February 12, 2007
Dip in plastics recycling rate statewide triggers new rules
Industry officials say requirements are unfair to them, consumers
BETH CASPER
When Marie Clement shops for groceries in Salem, the people in the aisles around her often are pushing carts filled with cases of bottled water.
It's not unusual: the consumption of bottled water has skyrocketed worldwide -- with enough bottled water being drunk in 2004 to fill 63,077 Olympic swimming pools.
But when the bottles are emptied, they often end up in the garbage. In Oregon, 125 million plastic water bottles were thrown out in 2005.
"A good percentage goes directly into the trash, and that is a sad comment because they are so easily recycled," Clement said. "It is much easier to recycle a plastic water bottle than, say, a plastic peanut butter jar."
No matter how easy it is, Oregonians are not recycling enough plastic to avoid state mandates implemented in 1991.
The amount of plastic containers in Oregon's trash last year has prompted a set of rules that the state says encourages a market for recycled plastic and that some manufacturers say increases costs to consumers.
For the first time in more than a decade, less than 25 percent of the state's rigid plastics were recycled.
Manufacturers now have a year to increase the recycled content of their bottles; use bottles made of materials that are recycled at a rate of more than 25 percent; or use bottles that can be refilled at least five times.
Representatives for food and product manufacturers take issue with the new rules.
For one, they argue that they are being punished for a problem that they didn't cause -- about 1,700 tons of rigid plastic meant for recycling ends up in the trash. The problem occurs at processing plants where sorters separate paper, plastic and metal. Inevitably, plastic bottles slip into the pallets of recycled paper -- sending the plastic to the wrong facility, and then to the dump.
"Consumers have been doing what they are supposed to do -- putting plastic packaging at the curbside," said Pat McCormick, a representative for the Grocery Manufacturers Association and Food Products Association. "Twenty percent of the plastic material we put at the curbside is ending up in landfills. Recycling was changed to make it easier for recyclers and haulers but ... we have had substantial problems with capturing all of the plastic.
"If the problem is not with what manufacturers have done," McCormick said, "why would we impose sanctions on manufacturers -- and then have potential impacts on availability of products or the price of products on consumers?"
The other issue raised addresses how bottle manufacturers would have to comply with the new rules.
The rule says that packagers would have to include 25 percent recycled material in every container. Packagers want to have an average of 25 percent recycled material across all the containers they make -- the same rule that is in California.
Local recycling experts say that manufacturers are shirking their duty -- especially in light of previous years' rate that hovered around 25 percent -- and that they should support an expanded bottle bill to improve recycling rates rather than quibble about the state rules.
"Changing how that rule is interpreted is not the best way to approach it," said Bailey Payne, the recycling coordinator for Marion County. "I think Oregon in general needs an expanded bottle bill and that would put us over 25 percent (plastic recycling rate)."
Oregon's bottle bill, passed in 1971, was the first to require soda and beer containers sold in the state to be returnable with a minimum refund value -- a nickel.
Payne said an expanded bottle bill could include a lot of the plastics that are getting thrown away -- water bottles especially. Plastics covered by the bottle bill have about a 70 percent recovery rate, and plastics not covered by the bottle bill have about a 20 percent recovery rate, he said.
He said Oregon's foresight in passing a bottle bill meant that the state didn't have the advantage of learning from other states' mistakes.
"In 1971, when the bottle bill was first passed, Oregon was the first one to do it, so there wasn't a model to follow," he said. "Other states have seen shortcomings of our bill and changed theirs."
At least two bottle bills will be discussed in the 2007 legislative session -- both likely would increase the bottle deposit, which now is 5 cents. They also would expand what containers are covered to include noncarbonated and sports drinks.
bcasper@StatesmanJournal.com or (503) 589-6994
Copyright 2007 Statesman Journal, Salem, Oregon
http://www.statesmanjournal.com:80/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070212/NEWS/702120312/1001
