10-cent bottle fee: Slam dunk for environment or consumer nuisance?

  • Article by: JOSEPHINE MARCOTTY , Star Tribune
  • Updated: January 14, 2014 - 2:08 PM

Lawmakers say Minnesota is overdue to raise recycling rates; a 10-cent drink container deposit is one possible solution.

Six years ago, the state decided that by 2012 Minnesotans should be recycling 80 percent of the billions of drink containers they use every year — a lofty goal that would keep it at the forefront of waste reduction nationally.

Since then the recycling rate hasn’t budged. At best, Minnesotans recycle less than half of the water, pop, beer, iced tea, fruit juice and energy-drink containers they use, with the rest winding up in landfills and garbage burners.

That contradiction explains what is expected to be a contentious public hearing Tuesday in St. Paul on one surefire way to change consumers’ habits: Turn beverage containers into cash by putting a 10 cent deposit on each one.

Such a fee would catapult the statewide recycling rate to 84 percent, a new analysis found, just as it has in some other states with similar laws. In addition, it would drastically reduce the energy and raw materials consumed in making new containers, along with greenhouse gas emissions and litter.

But it would also scramble the deck, creating winners and losers, in the state’s $8.5 billion recycling industry.

The state analysis projected that the recycling initiative would add about 1,000 jobs to a business that already has a $2 billion payroll in Minnesota, and save million of dollars for local governments. On the flip side, it would rob about $4.6 million in marketable commodities — plastic, aluminum and glass — from both public and private collectors that now sell it.

Instead, that revenue would help subsidize a new system of recycling hubs — along with $29 million from companies like Coca-Cola, Nestlé and other manufacturers, which have successfully fought a refund law for decades in part because they would be expected to pay for it.

And consumers? Recycling analysts say their costs might go up by less than one half-cent per container, but they would be saddled with an added chore: Taking bottles to a redemption center or grocery store to get their deposits back.

Some legislators and environmental groups say that the analysis finally provides the numbers that make their case.

“How often do you get a chance to improve the environment and create 1,000 jobs at same time?” said Paul Austin, executive director of Conservation Minnesota, an environmental group that has been advocating for the refund law.

But Tim Wilkin, president of the Minnesota Beverage Association, argues that the change is unnecessary. More and more communities are turning to single-sort recycling programs, he said, which will increase what for decades has been a stubbornly flat recycling rate.

“Any time you make it easier on consumers, all recycling goes up,” Wilkin said.

Away from home

What’s often overlooked is that home recycling is only part of the challenge. Drinking habits have changed markedly in the last two decades: Consumption of bottled water has skyrocketed to about 30 gallons per person annually since 1991, and so has the number of beverages consumed away from home.

Eureka Recycling, the zero-waste nonprofit based in St. Paul, estimates that one in three beverages is now consumed away from home, where recycling bins can be hard to find. Collecting those bottles, plus recycling from apartment buildings and businesses, has proved difficult, according to state pollution officials.

Still, the environmental payoff in higher recycling rates would be considerable. If the 153 billion containers that wound up in the nation’s waste stream in 2010 had instead been diverted back to manufacturers, they would have saved enough energy to power all the homes in Los Angeles and Chicago, according to the Container Recycling Institute.

One recycled aluminum can save enough energy to power a TV for three to four hours, Austin said.

Wilkin said the state could find other ways to increase recycling away from home. The Recycling Association of Minnesota, for example, has set up container collection bins at convenience stores and other public places. The revenue from the sales of plastic and aluminum pays the wages of the disabled adults hired to run it.

  • related content

  • Jan. 9: Minn. considers dime fee on some recyclables

    Thursday January 9, 2014

    Deposits on bottles and cans would raise $469 million and and create new 1,000 jobs. But it could also cost consumers or beverage firms $29 million annually.

  • Aug. 24: Minn. pushes to improve can-recycling rates

    Saturday August 24, 2013

    An exhibit at the State Fair underlines an effort to increase Minnesotans’ recycling rate of cans from a paltry 40 percent.

  • Operators at the Hennepin Energy Recovery Center in Minneapolis fluff the garbage to make it easier to burn.

  • The Hennepin Energy Recovery Center is a waste-to-energy facility that burns garbage to generate energy.

  • A public hearing Tuesday will explore the possibility of using beverage container deposits as a way to increase recycling rates, which have been below expectations.

  • get related content delivered to your inbox

  • manage my email subscriptions


Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters






question of the day

Poll: How will the Wild-Chicago series turn out?

Weekly Question