It's been a great 20 years for CRI, and we're taking a look forward, with the introduction of new mission and vision statements to guide our efforts.

We're also taking a look back, at some of the people who have made CRI what it is today.

This year we say farewell to board member Darryl Young, who was a major driving force behind the strategic planning process that led to our new mission and vision statements. We thank Darryl for his leadership over his 3 years on the Board of Directors. Roger Diedrich, one of our current board members, also celebrates a 20th anniversary this year, as he has been with the organization since its founding. Pat Franklin, CRI's founder, had so many good things to say about Roger that it couldn't fit in the newsletter! Click here to read Pat's message. Congratulations and thank-you to Roger, for 20 years of continuous service!

And of course, none of it would have been possible without supporters like you. We thank you for your interest in the environment, recycling, and your support of the Container Recycling Institute.

Here's to a fruitful 20 years and many more to come!

In this Issue:

• CRI adopts new mission and vision statements
• New deposit law in Fiji marks fifth legislative victory in 9 months
• Mass. study debunks deposit opponents' favorite myths
• Real pooch, real recycling
• Reporting, for real
• CRI endorses Senate resolution on recycling

 

CRI adopts new mission and vision statements

New Deposit Law in Fiji marks fifth legislative victory in 9 months

It's been a good year for new and improved deposit-refund systems, with a new deposit law enacted in Fiji on September 27. Guam passed its deposit law at the end of 2010, followed by the Northern Territory of Australia and the Turks and Caicos Islands in early 2011. Oregon's legislature passed a deposit law expansion in June. 

Fiji's deposit system is established by the Environment Management [Container Deposit] Regulations 2011. The law will not come into effect until the government has established a Managing Agency and Board, but a press release by the Cabinet reveals that the Regulations, once in effect, will establish a mandatory deposit on all beverage containers, paid by producers into a revolving fund.

Consumers may return their containers for a refund (minus a handling fee) to licensed collectors, who then deliver the containers to processors for recycling.

The Cabinet Minister explained that the new deposit system is intended to ensure that the approximate 50 million beverage containers consumed in the country each year are properly recycled.

Mass. study debunks deposit opponents' favorite myths
by Sue Herrschaft

A message from CRI's Executive Director, Susan Collins:
"I specifically wanted to share this study with CRI's supporters because it contains such useful information and it was so well researched. It thoroughly addresses some of the claims made by opponents, and refutes those false claims with loads of data to the contrary."

The Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MassDEP) conducted a survey which collected and compared information from Massachusetts and surrounding states on beverage pricing and product availability, and conducted interviews with store managers and others in states with an updated container deposit refund law (CDR) to see if the negative impacts predicted by opponents have been experienced elsewhere. The survey included over 100 store locations in five states. The information gathered attempts to address the issues raised by opponents of an updated CDR.

Claim #1: An updated CDR will lead to increased consumer prices.

Finding: The survey found that CDRs result in no difference in price between beverages - in fact some of the beverages surveyed were actually less expensive in CDR states.

Claim #2: An updated CDR will result in increased lease and operations costs for reverse vending machines (RVMs) and inconvenience to retailers due to increased volume of recyclables.

Finding: Sufficient infrastructure and capacity currently exists to handle the additional beverage containers of an updated CDR.

Claim #3: An updated CDR may reduce consumer choice at the retail level if vendors seek to limit their redemption obligations.

Finding: The presence or absence of a deposit did not appear to influence the availability of the beverages surveyed.

Overall, the survey suggests that an updated CDR that excludes bottles larger than three liters and juice bottles of all sizes could be easily implemented in Massachusetts with no increased costs, reduced consumer choices or other operational issues.

View the entire survey. 

Real pooch, real recycling

Recycling has found a new mascot in Max A. Pooch, a "recycled" dog from Lake County, IL.

Pooch was adopted (or "recycled") from a no-kill shelter by his human and spokesman, Keith Sanderson. With a little training, the Labrador retriever soon put his pedigree to good use, retrieving discarded bottles and cans from the parks around his home and collecting them to be recycled properly.

According to Sanderson, "In this time of financial stress it seems ironic to Pooch that humans spend billions of dollars in cleaning up after other humans. Why don't we just be like the Boy Scouts and leave an area better than we found it....Why don't we begin to act like adults and clean up after ourselves, even in public spaces?"

Pooch and Sanderson now take his trick on the road, using it as the focal point of popular presentations where they encourage recycling-both of pets and bottles. "People who litter and people who abandon dogs and other animals have something in common. They leave a mess for others to clean up."

To learn more about Max A. Pooch and his message, visit his website at  www.maxapooch.com. 

Reporting, for real

Q: When is a recycling rate not a recycling rate?
A: When it includes contaminants and non-recycled materials.

Unfortunately, most of the "recycling rates" reported by the materials industries do just that, presenting an inaccurate depiction of the actual state of recycling. As part of a Resource Recycling article on the future of recycling, published earlier this year, CRI's executive director, Susan Collins, addressed the issue of inflated recycling rates. Her portion of the article is below:

We need to start reporting what is actually recycled, not what is collected for recycling. Process losses occur at the materials recovery facility (MRF) when contaminants are removed, and even greater levels of contamination are removed when materials arrive at paper mills, plastics reclaimers and the like.

For example, The National Association for PET Container Resources (NAPCOR) recently reported a 29 percent "recycling rate" for PET plastic for 2009, but the same document reports yield of only 21 percent for PET, once the contamination has been removed. Some of the contamination in PET is naturally attached to the bottle, as caps, labels and adhesives. Many of the caps are polypropylene, and they are removed and recycled. When that recycling occurs, the weight of those caps are counted again in the polypropylene recycling rate. The labels, adhesives and other contaminants are disposed of, but their weight has already been counted as "recycling."

CRI endorses Senate resolution on recycling

A Senate resolution introduced in early August would show the U.S. Senate's support of improved recycling and has gained the support of several dozen recycling, waste, and materials-related organizations, including the Container Recycling Institute.

Senate Resolution 251, titled "a resolution expressing support for improvement in the collection, processing, and consumption of recyclable materials throughout the United States," was introduced in the US Senate on August 2, 2011.

The resolution highlights the economic and environmental benefits of recycling and expresses support for policies and research that encourage and improve recycling.

The resolution is currently in the Committee on Environment and Public Works.