Editorial

Update the Bottle Bill

While many people still go out of their way to pick up a discarded soda can, fewer people will reach down to collect a bottle of water previously tossed by another careless individual. The reason is simple: economics.

A soda can or bottle is worth 5¢ when redeemed, while the water bottle is worthless. Some people still will pick up the discarded water bottle because they don't like litter, but that bottle most likely will be placed in the closest, most convenient garbage can and eventually burned in a trash-to-energy plant or perhaps even buried in a landfill.

In a perfect world, the state's bottle law would not be necessary. People would not throw garbage on the street and everyone would sort their recyclables meticulously, put them in a blue bin, and place the bin at curbside on pick-up day. Unfortunately, we don't live in a perfect world, as all the garbage in Bridgeport and elsewhere along the roads, in parks, at beaches, in parking lots and near stores proves.

Some people are slobs. Some people are lazy. Some people are self-centered. Some people just don't care.

While returning bottles is a pain and a dirty job, as well as an expensive process for stores, it serves a useful purpose: it cuts down on pollution in the sky and on the ground, beautifying our surroundings. The returnables law also creates an economic sector - a whole industry has been created to handle the task. After all, someone has to manufacture the collection machines and haul the by-product.

The state Legislature first passed the bottle bill in the late 1970s, and it has become obsolete after nearly three decades. The only bottled water back then was Perrier (for the wealthy or for special occasions) and the Crystal Rock water cooler at the office. Now many Americans consume bottled water all day.

In fact, according to Bridgeport Democratic state Sen. Bill Finch, 400 million water bottles are sold annually in Connecticut alone. Plus another 300 million bottles or cans containing juice, flavored teas and sport drinks are sold each year. That's a lot of garbage, very little of which existed in the late 1970s.

Finch, co-chairman of the Legislature's Environment Committee, wants to increase the nickel deposit to 10¢ and expand the types of containers covered by the law to include non-carbonated beverages such as bottled water, juice, teas and sport drinks.

Finch's idea has opponents, and their arguments are not without merit. They insist expanding the returnables would burden small storeowners, and they want curbside recycling to become more proficient to better handle non-carbonated containers. But the current proposal would increase the handling fee for small stores and generate income to expand blue-bin recycling in municipalities.

Economics is a driving force in changing people's behavior. While a dime may not be enough incentive for everyone, it will motivate more people than a nickel. And there's no logical reason to charge a 5¢ deposit on soda but not on bottled water. Times have changed, and the bottle law has to change with them.

http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?BRD=1343&dept_id=433663&newsid=18083692&PAG=461&rfi=9