Editorial

Expand bottle bill

Scrap the bottle bill, a successful recycling program, to improve recycling.

That's the contradictory message of the Massachusetts Food Association as it tries to block an expansion of the bottle bill.

Chris Flynn, vice president of the Massachusetts Food Association, which represents grocers and supermarkets, said the bottle bill should be repealed.

"We should phase out the bottle bill over a period of time," he said. "It'd be better to improve and enhance recycling and get people to participate to a higher degree instead of just by recycling bottles."

But how could we improve recycling if the state kills one of its signature recycling programs? The problem with the bottle bill is it does not go far enough.

Since 1982, bottles and cans of beer, carbonated soft drinks and mineral water have carried a 5 cent deposit — an incentive for consumers to recycle rather than litter or carry the waste to the local transfer station.

Now, however, there is a bill on Beacon Hill that would expand the bottle bill by requiring deposits on water, sports and fruit drink bottles.

Supporters of the bill are optimistic that it will pass this year because the proposal made it through the Joint Committee of Telecommunications, Utilities and Energy in the last session — a hurdle it had never cleared before.

The bill was incorporated in Gov. Deval Patrick's budget as a source for additional state revenue — an estimated $20 million in uncollected deposits that would go to the state. The state receives about $37 million in annual revenue from the current bottle bill.

Here's a bill that will increase recycling in the state, reduce litter, and raise revenue for the state. Not bad.

More than 70 percent of redeemable bottles get recycled compared to 20 percent for unredeemable bottles.

Rep. Alice Wolf, D-Cambridge, the House sponsor of the bill, said the expanded law would save larger municipalities an estimated $4 million to $6 million in expenses incurred from littering.

Wolf said the bill would also help those who have low incomes or are homeless.

"We see a lot of people in Boston who are out of jobs pick up bottles that are left around and redeem them," Wolf said. "It's a source of income for them and cleans up the streets."

Christopher Crowley, vice president of Polar Beverages, represents the opposition.

"People are wed to this bottle bill and think it's a very effective way for recycling," Crowley said. "But it's really about as ineffective as you can get."

The bottle law is outdated, costly and unnecessary now that curbside recycling has been instituted in many municipalities, Crowley said.

But few Cape and Islands' communities offer curbside recycling.

Crowley also thinks Patrick's support of the bill is for financial, not ecological, reasons.

"It's disingenuous," Crowley said. "He's calling it an environmental item, but really it's a budget item that, in reality, is an indirect tax."

But Robert Keough, assistant secretary at the Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs, said the bottle bill is one of the many environmental bills that the governor has supported. He said governor would like to see the expanded bottle bill passed this year to help the environment.

http://www.capecodonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20110119/OPINION/101190318/-1/NEWSMAP