April 10, 2007
Talk bubbling around bottle bill
By Jason Hardin
A bill to require deposits on beverage cans and bottles sold in North Carolina has opinions flying around like fizz on a shaken -up soft drink.
Less trash on the roads. A hassle for consumers. An incentive to recycle. A potential financial hit for bottlers. A question mark for existing recycling programs.
At least the math is clear: A 10-cent deposit would be charged on every can and bottle.
The bill's primary sponsor, state Sen. Doug Berger , said the goal is to provide an economic incentive to recycle and to reduce litter.
"Whether you're liberal or conservative, folks want a clean environment," the Youngsville Democrat said.
About 20 percent to 30 percent of bottles and cans now are recycled, Berger said. Ideally, he said, that number would top 60 percent.
Consumers would be able to receive refunds on their deposits by taking the bottles and cans to redemption centers across the state.
Berger concedes some consumers might see this as a hassle, but he said the effort would be worth it.
"It's a matter of keeping the environment clean," he said. "It's weighing the cost and the benefit."
The bill will face stiff opposition in the assembly from bottlers and others in the beverage and retail industries.
Butch Gunnells, president of the N.C. Beverage Association, said the deposits could hurt the beverage industry by raising the cost of drinks.
Many consumers wouldn't go through the trouble of getting refunds, he said.
"It just winds up being a 10-cent-a-container tax," Gunnells said, noting that could amount to $2.40 on a case of drinks.
The bill also could hurt retailers in border counties, he said, encouraging customers to head for neighboring states without a deposit. No nearby states require deposits.
While the bill could push business away, it could pull used drink containers into the state, said Cliff Ritchie,
a Cheerwine executive and vice-president of the N.C. Beverage Association. Residents
of nearby states would be inclined to try to redeem their bottles and cans here, he
said.
Deposits also would undermine existing curbside recycling pick up programs in many areas, Ritchie said.
Cans, unlike paper products such as newspapers, help those programs recover much of their cost, he said. If consumers take their cans to the redemption centers themselves, that would make those programs more expensive to operate.
Finally, bottles and cans make up only a small percentage of litt er, he said.
Local shoppers offered mixed opinions.
Oak Ridge resident Evelyn Lynch , pushing her cart through the Summerfield Food Lion, said she felt the measure would encourage recycling.
"I think it would cut down on litter," she said.
Donna Church, of Summerfield, was surprised at the amount of the proposed deposits and questioned whether many people would go to the trouble of taking cans to recycling centers.
"I don't know if people would do that," she said.
Berger said the faces an uphill battle. Previous efforts failed, but he said he is hopeful this year will be different.
Contact Jason Hardin at 373-7021 or at jhardin@news-record.com
http://www.news-record.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070410/NEWSREC0101/70410001
