Has this website been useful?

We depend on your financial contributions to keep it running!
  Please help us out with a donation today.

Container and Packaging
Recycling UPDATE
Summer/Fall 2001 Issue

PORTLAND - Oregon became the first state in the nation to require a refundable deposit on beverage containers, when Republican Governor Tom McCall signed the Beverage Container Act, the so-called bottle bill, into law on July 2, 1971. Oregon adopted a number of landmark environmental laws in the 1960s and 1970s, creating a framework for environmental stewardship and placing the state on the leading edge of a new movement.

Thirty years after passing the bottle bill, Oregon has one of the highest beverage container recycling rates in the nation. According to the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ), an estimated 87 percent of the carbonated soft drink and beer containers sold in the state in 1998 were recycled. While the rate may be declining slightly, it is still among the highest in the nation - second only to Michigan.

The bottle bill remains a popular and effective law, but new challenges reveal problems that may require action by the Legislature. A series of recent articles and editorials praise the law, while pointing out chinks in the system.

When CRI contacted the Oregon DEQ, solid waste analyst Peter Spendelow pointed out both the strengths and weaknesses of the current law. "Recycling rates appear to be dropping," Spendelow said. "The value of a nickel deposit is not worth what it was 30 years ago. If you adjust for inflation, a nickel deposit then is the equivalent of 22-cents today," he said.

Benefits of the bottle bill, as Spendelow notes, include a high rate of recycling for containers covered by the law, a dramatic reduction in beverage container litter, and development of a strong recycling commitment in the state.

For a time, deposits strengthened the position of refillable bottles. But as the beverage industry dismantled the system of local bottling plants using the same bottles again and again, refillables largely disappeared. The deposit

law became the means to recover one-way bottles and cans for recycling.

Today, new types of beverages and packaging, not covered by the law, are eroding the effectiveness of the system. Recycling advocate and editor of Resource Recycling, Jerry Powell calls the Bottle Bill a "qualified success." Applying the deposit only to what he calls "fizzy drinks", limits the effectiveness of the law. Bottom

with the new types of beverages," CRI Executive Director Pat Franklin said.

The Oregon Public Interest Research Group (OSPIRG) mounted an initiative in the 1990's to expand the bottle bill program. Massive, out-of-state beverage industry spending on an 11th-hour advertising campaign defeated the initiative.

There is interest in updating and

line says Powell, "It made sense then and it makes sense now."

Bottled water, juices, teas, sports drinks and coffees have emerged as a significant part of the beverage industry, but these beverages are not subject to deposits in Oregon. Most of the bottles and cans containing these beverages are landfilled and many end up as litter.

Plastic beverage packaging developed long after Oregon adopted the bottle bill. As the fastest growing packaging material, plastics pose unique problems, due to their relatively high net cost of recycling. Plastic soft drink bottles covered by the bottle bill have a recycling rate that is approximately 4 times higher than non-deposit plastic bottles.

"Oregonians have recycled billions of beverage containers that would not have been recycled without deposits. However, litter is becoming a problem again in Oregon and other deposit states,

expanding the law. Representative Carolyn Tomei, a freshman member of the Oregon House introduced HB 3974 this year to expand the deposit law. Other changes being discussed by some recycling professionals include a handling fee paid by bottlers to retailers to reduce costs, and requiring bottlers and distributors to report beverage sales.

Developing precise figures on recycling and landfilling of beverage containers is difficult, since there are no reporting requirements in the current law. The DEQ must estimate the number of containers landfilled without the benefit of data held by beverage distributors concerning container refunds.

"The changing beverage market and the declining value of a nickel are reason enough for the state and interested parties to consider updating and expanding the Oregon bottle bill," said Franklin.