Stone: Deposit bottles

“This bill proposes to expand the scope of beverages subject to the beverage container redemption system to include all drinks in liquid form and intended for human consumption, except for milk, dairy products, plant-based beverages, infant formula, meal replacement drinks, or nonalcoholic cider. The bill would also require all manufacturers and distributors of covered beverages to participate in a producer responsibility organization that shall manage the collection and disposition of beverage containers.”

And “beverage also means liquor and ready-to-drink spirits.”

And “mixed wine drink, means a beverage containing wine and more than 15% added plain, carbonated or sparkling water and that contains added natural or artificially blended material, such as fruit juices, flavors.”

And “non-carbonated beverage containers holding more than 2.5 liters and carbonated beverage containers holding more than 3 liters would be exempt.”

This bill will unreasonably complicate our lives for no valid reason.

We are already required by law to recycle. This system that we pay for currently takes all bottles and containers. Our curbside recycling works and is simple. We don’t have to collect in a bunch of separate containers/bottles and then haul them to a redemption center. The bill requires a municipality of 7,000 citizens have at least one redemption center. So, those of us in Orwell, population about 1,200, are forced to haul our deposit bottles to some far off redemption center. Thus, adding to auto greenhouse gas emissions.

If you don’t return a bottle, the state of Vermont gets the 5¢ you forfeit. That 5¢ is then used to help the redemption system pay for the redemption system, a hidden tax on those who don’t redeem. And part of that tax is used for other purposes having nothing to do with recycling. This hidden tax will likely fall mostly on low-income folks, and those without ready transportation to lug their deposit bottles to be redeemed, and who already have a recycling bin right there on their curbside that is already paid for, no matter whether there is a bottle deposit.

Eliminate the bottle deposit system all together, send everything to the mixed recycling bin that we will still have to put out every week even if there are only two items in it — and pay for.

On further thought, I guess we could make redemption centers a destination holiday with water slides, beer garden and the local dance band. But then the Legislature would find something wrong with that and tax it to straighten us out. But also then, how would you get there, with a car full of bags of bottles, no room for the kids.

Adding hundreds of non-carbonated beverages to the deposit/redemption system will divert valuable waste plastic from our curbside recycling. This may well reduce income of the curbside recycling system and increase our cost to recycle.

If the new bottle bill is approved, it will add a second recycling system to our current recycling system. This will cost us more: one cost by our curbside hauler, which we pay for; the other cost by having to haul our deposit bottles to a redemption center, which we also pay for.

Why do we need dual systems? We don’t. This is inefficiency at its worst. And half the bottles we pick up along our dirt road are deposit bottles. So, this bill will not solve the roadside trash problem.

Down with bottle deposits. Up with all containers going to curbside recycling.

Paul Stone lives in Orwell.