It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Using Container Deposit Legislation ("bottle bill") to Increase Recycling

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 11 2016 @ 04:14 AM
link   
My nation has an additional cost of 10 eurocents on every bottle and can. This is an additional value added to the cost of the drink, which you will receive back if you take the empty bottle to recycling centre.

I was interested in checking out, whether USA also has some similar system for increasing recycling rates and it came out certain states (California, Connecticut, Hawaii, Iowa, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, New York, Oregon and Vermont) do have Container Deposit Legislation or also known as bottle bill and it has worked extremely well.


The United States’ overall beverage container recycling rate is approximately 33%, while states with container deposit laws have a 70% average rate of beverage container recycling. Michigan’s recycling rate of 97% from 1990 to 2008 was the highest in the nation, as is its $0.10 deposit


Wikipedia article on container deposit legislation in the United states

Considering how effective this method is and how low the recycling rates are in states which do not have it, I was wondering what are the reasons other states do not use such system.

I personally do believe, this additional bill should be even higher than 5 or 10 cents, considering the wealth of the average American.

What do you think, should every state use this system and if not why?




posted on Jun, 11 2016 @ 04:37 AM
link   
a reply to: Cabin

Hello Cabin...

I've lived in 2 states the majority of my life. One with a tax on drinking and one without. (for that really is what the bottle return amounts to. Taxing you for drinking a beverage) The one WITH a bottle tax is much dirtier than the one WITHOUT a bottle tax.

I don't think it matters if you have a beverage tax or not. I think what matters is how much care and effort you put into maintaining your state and how much care and effort the people of that state put forth to recycle on their own.

The one without a bottle tax was much cleaner. The roads were in better shape. The cities were in better shape. As soon as you cross the state line, into the one with a bottle tax...the roads are all potholed and well worn, garbage is on the sides of them. The cities look old and are not kept up. I don't know why that is..but it is.

This is just my experience within the two states I've lived in..others may have seen different. But I think it really is about the state caring enough to maintain itself and not about the bottle tax.

Thanks,
blend57

edit on 11-6-2016 by blend57 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 11 2016 @ 05:41 AM
link   
a reply to: blend57


Hmm... I wonder how it is like that.


Here the homeless people take care of that spending their days searching for bottles and cans in order to get some extra cash by taking these to the recycling centre, which is in every bigger store. Even when you throw your bottle away with trash it usually ends up being recycled, as the homeless people search through the trash containers.



posted on Jun, 11 2016 @ 05:53 AM
link   
a reply to: Cabin


In 2011, unclaimed (abandoned) deposits amounted to approximately $104 million in New York, $33.5 million in Massachusetts and $17.8 million in Michigan.3


Bottle Bill


Who keeps the unclaimed deposits? California and Hawaii – State-Managed Systems In the States of California and Hawaii, a special unit of the State manages and controls the finances of the beverage container recycling system. In the other U.S. states that have container deposit systems, the operations and financing are managed by the beverage industry. In California and Hawaii, the state collects the deposits from distributors when the beverages are sold to retailers. The bottler or distributor pays the deposit directly into a state-managed fund and collects the deposit from the retailer. The retailer then collects the deposit from the consumer. Any unclaimed deposits simply remain within this state-managed fund and are used to pay for the recycling program.Oregon, Iowa and Vermont – Distributors Keep Unclaimed Deposits In Oregon, Iowa and Vermont, the bottlers and distributors keep all unclaimed deposits. Connecticut, Massachusetts, New York, Maine and Michigan – Full and Partial Escheats In these states, distributors and bottlers are required to turn over all or a portion of unclaimed deposits to the state. The unclaimed deposits are said to “escheat” to the state, in much the same way that abandoned property escheats to the state when there are no heirs to claim or take ownership of it.Michigan escheats 75 percent of unclaimed deposits, and distributes the other 25 percent to retailers as a way to offset their handling costs. Massachusetts and Connecticut escheat 100 percent of unclaimed deposits; New York escheats 80 percent of unclaimed deposits, and Maine escheats unclaimed deposits from those distributors that are not part of a commingling agreement.


Escheat /ᵻsˈtʃiːt/[1][2][3][4] is a common law doctrine which transfers the property of a person who dies without heirs to the crown or state. It serves to ensure that property is not left in "limbo" without recognized ownership. It originally applied to a number of situations where a legal interest in land was destroyed by operation of law, so that the ownership of the land reverted to the immediately superior feudal lord.

Wiki Escheat Def


Not all states use them to support the recycling process.. Again, I guess it just depends on the state.

Thanks,
blend57

Edit to add : I just reread that whole thing and it does say that funds are used to manage the recycling system in all states. But, not all states have the same recycling system ? I dunno. I'm not trying to argue the point. Just saying that from what I've seen, it doesn't really matter. Having bottle taxes is not a direct reflection on how clean/beautiful a state is. From what I have personally experienced.

Thanks again,
blend57
edit on 11-6-2016 by blend57 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 11 2016 @ 06:18 AM
link   
a reply to: Cabin



Considering how effective this method is and how low the recycling rates are in states which do not have it, I was wondering what are the reasons other states do not use such system.


Because we still value freedom in most of the United States and an authoritarian bottle tax to force a certain behavior is distasteful. I would vote out any fool that tries to pass more unnecessary laws. We have enough damn laws.



posted on Jun, 11 2016 @ 06:39 AM
link   
a reply to: Cabin

when i was a kid, 60's and early 70's, there use to be a . 05 to.10 cent return for coca cola / pop bottles.
of course back then that's the only way they came. before cans and plastic.

i use to walk the hwy, picking them up for extra money. it was also not unseal to go to a grocery store and see mountains of old pop bottles stacked up for return.


edit on 11-6-2016 by hounddoghowlie because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 11 2016 @ 06:45 AM
link   
A few years after the deposit law was enacted in Michigan, we visited California before they had it, and the difference was very noticeable. In Michigan at that time, there were almost no bottles and cans littering the streets, not much broken glass either. In California though, they had cans, bottles and so much broken glass littering everywhere, it made the whole state look bad and the beaches look hazardous. Everyone on that trip agreed with that observation.

Not only does it make things cleaner, but provides you with some cash when you turn in all your deposit empties. It even created a bottle collecting "cottage industry" in my state. Over-all, I'd say it was a good idea that really works well. They should make recycling more profitable for people rather than an extra hassle with added expense.



posted on Jun, 11 2016 @ 06:53 AM
link   
a reply to: Cabin

I am a libertarian and live in michigan. The deposit fee is social engineering for recycling but it does work. It actually doesn't bother me. On a list of things I'd change about government this bit of social engineering would be at the bottom.

Blend I highly doubt beverage tax factors into the dirtiness or potholeness of a state. It's pretty miniscule.

I have plenty of memories as a child picking up cans after a 4th of july bash and making some coin. With that money I'd bike down to the ice cream shop or stock up on mountain dew.



posted on Jun, 11 2016 @ 07:15 AM
link   
a reply to: Cabin

In Illinois we don't have it, but recycling has been deeply entrenched for quite some time now here. Most people recycle everything recyclable - why fill your garbage bags faster just to avoid recycling?

My in-laws live in upper peninsula Michigan. Beautiful country all around. You'd think recycling would be automatic, based on the love of nature "up dere in da UP" but it's not. People recycle bottles and cans with deposits. Very few people recycle other plastics, metals, paper, cardboard.

I'm sure they would, if they had nice recycling carts like we do here, but they don't. Their only choice is to gather them up, put them in their vehicle and drive them to a recycling center, which hardly anyone goes to the trouble of doing.

So I think, more overall recycling happens when it's easy, and that's probably the best bet.



posted on Jun, 11 2016 @ 07:18 AM
link   
a reply to: jellyrev

Oh..I thought that was what this meant:


Michigan's bottle deposit law was put in place in the 1970s to reduce roadside litter, clean up the environment and conserve energy and natural resources.


Excerpt taken from here

My apologies if it doesn't.

The roadside litter part..clean up the environment part. I also did think that it was used to maintain the roads..maybe I was mistaken about that.

Thanks!
blend57



posted on Jun, 11 2016 @ 08:22 AM
link   
I'm in Michigan again and I have no problem with the deposit. the wife saves it for our vacation and picks up after others in our campground. She saves about $700 a year. We were in Missouri a couple of months ago and apparently they don't have the law and one house we drove by a few times seemed to have dump truck loads of cans in the yard.

On the plus side we're only a couple of miles from Indiana and they don't have a deposit but they have the MI bottles and cans for sale. Wife has friends that save the cans for us.




posted on Jun, 11 2016 @ 09:30 AM
link   
I live in Maine, where we have a five cent deposit.

I'm all for it- lots of people still toss their cans in the garbage, but it seems we've got a surplus of homeless people picking them out.


That, and I've got almost $500 in my deposit account waiting to be cashed out from the last few years of bottles.



posted on Jun, 11 2016 @ 09:59 AM
link   
a reply to: mikell




On the plus side we're only a couple of miles from Indiana and they don't have a deposit but they have the MI bottles and cans for sale. Wife has friends that save the cans for us.


You do know that is against the law



posted on Jun, 11 2016 @ 11:13 AM
link   
I lived in a state that had a 5-10 cent tax on bottles and cans. I'd hardly ever see bottles and cans laying around because people would pick them up for spare change.



posted on Jun, 11 2016 @ 03:13 PM
link   
a reply to: blend57
The roadside litter part is the only decent reason for this surcharge.
The trouble is people have been totally taken in by this"recycle" BS. What a brilliant word "recycle". That bit's sarcasm to you and me. Just who benefits from this con? It aint you or me.
Take cans. It takes more of an industrial process to "recycle" a can than to manufacture a can from ore.
Take plastic. Plastic can only be "recylcled" into low grade usage (not for human food or drink use) and this also takes serious industrial usage.
Glass is exactly the same answers as above, it takes more effort to "recycle" than produce from scratch. Oh yes, at one time bottles used to be taken back and washed to be used again. That was recycling. But not now, they all go into the same crusher.
So just who benefits? The biggest beneficiaries are the manufactures as they don't have to pay for the raw materials to make the glasses, bottles and papers as all you nice "recycling" people are GIVING them that. Not only are you giving them the materials back you are actually paying extra for them to take it.



posted on Jun, 11 2016 @ 06:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: Cabin



Considering how effective this method is and how low the recycling rates are in states which do not have it, I was wondering what are the reasons other states do not use such system.


Because we still value freedom in most of the United States and an authoritarian bottle tax to force a certain behavior is distasteful. I would vote out any fool that tries to pass more unnecessary laws. We have enough damn laws.


Normally I agree with you. But in this instance I'll counter.

If one considers it a transfer of taxes/fees etc., instead of an additional tax it is easier to accept. Most major cities nowadays strongly encourage recycling so it is already ingrained in many people to sort their trash. I lived in a bottle bill state for most of my life and the state as a whole was much cleaner than neighboring states, an immediate noticeable fact. There are so many people that fall through the cracks of public assistance - wanderers, alcoholics, drug addicts, homeless on the street etc. are able to provide some support for themselves.....yes, at our cost.....somewhat. I myself have taken advantage of collecting from parks and saving my own and friends to supplement my finances when money was tight.

The only people losing money here are those who don't return the bottles to a return center for a refund so it is a choice to get a refund or not, and granted, it's not a fun experience in the hot summer with lines of impatient people and machines intermittently breaking down.

Since so many also choose to toss their garbage about, our taxes pay for clean-up. We also pay via taxes for spending money for low/no income. Why not encourage them to make a little for themselves? Many children also collect bottle and cans for spending money. I now live in a no bottle bill state and the difference in container litter is quite noticeable, even in my little town.

My point is, our taxes already support the efforts a bottle bill would also help alleviate. Unlike all the other taxes, we can recoup this tax if we choose to do so and rather quickly without any paperwork. Of all the taxes we pay, this is the least offensive IMHO.



posted on Jun, 11 2016 @ 07:33 PM
link   
I kind of miss not having a deposit on them. When we lived in NY I could come up with a three or four bucks just by walking to the closest recycling center collecting cans and bottles on the way.
They don't have them in virginia and I couldn't walk that far now, but still, would be far easier than having to wait till I had enough to make it worthwhile to load them up in a car and take them to the nearest recycling center which is more interested in larger items than they are cans..
and I haven't found anyplace that will let you trade in the bottle for cash and you even have to pay the county extra for the special trash can for them to pick them up to recycle, so the plastic is just going into the trash now.



new topics

top topics



 
2

log in

join