There’s an effort afoot across the state to get an expanded bottle bill on the ballot next year that would add water, juice and other containers as returnables. Supporters say only 20% of bottles not covered by the current deposit system wind up getting recycled. Opponents say an updated bottle bill would cost consumers and business, and not greatly boost recycling rates.
The Sustainable Wellesley organization is in favor of the updated bottle bill and is joining forces with the League of Women Voters of Wellesley to recruit supporters to help get signatures from other supporters. Expect to see these backers at the Wellesley Farmers’ Market, Roche Bros., and the Wellesley RDF looking for signatures. If interested in joining the cause, visit here.
On the contrary, Steve … Opponents of expansion (bottlers, retailers) want to get out of the collection business because it is bad for their primary business. They are supporting a $0.01/container tax on all beverages that would generate $37mm to the state to be dedicated to comprehensive municipal recycling programs. Additionally, they would give up the $20mm+ in container scrap sales that would benefit municipal recycling systems. The current bottle bill generates peanuts for towns, with the bulk of the $25mm in escheats going to the State’s general fund. This is a great opportunity for Massachusetts to focus on ALL recycling, not the tiny piece of the waste stream of bottles/cans.
Expanded bottle bill legislation amounts to an added tax on grocery items that consumers will be forced to absorb. For many Massachusetts residents who already face challenges living on a tight budget or fixed income – this policy shift represents a regressive and burdensome expense. Furthermore, such legislation also holds the potential to unleash adverse, unintended consequences on small businesses and the jobs they provide.
Bottle bills are in place around the world and are the most effective way to increase recycling and reduce litter. In the US, ten states have deposits, and these states recycle more containers than the other 40 states combined. Yes, deposit programs do shift the cost to producers and consumers – shouldn’t those who profit and those who drink the beverages help with the cost of cleaning up the associated litter or the cost of recycling/disposing the bottles? What opponents don’t tell you is they want these costs footed by local government and taxpayers. We all win with less litter and more recycling. Learn more at bottlebill.org