April 19, 2008
Letters to the Editor
Ins and outs of Maine bottle law
RE "MESSAGE in a bottle: Proponents cite Maine's successful redemption law as a lesson for Mass." (City & Region, April 9): As counsel for distributors of nonalcoholic drinks in Maine, I spoke twice to your reporter about challenges presented by the expanded bottle law. Not all the information was included in the article.
Before expansion, the number of containers fraudulently redeemed was limited. The products covered were sold exclusively by distributors that knew the number of containers sold. The process of collecting empty containers was a closed loop, and could be carefully monitored. This is how Massachusetts' bottle bill works today.
When Maine's bottle bill expanded, it became more complicated, and fraud increased dramatically. Many beverages captured under expansion are delivered into Maine from warehouses and brokers. The number of containers could not be tracked as before.
I would dispute any notion that fraud is a negligible factor in Maine's bottle bill. As part of a recent Maine Department of Agriculture study, Maine distributors estimated that fraud costs them $5 million a year.
Maine consumers spend tens of millions of dollars a year to sustain an expanded bottle bill, even though it addresses only 5 percent of the total waste stream. This policy makes limited environmental or economic sense. A better solution would be to dedicate these funds to enhance comprehensive recycling programs that could target the entire recyclable waste stream.
NEWELL AUGUR
Director
Maine Beverage Association
Hallowell, Maine
I GET jealous of our Maine neighbors whenever we travel there. They get to claim deposits on virtually all their beverage containers: sports drinks, fruit juices, water bottles, wine, and iced tea. Now I read how effective their system is, beating our paltry 66 percent redemption rate with a whopping 93 percent ("Redemption made easier," Editorial, April 12).
It seems to me that upgrading our bottle law - including all those "loophole" drinks, increasing the handling fee, improving technology in the redemption process, introducing anti-fraud measures, and promoting more redemption centers - would give the Commonwealth a fighting chance to claim the title of redemption leader from our Maine neighbors. With those changes could come cleaner roadsides and waterways, more jobs, savings for cities and towns with less trash, and money for the state treasury from unclaimed deposits. We need this tongue-twister legislation: a better bottle bill now.
PAUL GAUDET
Lowell
