A Dime Can Make a Big Difference for the Environment

As consumers, we are increasingly aware that many of the conveniences we enjoy come with environmental consequences. There may be no greater convenience than the single-use containers made of plastic, metal, and glass that we use numerous times a day. 

Americans buy billions of plastic bottles and aluminum and steel cans each year, many of which end up in landfills or, worse, as litter, even though they are fully recyclable. 

As good stewards of the environment, it's our responsibility to minimize the impacts of plastics and other modern amenities that make our lives easier and safer. Doing so does not mean we must renounce those conveniences, though. 

One of the easiest options for reducing our environmental footprint is recycling, though it comes with its own set of challenges. 

The good news is that whether it's dragging a blue bin to the curb in the morning or tossing an empty water bottle or aluminum soda can in the designated receptacle at the office, recycling has become an everyday activity for more than 100 million Americans.

Recycling beverage containers to make new products saves resources and reduces pollution, in particular for aluminum and glass, which are infinitely recyclable without a loss in quality. It also lessens the need to develop virgin raw materials to manufacture new containers, especially when bottle- and can-makers can get back clean, high-quality materials free of contamination.  

Unfortunately, recycling rates across the United States have stagnated in recent years, even while the amount of material we throw away has increased. 

According to the Container Recycling Institute, two-thirds of all beverage containers never get recycled. Millions of tons of plastics, glass, and aluminum end up in landfills every year despite the ability to recycle them because of contamination or mishandling. 

Recycling is experiencing a market failure because demand for recycled products has not kept up with supply. There's a couple of reasons for this, including a weak domestic recycling market. 

For decades, Americans exported less-valuable recyclable materials overseas because it was considered less costly than processing them domestically. In 2016, we shipped 16 million tons of plastic, paper, and metals to China. The necessary infrastructure to process those materials never fully develop in the United States because of this dependence on foreign facilities. 

Then in 2018, China, which handled nearly half of the world's discarded materials at the time, banned the import of recyclable materials. Other Asian countries soon followed suit. The embargo left many U.S. communities with nowhere to send plastics and other recyclable waste.

Another challenge is weak economics. Plainly speaking, the economics of many municipal recycling programs don't pencil out. Recycling can increase the cost of trash collection for cities that must commit personnel and equipment to separate recyclables from non-recyclable materials and must often pay companies to cart off materials that cannot be recycled profitably. Some recyclables — notably aluminum and glass — continue to have a relatively high-market value but require extensive sorting to avoid contamination with non-recyclable materials, adding extra time and labor costs. Other recyclable materials simply don't have a market that justifies the cost of processing.

The solution to these and other challenges facing the recycling industry shouldn't require an extensive government program to force people to change their habits, though. 

A better option is to change the market incentives to encourage recycling by placing a small refundable deposit on bottles and other beverage containers at the point of sale. 

Recycling incentive programs, often referred to as bottle bills, place a fully refundable cash deposit on aluminum, glass, plastic and other beverage containers. Consumers pay the deposit at the time of purchase and collect a refund when they return the empty bottle or can. Such programs provide an economic incentive to consumers to make sure containers don't end up in the trash. 

It's an elegant solution to a long-standing problem. 

Ten states, along with 40 countries and regions around the world, have bottle deposit programs, and each has reported higher recycling rates since enactment. The top five recycling states in the United States – Maine, Vermont, Massachusetts, Oregon, and Connecticut – have deposit programs.

Container deposit programs have existed in the United States since 1971. In most states, the deposit requirement is minimal — five to 10 cents on each bottle or can — but sufficient to encourage participation.  

According to data from the Container Recycling Institute, beverage containers sold with a deposit get recycled at rates two to three times higher than containers sold without an incentive.

Data from the New York Department of Environmental Conservation shows that enacting a bottle bill there reduced roadside litter in the state by 70 percent and, in 2020, helped to recycle 5.5 billion plastic, glass, and aluminum beverage containers at no cost to local governments.

Deposit programs offer a convenient and effective way for consumers to reduce their environmental footprint without adding to taxpayers' burden, which is one reason these programs have strong public support. According to a recent poll, 81 percent of the American public support container deposits, as do 90 percent of consumers in states with similar programs already in place.

Container deposit programs increase recycling, reduce litter, and provide a domestic supply of raw materials that cannot be offshored to foreign competitors. Creating a domestic market that improves the environment, generates jobs, and only "costs" consumers a refunded dime sounds like a worthwhile investment. 

Robert Dillon is a senior advisor to ConservAmerica, a nonprofit organization committed to supporting market-based solutions to environmental and energy policy challenges.