slightly more negative this year. The glass industry has been in decline for some time, a victim of lighter weight aluminum cans and plastic bottles. In addition, Americans are drinking less alcohol. That’s the biggest user of glass bottles. Our beleaguered economy is hurting recycling markets. Recyclables are just raw materials looking for a buyer. Those buyers are purchasing managers making a bet on how much raw materials they will need for their companies’ products. This can be, say, aluminum cans, boxes to ship those empty cans to beverage companies or boxes to deliver filled cans to retail outlets. When buyers are optimistic, they buy more. In 2025, they were gloomy. Prices of all of these recyclables have been hurt by declining unit sales of consumer products and the resulting decline in box demand. We are in a “ K-shaped” economic recovery from the pandemic. This means the recovery’s impact varied by economic status. Wealthy households now account for half of consumer spending on goods and services. They spend more on “services” such as trips and entertainment than on goods. Lower income households, however, are squeezed between paying for necessities such as housing, health care, insurance and food before everything else. They are pinching their nickels and looking for bargains. Simply stated, due to the K-shaped recovery, sales are down and we need fewer packages and shipping boxes. So what will happen in 2026? The loss of so much older paper capacity is bringing demand and supply back into a better balance. Look for prices to rebound a bit. Plastic prices will remain soft barring a reversal of the K-shaped recovery. PET prices, have the most potential if beverage demand returns. Color HDPE, will remain in the doldrums until new housing construction increases. Natural HDPE will stay where it is or go up a bit. Polypropylene will probably stay where it is. As for glass, change isn’t likely. I realize that’s not optimistic. Given the projected rise in health, insurance and energy costs this year, Americans will still be pinching pennies. Box production will decline as unit sales fall. Our K-shaped economy needs to become a rising economic tide lifting all boats. Recyclables, afterall, are commodities subject to the economy’s ups and downs. When our economy truly rebounds, recycling markets will thrive again. Read on Waste360.
By Waste Dive December 9, 2025
MRFs in the Northeast United States reported a decrease in average prices for nearly all recycled commodities — with glass and bulky rigids providing the rare bright spot — during the third quarter of 2025, according to a report from the Northeast Recycling Council. This continues the downward trend reported in the region since Q2. In Q3, average blended commodity value without residuals was $75.14, a decrease of 21.9% from the previous quarter. When calculating the value with residuals, prices were $60.16, a decrease of 27.24%, says the quarterly MRF Commodity Values Survey Report. Single-stream MRFs saw values decrease sequentially by 23.32% without residuals and 28.86% with residuals. Dual-stream or source-separated MRFs saw decreases of 17.33% without residuals and 21.76% with residuals compared to last quarter. The report includes information from 19 MRFs representing 12 states: Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Virginia. The NERC report is meant to offer a regional look at price trends and is a part of the group’s ongoing work to promote and boost recycled commodity supply and demand in the Northeast. It surveys a variety of MRFs in numerous markets, including those in five states with beverage container deposit laws, which it says affect material flows into MRFs. NERC says its reports are not meant to be used as a price guide for MRF contracts because it “represents the diversity of operating conditions in these locations.” NERC adopted a new report format at the beginning of 2025 that now provides average prices for specific commodities in addition to aggregate values. According to the Q3 report, most commodity categories fell significantly, with the exception of glass and the “special case of bulky rigids.” The average price for bulky rigids in the quarter was $43.26, a 93% increase from the previous quarter. NERC did not offer insight into the increase. The average price for PET was $125.58 in the quarter, down 60%, while prices for Natural HDPE fetched about $955.31 a ton, down 46%. OCC saw an average price of about $86.23, down 10%, according to the report. Major publicly-traded waste companies echoed similar commodity trends during their Q3 earnings calls . Casella, which operates in the Northeast and mid-Atlantic, reported that its average recycled commodity revenue per ton was down 29% year over year in Q3. To reduce the impact from low commodity values, the company typically shares risk with customers by adjusting tip fees in down markets. Recent upgrades at a Connecticut MRF helped raise revenue for processing volumes in the quarter, executives said. Meanwhile, Republic Services is planning to build a polymer center for processing recycled plastic in Allentown, Pennsylvania, next year. During the Q3 earnings call in October, executives said they expect strong demand at such centers from both a pricing and volume standpoint, despite the decline in commodity prices. The company already has similar polymer centers in Indianapolis and Las Vegas, which consume curbside-collected plastics from Republic’s recycling centers and produce products such as clear, hot-wash PET flake and sorted bales of other plastics. Read on Waste Dive.
By Megan Fontes December 4, 2025
NERC’s Material Recovery Facilities (MRF) Commodity Values Survey Report for the period July - September 2025 showed a continued decline in the average commodity prices for Q3 2025. The average value of all commodities decreased by 21.90% without residuals to $75.14 and by 27.24% with residuals to $60.16, as compared to last quarter. Single stream decreased by 23.32% without residuals and 28.86% with residuals, while dual stream / source separated decreased by 17.33% without residuals and 21.76% with residuals compared to last quarter. Dual stream MRFs saw a slightly smaller decrease with residuals than single stream. Individual commodity price averages this quarter denote the decrease felt across all commodity categories apart from glass and the special case of bulky rigids.