
Energizer, Duracell and Panasonic fined millions for missing Ontario battery recycling targets
Three of the biggest names in household batteries are facing fines of nearly $3 million for failing to meet recycling targets in Ontario for 2023.
Energizer and Duracell will each have to pay $1 million to the Resource Productivity and Recovery Authority (RPRA) — which oversees recycling in the province — the highest amount that a company can be fined under the Resource Recovery and Circular Economy Act, the provincial regulation that governs recycling.
Panasonic, which received a leader in sustainability award for 2024 from Call2Recycle Canada, the non-profit organization responsible for recycling batteries on the companies' behalf, was fined $781,725.
ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW
'We are disappointed with the regulator's decision,' said Joe Zenobio, president of Call2Recycle Canada, in an email. 'The three battery producers are actively moving toward appealing the RPRA's decision, which is viewed as punitive and unwarranted.
'We are confident that we have gone above and beyond what is required to increase collection rates in Ontario,' said Zenobio. 'Educating the public on recycling batteries and building the proper infrastructure from collection to recycling activities is a process that takes time, and we remain committed to it on behalf of our producer members.'
All three companies recycled 19 per cent of the single-use batteries, such as AA or AAA, they sold in the Ontario market in 2023, short of the target of 40 per cent, according to RPRA.
'The fines were necessary because Duracell, Energizer and Panasonic failed to meet their 2023 minimum recycling requirements for single-use batteries and all three producers were insufficiently responsive to our previous efforts to encourage their compliance with Ontario's recycling laws,' said the authority in an email.
'This action holds polluters accountable and ensures a level playing field for those battery producers who do follow Ontario's environmental laws,' said RPRA.
The fines, issued by RPRA at the end of April, are millions of dollars less than what the companies would have paid to recycle enough batteries to meet the Ontario benchmark, according to the authority.
ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW
ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW
The fines are the first ones issued by RPRA since the provincial authority came into being in 2019 after the province downloaded the full cost of recycling onto the companies, manufacturers and distributors who supply and sell goods on the Ontario market, a cost that used to be shared with municipalities. The new model is referred to as producer responsibility.
Battery companies had until April of last year to report their recycling data for 2023, which was the first year for which the authority was allowed to issue administrative penalties, or fines, under the provincial legislation.
In an email to the Star, Panasonic said it has not decided how it will respond to the administrative penalty, 'as we are currently evaluating our options under the guidance of our external legal counsel. We are also actively co-ordinating with Call2Recycle.'
Energizer said in an email that it had no comment. Duracell didn't provide a response to the Star.
The companies have 15 days to appeal the fines, which were issued April 28.
In written judgments, RPRA said the companies blamed unachievable targets set by the province for their inability to meet the recycling requirement for single-use batteries, as opposed to the recycling target for rechargeable ones, which are larger and easier to collect. The companies met the recycling target for rechargeable batteries of 40 per cent.
This year, after public consultations that included industry input, the provincial government removed the separate recycling targets for single-use and rechargeable batteries and created one overall target of 45 per cent for 2025 and 50 per cent for 2026 and beyond.
ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW
ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW
All three battery companies pointed to the change in government regulation going forward as an indication that the 40 per cent recycling target for single-use batteries was unjust.
Energizer said the change in regulation was 'a clear acknowledgment of the existing deficiencies of the recycling regulations' and 'those changes are an acknowledgment that the existing framework required revisions,' according to the RPRA report.
Zenobio said in the email that having two different categories for battery collection — single-use and rechargeable — 'not only made compliance unnecessarily complex but also failed to recognize the collective efforts and results of the industry, being burdensome and counterproductive.
'As a result, despite strong overall performance, Ontario's unique regulatory structure meant that the province's requirements were not met,' he said.
In 2020, the province had a 47 per cent diversion rate for single-use batteries, according to Stewardship Ontario, which used to oversee recycling for producers when the cost was still shared with municipalities. Rechargeable-battery recycling wasn't measured under that system.
RPRA says the money from the fines will offset the cost of recycling programs in the province.
ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW
ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW
But paying the fines won't make the battery companies complaint with the legislation.
RPRA said it an email that it 'also has the power to prosecute non-compliant producers for failing to meet their regulatory requirements,' convictions that could result in fines of up to $250,000 each day a corporation is non-compliant and $500,000 a day for each subsequent conviction.
The authority said it couldn't divulge it's compliance strategy or speculate on any 'enforcement action we may or may not take.'

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Cision Canada
7 days ago
- Cision Canada
Call2Recycle Canada Releases its 2024 Annual Report, Celebrating a Second Consecutive Record-Breaking Year for Battery Recycling Français
TORONTO, June 24, 2025 /CNW/ - Call2Recycle, Canada's leading battery collection and recycling organization, today released its 2024 Annual Report, highlighting a landmark year in its mission to advance battery recycling across the country. Canadians recycled 6.8 million kg of used batteries in 2024, a significant 17% increase over 2023, marking an incredible record in the organization's history. This milestone helped Call2Recycle surpass a remarkable 50 million kilograms of batteries collected since its inception in 1997. The report also details the successful launch of Recycle Your Batteries, Canada!, a new national awareness program led by Canadian soccer legend and program ambassador Christine Sinclair. The initiative helped increase public education and motivate battery recycling participation, both through major digital and TV awareness campaigns and through multiple local community events. The program itself experienced considerable growth throughout 2024, adding over 2,800 new battery collection sites across the country to reach 15,000 collection sites, and allowing 90% of Canadians to have easy, convenient access to battery recycling within 15 km of their homes. Call2Recycle also drove up battery recycling in new regions and sectors, with the launch of its new program for household batteries in Nova Scotia and the securing of approval for its dedicated e-transport battery program in British Columbia, leading the charge in the responsible recycling of entire e-bike devices including the batteries. To keep pace with this growth, Call2Recycle expanded its infrastructure, introducing North America's first Smart Battery Containers, equipped with thermal and fill-level sensors to enhance safety and efficiency. The organization also scaled its transport, sorting, and processing partner network to manage increasing battery volumes across the country, substantially increasing the program's efficiencies while reducing costs and supporting the Canadian economy. "As Canadians, we are more committed than ever to protecting our environment and building a strong circular economy," said Joe Zenobio, President of Call2Recycle Canada. "The achievements in 2024 reflect the power of partnerships, from governments and municipalities to businesses and individual citizens, working together to make battery recycling part of everyday life. We are very proud to see our program experience such success and we will continue driving up battery recycling from coast to coast to help Canadians recycle even more batteries." Battery recycling is an essential pillar of Canada's sustainability effort to build a strong circular economy and protect the environment. Call2Recycle continues to lead efforts to boost participation, encouraging all Canadians to follow the simple three-step process: " Collect, Protect, Drop-Off", at least every three months. To find your nearest drop-off location, visit About Call2Recycle Canada, Inc. For more information, please visit our website: Call2Recycle is Canada's leading organization for the collection and recycling of batteries and battery-powered products. As a trusted steward for more than 400 members including producers of single-use and rechargeable batteries Call2Recycle fulfills regulatory obligations while advancing a circular economy. The organization manages several leading programs, including Recycle Your Batteries, Canada! for household and e-bike batteries, Recycle Your Vapes for battery-powered vapes and e-cigarettes in Québec, and the voluntary EV Battery Recovery program for electric vehicle batteries, also in Québec. Call2Recycle operates provincially-approved programs in British Columbia, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Québec, Prince Edward Island, and Nova Scotia, and serves as a registered Producer Responsibility Organization (PRO) in Ontario and Alberta. Its collection and recycling services cover household batteries (up to 5 kg) and e-transport batteries used in e-bikes, e-scooters, e-skateboards, hoverboards, and electric vehicles (EVs). Since 1997, Call2Recycle has diverted more than 50 million kilograms of batteries from Canadian landfills. It is committed to excellence in environmental stewardship, holding certifications in globally recognized standards, including R2v3, ISO 14001, ISO 45001, and ISO 9001. With a network of over 15,000 collection locations—including leading retailers and municipal sites—Call2Recycle is a trusted partner in building a cleaner, more sustainable Canada.


Global News
17-06-2025
- Global News
Duracell sues Energizer over battery life claims in high-voltage feud
In a battle of the batteries, Duracell has sued Energizer, accusing its rival of crossing the positive line and misleading consumers in a nationwide TV and online ad campaign about whose batteries last longer. Duracell, owned by Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway, filed a complaint in Manhattan federal court on June 13, stating that it has suffered irreparable harm and lost customer goodwill due to Energizer Max ads featuring Energizer's sunglasses-clad, drum-beating pink bunny. Duracell contested claims that Energizer Max outlasts Duracell Power Boost batteries by 10 per cent, that it 'beats' Duracell, and is 'proven to last longer' in the ongoing power struggle between the two brands. It said Energizer based those claims solely on a comparison of AA batteries under the non-profit American National Standards Institute's personal grooming products standard and does not apply to all Duracell batteries. Story continues below advertisement The claims 'necessarily imply the false message that Energizer Max batteries outlast all Duracell batteries' and represent 'a clear effort by Energizer to expand its market share — at Duracell's expense,' Duracell said in the high-voltage feud against its competitor. 3:59 Health Matters: Button battery poisoning One of Energizer's recent YouTube ads shows their pink bunny battling it out with a battery that looks very similar to a Duracell product. Get daily National news Get the day's top news, political, economic, and current affairs headlines, delivered to your inbox once a day. Sign up for daily National newsletter Sign Up By providing your email address, you have read and agree to Global News' Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy 'There's no competition. Energizer Max outlasts Duracell Power Boost by 10 per cent. No fluff. Just facts. Energizer Max now powered by enhanced energy,' a voiceover states. Duracell accused Energizer of false advertising under federal and New York unfair competition laws but Energizer has yet to respond to the claim. It is seeking unspecified compensatory and punitive damages, including lost profits and an injunction requiring 'corrective advertising.' Story continues below advertisement This isn't the first time the companies have battled it out in a fully charged courtroom. In 2022, Energizer won a seven-year court case against Duracell in a Canadian court after arguing that Duracell packaging couldn't claim its products lasted longer than Energizer products because of the contravened trademark law, since their slogan is famously associated with the Energizer Bunny that 'keeps going and going and going.' The court ruled in Energizer's favour regarding the use of its trademarks in Duracell's campaign, awarding Energizer a permanent injunction and $179,000 in damages. In 2019 and 2020, Duracell and Energizer sued each other in the Manhattan court over performance claims in ads for Duracell Optimum and Energizer Max batteries. Both lawsuits were resolved and voluntarily dismissed in December 2020. It seems that Energizer 'keeps suing and suing and suing' as they won another lawsuit against Duracell in 2016 for using a pink bunny mascot in their ads even though Duracell began using a pink bunny in 1973. View image in full screen Pink rabbit and a drum, emblem of Duracell from 1973. Apic/Getty Images Energizer began featuring a pink bunny in their ad campaigns in 1989 and Duracell retained European rights to the bunny in a deal between the two companies in 1992. But Energizer claimed its rights were violated in 2016 because packages of Duracell batteries featuring the rabbit began showing up in stores in the United States after being imported from Europe. Story continues below advertisement View image in full screen The Energizer Bunny during the filming of a television commercial, July 27, 2000, in Los Angeles, Calif. Getty Images/Bob Riha, Jr. After Energizer filed a trademark infringement and contract violation against its rival, Duracell replied and said the cases Energizer cited came from overseas distributors imported packages abroad and that they did not have the power to stop those distributors from shipping them. In November 2017, a United States District judge threw out most of Energizer's claims in the judgement, but left the breach of the 1992 territorial contract. As for the latest legal power struggle between the two battery giants, it seems the feud will keep on going and going with a fully charged debate. — With files from Reuters


National Observer
06-06-2025
- National Observer
Ford government proposes major rollback of Blue Box recycling rules
The Ford government has quietly proposed major changes to Ontario's Blue Box recycling program — changes advocates say will increase pollution, reduce accountability for waste producers and place more costs on renters and municipalities. The new rules would delay key recycling targets by five years, giving producers until 2031 to meet recovery goals for materials like paper, plastic, metal, glass and beverage containers. Those targets had been set to take effect in 2026. The proposed changes would eliminate rules requiring producers to collect packaging waste from apartments, long-term care homes, retirement homes and schools without municipal pickup. Beverage companies would no longer be responsible for containers consumed outside the home. The plan would also allow producers to burn non-recyclable plastic in incinerators or cement kilns and still count it as recycling. The Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks says the changes are intended to manage 'higher than expected cost growth' and ensure a 'stable and sustainable' blue box system during the province's transition to full producer responsibility. The government would allow producers up to 15 per cent of recycling targets to be met by burning non-recyclable plastic waste in incinerators or cement kilns. Under the province's Resource Recovery and Circular Economy Act, producers — including brand owners, retailers and importers — are required to manage recycling programs for packaging and single-use items. The current changes would weaken the 2021 regulations that aimed to shift this responsibility away from municipalities and onto the companies that create waste. Critics say the proposal marks a dramatic reversal of more than a decade of progress on waste reduction and recycling in the province. Big retailers and consumer brands have been lobbying the Ford government to weaken Ontario's Blue Box rules, claiming recycling costs are too high. Karen Wirsig, senior program manager at Environmental Defence, said the changes would increase plastic pollution, promote incineration and burden communities with more garbage, all while letting major producers — like grocery chains and beverage companies — off the hook. 'The government is betraying Ontarians by seeking to reverse requirements that would have reduced single-use and unrecyclable plastics and to delay enforcement of these — now weakened — rules for another five years,' Wirsig said. The Ford government's proposal comes just a day after it passed the controversial Bill 5, which also fast-tracks large waste facility approval under the claim that Ontario is facing a landfill crisis. 'From the moves this week, it is clear that the premier and the government think more garbage, more dumps and more waste-burners are good for Ontario,' Wirsig said, calling it a coordinated shift toward deregulation that benefits producers and the waste industry at the expense of environmental health and ordinary Ontarians. The government also proposes slashing the recycling target for flexible plastic packaging, such as food wrappers and plastic bags, from 25 per cent to just five per cent. The ministry says industry stakeholders argue these materials are costly, hard to recycle and often contaminate other recyclables. Komal Habib, an associate professor at the University of Waterloo and expert in industrial ecology, said delaying recovery targets by five years is excessive and risks weakening Ontario's circular economy goals. 'It's too long of a transition time to allow producers to plan and make investments for collection and recycling activities,' Habib said. On the decision to exclude multi-residential buildings and public spaces from producer collection responsibilities, Habib said it could have serious consequences. These sites produce a growing share of urban waste, especially in cities like Toronto and Waterloo — leaving them out of the system could hamper progress toward circular economy goals. Ontario is still dumping billions of bottles and cans, while other provinces profit from a deposit-return recycling system. Despite 81 per cent of Ontarians supporting such a system, last year the Ford government scrapped the non-alcoholic drink container deposit-return program, citing cost concerns 'for small businesses and families,' without providing any estimates. Opposition slams industry influence Big retailers and consumer brands have been lobbying the Ford government to weaken Ontario's Blue Box rules, claiming recycling costs are too high. Last year, in a joint letter, several Ontario municipal organizations raised concerns about industry lobbying for changes to the province's Blue Box Regulation, warning it could undermine the goals of extended producer responsibility and shift costs back onto municipalities. Ontario NDP environment critic Peter Tabuns said the Ford government's decision to delay recycling targets and loosen producer obligations is a clear example of corporate influence overriding public interest. He argued that big companies have had more than a decade to develop less wasteful packaging but failed to act. Tabuns said the idea behind extended producer responsibility was to force innovation by making polluters pay, but the changes signal a retreat from that principle. He added that the government's decision to allow incineration to count toward recycling targets would worsen climate emissions and increase toxic pollution. Green Party Leader Mike Schreiner said the government is effectively dismantling a system that was meant to make waste producers accountable and encourage less packaging waste. Instead, he warned, the rollback will lead to more garbage, higher costs for taxpayers and missed opportunities to build a circular economy. Ontario should be moving toward strict producer responsibility, zero waste targets, and greater inclusion of commercial and multi-residential buildings in recycling programs, not backing away from them, he said. A more effective approach would be to reduce the delay to no more than two years and push producers to invest in infrastructure, Habib suggested. She also urged the government to fund academic research to evaluate whether current recovery targets are realistic and sustainable.