34 South Main St., Attleboro, MA - Directions - (508) 222-7000
Home News Sports Features classifieds milestones services photos tvlistings cars jobs realestate subscribe
News

Is the bottle half full?



Joe Kvilhaug, director of financial services for Wredemco, a redemption center based in Wrentham, said the proposed expansion of the bottle bill would increase his business and could enable him to hire more workers. (Staff photo by Martin Gavin)




Local businesses mixed on expanded return proposal
Local business owners are guardedly positive about a proposal to expand the types of drink containers that would require a five-cent deposit - despite possible costs to them.

"Anything that forces people to recycle more is good," said Michael Benjamin, owner of Rehoboth House of Pizza. "There is way too much waste going on."

The current law applies only to soda and beer cans and bottles.

Under Gov. Deval Patrick's proposal to expand the "bottle bill," consumers would be charged a nickle deposit on an additional 1.6 billion beverage containers for water, coffee, tea, fruit juices and energy drinks.

The goal is to spur recycling, but also to boost state coffers.
Benjamin said distributors would charge him an extra nickel for containers eligible for deposit, but he said he would not pass the cost along to his customers.

"We would lose the extra nickel, but it wouldn't affect me much," said Benjamin, who co-owns the restaurant with his wife Fatima.

Varsha Patel, owner of Sun Market in Attleboro, disagrees.

"I am going to have to raise the customer's price," Patel said. "We don't sell without checking the price we pay. I can't just stop selling."

Joe Kvilhaug, director of financial services for Wredemco, a redemption center based in Wrentham, said the proposed expansion would increase his business and could enable him to hire more workers.

"Our volume would definitely increase, and we would be able to justify hiring with enough volume," Kvilhaug said. "We would have to get additional space, and a lot depends on how much more money we would be paying in rent."

Under the current container law, redemption centers are reimbursed 7.25 cents by the distributor for every nickel they refund customers who return cans and bottles.

The bottle bill began as an anti-littering initiative more than two decades ago, and now covers about 2.35 billion containers per year, according to Greg Cooper, deputy division director of the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection.

Patrick's budget proposal estimates the state could make an additional $20 million from unclaimed deposits on bottles and cans not currently covered by the law.

The governor's budget would use $5 million of the new revenue for recycling programs.
DEP estimates that 70 percent of containers now eligible are redeemed. Applying that formula, the state expects to collect a nickle each on 30 percent of newly eligible containers - a total of about $24 million.

"In these instances when the consumer does not redeem the deposit, the unclaimed bottle deposit goes back to the state," Cooper said. "After all, they certainly aren't the distributor's nickels."

One local lawmaker is leery of the proposal.

"I think recycling is working, so we don't need another bill to raise the cost," said Rep. Bill Bowles, D-Attleboro.

Bowles said the argument for the bill - particularly the $20 million or more in new revenue - indicates that the new provision would jeopardize the bottle bill's original purpose.

"If the state gets $20 million, then people aren't redeeming the bottle," said Bowles. "It's just another tax to charge somebody a nickel more for the bottle."

 


*Member ID:
*Password:
  Forgot Your Password?
 
View Comments » 15 comment(s) « Hide Comments

crush wrote on Feb 18, 2010 3:23 PM:

" Expanding the bottle bill is an economic disaster. With the exception of Hawaii in 2002 no state has enacted a bottle bill since 1986 with 8 of the 10 states with bottle bills enacting them between 1971 and 1982. If this is so successful at increasing recycling rates why haven't the other 80% of states enacted bottle bill laws? Because the economic price is steep for the limiting benefit these bills provide.

As a example Massachusetts' current bottle bill costs consumers and businesses over $100 million each year and only recycles an average of 72% annually (1990-2009) via the redemption process. Mr Sego's 80% figure includes those deposited cans placed in curbside recycling where you lose your nickel even though you are recycling.

See my article and comments in the Mansfield News at http://www.wickedlocal.com/mansfield/news/opinions/letters/x1682930792/LETTERS-Bottle-bill-milks-the-consumer

This is a bad policy that will cost consumers tens of millions more and businesses even more than that. Expanding the bill is bad for the economy and your wallet. Write your representative and oppose any legislation expanding the bottle bill.

Respectfully,
-Jason Armstrong "

s-plumb wrote on Feb 9, 2010 1:10 PM:

" phil: All have a right to express an opinion, but please explain how these taxes and fees make our neighborhoods cleaner and safer? "

philsego wrote on Feb 9, 2010 11:24 AM:

" (part 2)

An Updated Bottle Bill would expand our container deposit system to include “new age” drinks such as non-carbonated beverages, water, iced tea, juice, and sports drinks. It would decrease litter - and increase recycling.

But to believe that EVERYONE recycles just because he/she does is simply wishful thinking. The reality is that recycling rate of most of the state's larger cities and towns is stuck at under 12% - and the state average is sadly only 26%.

By comparison, containers covered under the bottle bill are redeemed/recycled at a whopping 80%. With over 3.3 BILLION containers sold every year in Massachusetts, these non-recycled containers are choking our landfills, clogging our sewers, littering our parks - and using up badly needed resources. Updating our bottle bill will boost recycling, save our communities disposal costs and litter cleanup fees, and conserve valuable resources. These plastic bottles are made of 99% petroleum - what a sad waste to send our valuable oil to landfills where they'll sit forever. And anyone who wants their 5-cent deposit back simply returns the bottles for a full refund. What could be more fair?

We need to improve what works – and work to find more ways to improve our recycling efforts. I suggest that rather than criticize this enormously successful recycling effort, "comptonscattering" focuses his/her attention on getting his neighbors to reduce, reuse, and recycle.

-- Phil Sego, Massachusetts Sierra Club "

philsego wrote on Feb 9, 2010 11:22 AM:

" (part 1)

While I appreciate that some people believe that access to curbside has solved all our recycling needs, the reality is that while curbside is great for beverages consumed at home, it's not effective for beverages consumed on-the-go. But the Bottle Bill is.

The Bottle Bill is the state’s most successful recycling and litter prevention program. Since the Bottle Bill's inception in 1983, over 30 billion containers have been redeemed, contributing to a healthier environment, cleaner and safer communities, and a stronger economy. But to keep up with the times and consumer’s tastes, the bottle bill must be updated. "

jeepXJ wrote on Feb 8, 2010 7:23 PM:

" It's not a horrible idea, however, there needs to be more places to redeem the bottles!! I used to collect a ton of bottles and cans and store them in the basement until I literally had a full truck-load (7' pickup bed full) of empties and would return them and them for some decent cash. The place that allowed large returns like that shut down and now the only places are little package stores and such that don't want to deal with a whole ton of bottles and cans, some of which they potentially don't sell, so they won't take! That really gets me, it's a freakin can or bottle with the 5 cent stamp on it, take it!! Once it was too hard for me to do any longer I gave up. I still recycle, but now I put them out in the recycle bin. In Rehoboth we pay for our own trash/recycle pickup, and so they take my recycle too....now a whole ton of bottles/cans every other week. If it were easier for me to return them in bulk, I would save them up like I used to do. "

gimmesum wrote on Feb 8, 2010 6:30 PM:

" EMT: I am with you. Reduce, reuse, recycle. It is not a mistake they are listed in this order.

I very rarely buy any beverage that requires a deposit.

realist: I think all hell would break loose if basics like bulk milk or juice were added to the bottle bill list. "

mmarcia wrote on Feb 8, 2010 4:23 PM:

" Does every city/town have a recycling program? I'd rather just get my my nickel back! What happens to the nickels other people don't redeem? Does the state keep it? "

ads wrote on Feb 8, 2010 3:24 PM:

" If water bottles end up with a deposit fee of 5¢, I think the popularity of reusable water bottles will increase dramatically.

While I recycle everything I can at home, it is not so easy to do when out of the house - unless I bring my trash home to recycle - which isn't always appealing.

I will not be happy if this bill increases the variety of bottles requiring a deposit, but I know it will be good for the environment in the long run. "

realist wrote on Feb 8, 2010 1:21 PM:

" Does this also affect cartons of orange juice and is milk going to be specifically exempted?

Of course Mr. Benjamin thinks it's a good idea. How many people pick up empties from the side of the road and try to turn them in at his restaurant? Mr. Patel probably sees this all the time.
Most cities and towns have recycling programs. Maybe it's time to repeal the bottle bill completely.
This would let the stores devote less space to empties and save the labor costs. "

rabblerouser wrote on Feb 8, 2010 1:06 PM:

" When the original bottle bill was put on the ballot, the major bottlers (Coca Cola & Pepsi) spent millions on advertising to get people to vote against it as they didn't want to handle the cans and bottles twice. Quickly the unclaimed can and bottle fund grew to a few million dollars and then the bottlers claimed it should be theirs.
I already recycle every non carbonated can or bottle I buy.
Why place another cost or burden on taxpayers.
This governor is looking to get every possible amount of money you have from your wallet or purse to the state general fund coffers so they can waste it as they see fit.
Gratefully he will be gone in the fall,
one term and done, Deval, bye! "

chauncey gardner wrote on Feb 8, 2010 12:26 PM:

" The deposit has been set at a nickle for well over 20yrs,wouldn't now be a good time to raise it to an even dime? "

kevinh. wrote on Feb 8, 2010 11:55 AM:

" We have recycling. Drop the tax (deposit). "

mmarcia wrote on Feb 8, 2010 10:56 AM:

" A 10-cent deposit? Fine with me! I recycle anything with the recycling triangle on it. If I've paid a deposit, I'll bring it to the store to get my nickel back - I won't be putting it in my recycling bin. If anyone has been in the recycling room at Stop & Shop, they've seen people who collect cans and bottles and are obviously supplementing their income. "

EMT wrote on Feb 8, 2010 10:11 AM:

" SO.. I pay my annual trash fee, which provides single stream recycling.. so, in a sense, I'm paying to recycle that bottle already.. now the state wants to add another nickel to that fee?

We should be changing the thought process of our young people to "reduce reuse and recycle" rather than just toss it in the trash, or worse, on the side of the road.

I guess that's why I buy most of my bottles in RI. "

American Person wrote on Feb 8, 2010 9:43 AM:

" $5 million for recycling? This can't be real. How about we repair the failing infrastructure all around us. Otherwise there won't be a street to liter on in the first place. "