Letter to the Editor

Pet Peeve

Luke Schmidt’s comment, “putting a deposit on containers. . . . does not lead to more recycling," (‘PET recycling rate continues to drop, Waste News, October 11, 1999), is not only irresponsible, it’s absolutely false. If bottle bills don’t lead to more recycling, Mr. Schmidt should explain why PET soda bottles are recycled at nearly three times the rate of PET custom bottles.

The 2.5 redemption value in California, 10-cent deposit in Michigan and 5-cent deposit in Maine, Massachusetts, Iowa, Oregon, New York, Connecticut, Delaware and Vermont all provide a monetary incentive to return PET soda containers. Assuming an average PET bottle redemption rate of 75 percent in the 10 deposit states, and a national soda bottle recycling rate of 35.6 percent, the Container Recycling Institute estimates the average recycling rate for PET soda bottles in the 40 non-deposit states is under 20 percent.

Even with recycling rates in deposit states that are twice as high as the national average, PET recycling is sinking, and has been for four years. With the majority of single-serve containers being consumed away from home, it is imperative that we have an infrastructure in place that recovers those containers. The deposit system serves that purpose well.

If NAPCOR wants to stop the flow of more than 25 billion PET soft drink and non-carbonated bottles going to landfills each year (47,000 every minute), they need to withdraw their opposition to bottle bills. If a few outspoken NAPCOR members like Coca-Cola, Amoco or Dow nix that idea, then they should at least acknowledge the fact that bottle bills in ten states are doing the lion’s share of PET bottle recycling.

Sincerely,

Pat Franklin
Executive Director
Container Recycling Institute
Arlington, VA