Hawaii’s Bottle Bill -- A Perspective on the Opposition

By Suzanne Jones

Our State Legislature has heard overwhelming support to pass a bottle bill for Hawaii. They have the full support of the counties -- all four mayors, all four county councils and the solid waste and recycling agencies -- and the support of the State Departments of Health and Environmental Quality Control, the EPA, the entire environmental community, the League of Women Voters, the recycling industry and the public. With such strong backing, it seems that the decision would be clear, until you understand that the beverage industry is offering them a different argument. The following paragraphs outline the beverage industry’s opposition and provide counterpoints.

The beverage industry argues that the beverage container deposit system is too costly, forcing higher prices on the consumer. They’ve even called it a hidden tax – a money grab to fund government programs. But the public has testified that they are fully aware of the program's costs -- 7 cents per container (5 cents refundable and 2 cents to run the system) -- and they think it's a good deal. For 2 cents a container, or approximately $12 per person for an entire year, they are assured of super high recycling rates and phenomenal reductions in litter.

The beverage industry proposes curbside collection to achieve higher recovery at a lower cost. National and local studies do not support their claims, and as more and more single-serve beverages are consumed away from home, curbside does nothing to address recovery in these areas, nor will it have any impact on reducing litter. A local opinion poll showed 70% support for the bottle bill over curbside.

The beverage/retail industry has expressed concern for the burden placed on the retailer to take back the empties, making claims that it will cause unsanitary conditions in storage areas and be impossible for small stores with little space. They seem to be confusing mainland systems with the one proposed for us here in Hawaii. Hawaii's bottle bill exempts the small retailer and encourages the establishment of independent redemption centers to remove the take-back responsibilities from the retailers. Furthermore, the State will be given the resources to step in and assist with the establishment of redemption centers in outlying rural communities.

The conference committee is scheduling to convene on the bottle bill (HB1256) this week. We hope the discussion will be about setting the fee and deposit amounts and not about modifying the deposit system itself, but anything is possible. In these last days of decision-making, the beverage industry is stepping up their pressure.

A conference bill has been proposed that abandons the deposit and establishes a half-cent ADF (advance disposal fee) on all beverage containers, which would be distributed to the counties to support their local recycling efforts. This comes straight from the beverage industry. In effect, it barely increases the amount that has been collected over the past 10 years in the glass ADF, currently at 1½ cents per container, which has not been sufficient to increase glass recycling rates beyond commercial sector collection on Oahu and provides no economic incentive (a deposit or buy-back value) to promote high recovery rates or address litter.

The beverage industry has been increasing its paid advertising in print and on the radio with a message that misleads the public and distorts the facts. I've got to call them on bad form. As they deliver their message, why are they hiding behind "Paid for by Hawaii Citizens for Comprehensive Recycling"? The public should know that the anti bottle bill campaign is paid for by the beverage industry, so they can determine the credibility of the message. Is the beverage industry concerned that the public might perceive their ads as self-serving if they put their names on it? These are the strategies that have won the day for the beverage industry in other state battles.

I think Hawaii's citizens are seeing through to the real issue -- a bottle bill will increase recycling and reduce litter for 2 cents a container plus a deposit that they get back -- but it’s imperative that we ensure a fair and open debate as our legislators decide on this.

The long-term success of deposit systems has been clearly demonstrated in 10 states, including New York, New Jersey, California and Oregon, where the system has been operational for 30 years. Recycling rates range between 70% and 95%, and beverage container litter has virtually disappeared. Everyone would like to see Hawaii benefit from these kinds of results.

The deposit system proposed for Hawaii has been well designed, and the counties are convinced that it will be more cost-efficient than any other strategy we could employ. So many agree that it’s time to pass a deposit bill for Hawaii. We have an opportunity to establish Hawaii as an environmental leader. As the custodians of paradise, that role seems almost mandatory.

Suzanne Jones is the recycling coordinator for the City & County of Honolulu and can be contacted at 768-3420 or at sjones@co.honolulu.hi.us