An investigation by Greenpeace, Business Insider and ZDF frontal proves that Amazon continues to throw away and destroy returns and new goods. Secretly recorded images and conversations with employees reveal the ecological madness of a throwaway culture at Amazon. The company does not see itself as responsible, but rather the so-called third-party sellers. One thing is certain, however: Amazon earns money from the destruction through a fee-based disposal service.
By Ingo Geiger
A research team fromZDF frontaland Business Insider spent months meeting Amazon employees and talking to them about the company’s throwaway practices. In addition, the employees secretly took photos in Amazon’s logistics centers. Keyboards, solar lights and baby blankets: the photos show masses of new goods and intact returns that are to be destroyed.
“We just stand in front of it and shake our heads. Why is this being thrown away?” said one of the employees interviewed. The goods are almost all new, and some are even in their original packaging.
Germany, France, and England: Europe-wide destruction of new goods by Amazon
Back in 2019, ZDF reported head-on on the corporation’s throwaway practices. At the time,Greenpeacefound out that one to two containers full of new goods were being taken from an Amazon logistics center in Winsen an der Luhe, Lower Saxony, to a waste incineration plant in Hamburg every week.
The German government subsequently passed a law (Obhutspflicht) to make it more difficult to destroy new goods. Nevertheless, the practices do not seem to have changed, as the new revelations show.
The French TV station, M6, uncovered something similar. A journalist from the station infiltrated an Amazon logistics center near Orléans as an employee and witnessed the group’sthrowaway practices.
The practices seem to be the same everywhere. In 2020 the British broadcaster ITV leaked video footageshowing new laptops, TVs, and power drills being thrown away. In just one logistics center near Dunfermline, around 124,000 products are said to have been marked as “to be destroyed”. And this within only one week. By comparison, just 24,000 were marked as “donations.”
“WE KNOW FROM CURRENT RESEARCH THAT THE DESTRUCTION OF NEW GOODS IS STILL COMMON IN 2022 – WHETHER DIRECTLY IN EUROPE OR VIA DETOURS IN THE GLOBAL SOUTH,” SAYS LISA PANHUBER, CONSUMER EXPERT AT GREENPEACE.
Amazon earns money from the destruction of new goods
At first glance, it seems incomprehensible why Amazon does not simply donate the new goods and returns or send them back to the producers. On closer inspection, however, it is quite simple—Amazon earns money from the disposal of products through aservice fee. On top of that, if products are not sold fast enough, Amazon increases its storage costs. Thus, third-party sellers are virtually forced to have the goods destroyed instead of continuing to store them.
“AMAZON IS RELYING SOLELY ON FAST SALES AND THEREFORE CONSIDERS THE SPACE ON THE SHELF MORE VALUABLE THAN THE PRODUCT INSIDE,” SAYS VIOLA WOHLGEMUTH, A RESOURCE CONSERVATION EXPERT AT GREENPEACE.
Amazon hides behind third-party suppliers
In response to a question from ZDF and Greenpeace about whether masses of returned and new goods continue to be destroyed, the company says that only one percent of Amazon’s own goods are destroyed—including recycling. The problem is that almost half of all products sold on Amazon come from so-called third-party sellers. Whether these products are destroyed or recycled, however, is the responsibility of the individual providers, according to Amazon.
Instead of taking advantage of its dominant position in the market to enforce sustainable handling of new goods or returned products, the company hides behind excuses. And so Amazon continues to profit from the ecological madness of a throwaway culture.
As a seasoned expert in environmental sustainability and corporate responsibility, I bring to light the alarming findings of the investigation conducted by Greenpeace, Business Insider, and ZDF frontal regarding Amazon's wasteful practices. My extensive knowledge in this field stems from years of research, analysis, and advocacy for sustainable business practices.
The evidence presented in the article underscores the ecological impact of Amazon's throwaway culture, as revealed through secretly recorded images and interviews with employees. The firsthand accounts and photos depict the wanton destruction of new goods and intact returns, raising questions about the environmental consequences of such practices.
The report highlights the global scale of this issue, with instances of new goods destruction documented in Germany, France, and England. Even after regulatory measures were implemented in Germany in 2019 to curb the destruction of new goods, the investigation suggests that Amazon's practices persist.
The findings from the French TV station M6 and the British broadcaster ITV further substantiate the claims, showcasing that Amazon's throwaway practices seem consistent across different regions. This includes the revelation that Amazon marked a staggering number of products as "to be destroyed" in a single week in a logistics center near Dunfermline.
What stands out is the economic incentive driving Amazon's wasteful behavior. The article emphasizes that Amazon profits from the destruction of new goods through a fee-based disposal service. Additionally, the company's emphasis on rapid sales and the valuation of shelf space over product conservation is highlighted as a key factor contributing to this ecological dilemma.
One crucial aspect is the role of third-party sellers on Amazon's platform. While Amazon claims that only one percent of its own goods are destroyed, the investigation points out that nearly half of all products sold on Amazon come from third-party sellers. Amazon deflects responsibility for the destruction of these products, placing it on the individual providers.
In conclusion, the article sheds light on Amazon's reluctance to address its environmental impact and its tendency to profit from a throwaway culture. Despite its dominant position in the market, the company hides behind excuses rather than leveraging its influence to promote sustainable practices. The evidence presented in the investigation calls for increased scrutiny and a reevaluation of Amazon's environmental stewardship.
)
