Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) is transforming the packaging landscape, and businesses across the entire supply chain must adapt to these new standards. Seven states—Oregon, California, Colorado, Minnesota, Maine, Maryland, and Washington—have passed EPR bills, with Oregon set to collect its first fees in July 2025. As these regulations take effect, understanding how EPR works, who it impacts, and how your business can adapt is more important than ever. Read as we break down everything you need to know, from compliance strategies to the financial implications of packaging choices, ensuring you stay ahead in a rapidly evolving regulatory environment.

Stora Enso and Tetra Pak are jointly examining a shared beverage carton recycling solution to meet the growing recycling need in Benelux, responding to the demand for circular paper-based packaging solutions. The joint feasibility study includes a plan for a comprehensive beverage carton recycling facility at Stora Enso’s Langerbrugge site in Belgium. Processing of the fibers would take place at the Langerbrugge site, while the polymer and aluminum barrier materials would be recycled by a dedicated partner. Approximately 75,000 tonnes of beverage cartons are put on the Benelux market annually, a growing volume of which more than 70% is already collected for recycling. Currently, there is no existing beverage carton recycling infrastructure in Benelux. This collaboration between Stora Enso and Tetra Pak would create a complete recycling system for beverage cartons in Benelux and surrounding regions. Within the solution, Stora Enso would process collected beverage cartons and recover the fibers. The recycled fibers would serve as source material for producing recycled containerboard within the Langerbrugge site, delivering a fully circular solution. Tetra Pak would secure a recycling solution for polymer and aluminum materials to be processed by a dedicated partner.

“If the court forces EPA to lower of the ozone standard even more, projects to keep paper and wood products manufacturing facilities competitive could be halted, putting at risk countless high-paying jobs in rural America. The new standard at 70 parts per billion (ppb) is already precariously close to background levels in the environment. Lowering the ozone limit to 65 ppb or lower - as petitioners demand - would unnecessarily divert needed resources from more productive use and is not supported by the scientific evidence.”