Passage of Illinois bottle bill would make an even dozen in U.S.

By Joe Truini, From the May 9, 2005 Issue of Waste News

Two states´ efforts to pursue bottle bills are heading in different
directions, with one dying in the state legislature and another gearing up
for the battle.

Tennessee State Rep. Russell Johnson sponsored a bill that would´ve put a
5-cent deposit on beverage containers sold in the state. Alas, the measure
didn´t come close to passage.

But Johnson, who has pursued deposit legislation twice before, will bring up
the matter again in January 2006 during the next legislative session, said a
spokeswoman from his office.

Meanwhile, Illinois Lt. Gov. Pat Quinn submitted a draft bottle bill
proposal to state legislators May 3. Quinn´s I-CAN initiative calls for a
5-cent deposit on all plastic, glass and metal carbonated and noncarbonated
beverage containers, except for dairy products.

"It will reduce strain on Illinois landfills, clean up our beaches and
recreational waterways and cut dependence on foreign oil," Quinn said.

The Illinois Environmental Protection Agency would administer the program.
Consumers would pay 5 cents for each container bought from a retailer, who
would then give the nickel to a distributor. Distributors would deposit the
5 cents, along with a 2-cent redemption fee, to a new state environmental
fund.

The redemption centers, which could be the retailer or an automated reverse
vending machine, would get back 7 cents for each container they returned to
the distributor, earning 2 cents per container. The state would use
unclaimed deposits for environmental programs and share a portion of those
funds with municipalities.

In 2002, Illinois consumers bought 8 billion beverage containers weighing an
aggregate 544,683 tons, Quinn said.

The proposal already has drawn opposition from the usual sources, including
beverage manufacturers, retailers and distributors, who feel that container
deposits single out the industry and are an unfair tax.

While well-intentioned, mandatory container deposits are not effective,
long-term environmental programs, according to the American Beverage
Association. Operational costs in the 10 states that have run programs for
years are at least four times higher than the cost of operating a
comprehensive recycling program, which includes curbside recycling.

Hawaii, the 11th bottle-bill state, implemented its program this year.

Mandatory container deposits cost at least $500 per ton to collect the
material, while comprehensive dropoff and curbside recycling costs an
average of $125 per ton, and includes a larger chunk of the waste stream,
according to the ABA.

"We have had, of course, as with almost all bottle bills, a few concerns as
well from some of the bottling companies and some of the soft drink
manufacturers," said Michael Norbeck, Quinn´s policy advisor. "I have a
feeling it´ll be a process of negotiations. We´ll try and take everybody´s
concerns into account as we try to form the legislation into its final
product."

A statewide deposit law would help preserve Illinois´ landfill space, he
said. Studies show the state has about 12 years of landfill space left. A
bottle bill could stretch that time significantly.

"The landfill situation has become more acute in recent years," Norbeck
said.

Recycling more bottles and cans also would save energy, an increasingly
important factor given the rise in energy prices and oil, he said. Recycling
70 percent of the state´s containers would save as much energy as taking
100,000 homes off the power grid.

"There´s no way you can tell 100,000 people to stop using electricity,"
Norbeck said.

Contact Waste News reporter Joe Truini at (330) 865-6166 or
jtruini@crain.com

Kyle Paulson
Research Associate
Container Recycling Institute
1601 N. Kent Street, Suite 803
Arlington, VA 22209
Voice: 703-276-9800
Fax: 703-276-9587
E-mail: kpaulson@container-recycling.org