Seattle Solid Waste Utility Findings: 2) Cost savings to the city: Between $591,245 and $849,219 3) Overall net system savings to city (after compensating recyclers for revenue loss): Between $236,917 and $632,774 1) Increased diversion: 42% to 54% more beverage container tonnage diverted How would a bottle bill impact an existing curbside recycling program?
Sources: New York:“Survey of New York Registered Voters: Attitudes Toward New York’s Bottle Bill and Proposed Reforms”, Public Policy Associates, Inc, Feb. 2004 [800 registered voters surveyed]. Iowa: University of Northern Iowa Center for Social and Behavioral Research, 2004. Michigan: Public Policy Associates, Inc, Feb. 2004 [1000 registered voters surveyed]. Public Support for Deposits in Bottle Bill States New York: 81% of respondents agreed that: “Curbside recycling is not enough. We need the bottle-deposit program to control litter.” Iowa: More than 90% of respondents indicated support for Iowa’s existing bottle bill. favored updating the state’s 10¢ deposit law to include bottled water, juice, iced teas, and sports drinks. Michigan: 74% favored updating the state’s 10¢ deposit law to include bottled water, juice, iced teas, and sports drinks.
In most states, unredeemed deposits are property of distributors/bottlers. In MA, CA, MI and ME unredeemed deposits go to the state. ($33.7 million in FY-2003 in MA) A total of $314.8 million has gone to the state of MA since 1990, most of it to the state’s Clean Environment Fund. Who keeps the unredeemed deposits?
10 ¢ Modeled after industry’s system for collecting refillable beer, soft drink and milk bottles Provide consumers with a financial incentive to recycle and a disincentive to litter Work everywhere! Why are beverage container deposit programs so successful?