Coca-Cola officials claim bottle bill adds unneeded cost to recycling effort

Ray Dube, sustainability manager for Coca Cola of Northern New England, showcases the company’s recycling program during a presentation Thursday in Colchester. Photo by John Herrick/VTDigger

Ray Dube, sustainability manager for Coca Cola of Northern New England, showcases the company’s recycling program during a presentation Thursday in Colchester. Photo by John Herrick/VTDigger

COLCHESTER — Regional Coca-Cola officials said Thursday that the state’s bottle deposit law is increasing the cost of recycling programs that provide waste material to local businesses.

The requirement in Vermont’s current Beverage Container Law, or “bottle bill,” that beverage companies pick up their containers from redemption centers adds an unnecessary expense to the company’s recycling programs, said David Larose, Vermont and New York state manager for Coca-Cola of Northern New England (CCNNE).

The company presented its latest program during a recycling expo at the CCNNE facilities in Colchester on Thursday.

Ray Dube, sustainability manager for CCNNE, said No. 1 polyethylene terephthalate (PET) plastic bottles can be turned into a polyester fiber used in Nike and New Balance sneakers, Vermont Teddy Bear animals and The North Face jackets.

However, even though CCNNE recycles about 6.5 million plastic bottles in a given year, this is not enough to supply the growing demand for the material, Dube said.

“These companies are desperate for material,” Dube said. “If we want to keep them here, we have to supply them with this material.”

The company does not make any money from the program, Dube said, but is looking to reduce the amount it costs to redeem the plastic and send processed material to companies that reuse it for their products.

Under the deposit-redemption system outlined in the bottle bill, the company has to pay handling fees to retrieve their containers from redemption centers. According to the law, companies pay a handling fee of 3.5 or 4 cents per bottle.

David Larose, Vermont and New York state manager for Coca Cola of Northern New England, toured the company's Colchester facility Thursday during an Expo in which the company showcased its latest recycling program. Photo by John Herrick/VTDigger

David Larose, Vermont and New York state manager for Coca Cola of Northern New England, toured the company’s Colchester facility Thursday during an Expo in which the company showcased its latest recycling program. Photo by John Herrick/VTDigger

Supporters of the bottle bill say the 5-cent refundable deposit is an incentive for people to return the containers and that the rate of recycling is much higher for items with a deposit than for those without a deposit.

Larose said the handling fee is an unnecessary cost that his company has to pass on to other Vermont businesses. Larose wants the plastic to go directly to processing facilities instead of lugging it around.

“We are not in the recycling business, we are in the beverage business,” Larose said.

This means sending the plastic through a traditional recycling system rather than depositing them at redemption centers, as the bill encourages with a cash refund on plastic, glass and aluminum cans.

The handling fee for a 750-pound bale of plastic bottles is $510 at 4 cents a bottle, Larose said. To reclaim the bale, the company gets 24.3 cents per pound, or $182.25, he said.

This totals a loss of $328 on the bottles’ value that could otherwise go directly to waste processing companies, such as Casella Waste Systems, if these bottles were simply recycled, Larose said. Waste facilities could then use the money to expand their facilities’ capabilities to recycle other materials and increase the waste diversion rate in the state, he said. The diversion rate is the amount of material that does not go into a landfill.

The deposit incentive

Lauren Hierl, an environmental health advocate for Vermont Public Interest Research Group (VPIRG), an environmental advocacy organization that supports the bottle bill, said the deposit-redemption system reduces waste.

“I don’t think anybody questions the environmental benefits of the bottle bill,” she said.

Hierl said the the bottle return rate under the program is about 75 percent. For traditional, curbside recycling where the plastic goes into a blue box and then is sent to a recycling facility, the diversion rate is about 35 percent, she said.

She said beverage companies should pay a fee to collect their bottles as an incentive to reduce the amount of waste they produce. The principle of “extended producer responsibility,” which means producers account for the long-term impact of their products, is a strategic component of the bill, she said.

There are currently two bills in the Natural Resources and Energy Committee designed to expand Vermont’s bottle redemption program to include all recyclable beverage containers, except those containing milk, H.495 and H.375.

Only carbonated drinks and liquor are redeemable under present law, which was originally passed in 1972 to address littering.

Rep. Tim Jerman, D-Essex Junction, a member of the Natural Resources and Energy Committee, said the committee is studying the benefits of the bottle bill.

The goal of the law is to reduce the amount of waste that goes into landfills, he said. He said the issue is urgent because the state has just one working landfill, located in Coventry.

John Herrick

Leave a Reply

18 Comments on "Coca-Cola officials claim bottle bill adds unneeded cost to recycling effort"


Comment Policy requires that all commenters identify themselves by their authentic first and last names. Initials, pseudonyms or screen names are not permissible.

No personal harassment, abuse, or hate speech is permitted. Be succinct and to the point. If your comment is over 500 words, consider sending a commentary instead.

We personally review and moderate every comment that is posted here. This takes a lot of time; please consider donating to keep the conversation productive and informative.

The purpose of this policy is to encourage a civil discourse among readers who are willing to stand behind their identities and their comments. VTDigger has created a safe zone for readers who wish to engage in a thoughtful discussion on a range of subjects. We hope you join the conversation.

Privacy policy
Sort by:   newest | oldest | most voted
Dennis Shanley
3 years 4 months ago
Way back in the early 1970’s I was driving an MBG. My constant companion was Lucas, the Prince of Darkness. Needless to say, I spent a lot of time hitching rides in those days. I vividly remember one day thumbing on 104 traveling from St. A to Jeff. It was about 8 months after the bottle bill went into effect and something was gnawing at my mind as I trudged along. Suddenly the light bulb (incandescent at that time)in my head lit up, all the beer cans (steel at that time) in the ditch were rusty. Very few deposit cans… Read more »
Fred woogmaster
3 years 4 months ago

Very well stated, Mr. Shanley. I agree.

kathy boyle
3 years 4 months ago
Very well said. It is always about the money. Coca Cola just doesn’t want the expense or headache. Well, too bad. And I also agree that they should raise the deposit, and include ALL beverages in plastic and cans. There are other beneficiaries of the bottle bill besides a more attractive state. Your local bottle redemption center is one of them, as well as, their employees (just ask my teenage son!). When MY father was a boy he collected bottles in MA. They were a nickel then! This was in the 30’and 40’s. It was the only way he could… Read more »
kate griffin
2 years 9 months ago

If a third of the bottlers volume is pet bottles and selling at $.24/lb. then the balance of your volume is mostly aluminum which sells for nearly $.75/lb. which is 3 times as much money and three times more volume. By my calculation you make money on the returned deposits!
Who keeps the deposits that are not paid out?
At 75% return , who keeps the 25% of all the nickels collected , the bottler!

Wayne Andrews
3 years 4 months ago
Dennis: I agree with the original concept of the nickel return but that was in an era when recycling was in its infancy. Hopefully through education we know better today. However there are those that still discard their waste onto the roads and that is what we should be dealing with. With Act 148?? going into effect one portion is in July 2014 recycling is mandatory. (yes another law) Why is it we still need Coke or others to do Vermonts bidding for them? How about the stores charging the nickel or dime per canister, send that money to the… Read more »
Elisabeth Hebert
3 years 4 months ago

Why am I not surprised that this greedy company has only it’s profit in mind and gives a hoot about the public good as Dennis Shanley describes it?
To the Legislature: please do not away with the bottle- bill!

Mike Kerin
3 years 4 months ago

Corporate greed! That is the only reason Coke wants the bottle bill overturned. This law “bottle bill” works! Don’t fix what isn’t broken!

Wayne Andrews
3 years 4 months ago

For all the perfectionists in this world what is going to happen to the district recyclers budgets when the “extra” dime levy” takes away from their respective revenues? Its those non returnables which yields the districts a profit.
Would we think the same of metals at transfer stations?

Rob Simoneau
3 years 4 months ago
“We are not in the recycling business, we are in the beverage business, Larose said.” Yes you are in the recycling business. In Europe and other parts of the world the company who product products must, yes must, take their back. The simple logic is that if you produce the product you have the technology for its proper recycling. From a life cycle point of view this is important since the more plastic bottles we recycle the less oil we have to drill; plastics are made from hydrocarbons, eliminating the resulting pollution and energy that was need to replace the… Read more »
David Ellenbogen
3 years 4 months ago

If Coke is so dedicated to recycling, why did they as a corporation vote against a shareholder proposition about 10 years ago to increase the percentage of recycled plastic in its bottles to a mere 30%? It’s all about money for Coke (like most large corporations), and it’s their poor luck that bottles are one of the only items where the disposal cost of the packaging is not left for society to pick up on its own dime.

mike johnson
3 years 4 months ago

Coke’s dedication to recycling is only a facade. They want to promote recycling, but rarely do very little to actually ensure that their containers get recycled. In fact, they buy up material from the very bottle bill states they condemn just to boost their recycling numbers. If it wasn’t for the deposit systems, recycling rates of PET and for aluminum cans would be dismal.

Connie Godin
3 years 4 months ago

Keep and expand the bottle bill, sick of the water and ice tea bottle garbage all over the side of the roads and in town and everywhere.

Bradford Morgan
3 years 4 months ago

Wow! Not one right wing nut standing up for Coke. Keep it up, it works and extend the program to every bottle.

3 years 4 months ago

Coke just wants to save money. They have never really cared about the environment nor anyone’s health. That isn’t their fault. Corporations today falsely focus on maximizing profits to hell with anything else. It is up to the people to have them behave a certain way in their communities through laws and regulations. If it was up to Coke they would be fine if we just tossed the bottles roadside and left them there forever.

Marty Manahan
3 years 4 months ago

I think a main point that seems to be miising is what the bottle bill does for our economy. How many people pick up bottles and return them to supplement their income? How many “bottle drives” are there for community programs such as boy scouts, youth sports programs, community projects? What about the number of school kids that are employed in redemption centers at your local convenience stores. if the bottle bill goes away so does all of the above.

Mike Elmer
3 years 4 months ago

Beverage companies lose $$ on the Aluminum & plastic they sell. The handling fee wipes out any profit from those materials. Many would say, so what?

Waste companies & towns would make money by selling all of that scrap — it can help fuel more efficient curbside programs that collect ALL categories of recycling materials, public space bins & collection routines etc…whatever an individual community needs to make a step change in its diversion. That is where the real recycling can have a positive impact in reducing landfills.

Maureen Beach
3 years 4 months ago

This bottle bill ultimately amounts to a tax on hard-working Vermonters, many of whom are already struggling to make ends’ meet or are living on a fixed income. Such policies are regressive and can also be harmful to small businesses and the jobs they provide.

Steven Wolk
3 years 3 months ago
I must assume, as in any business, that distributors such as Coke would have the cost of redemption figured into the cost of their product. Hmm, let me think, oh yeah they do. When a store pays for the product coming in they have to pay the deposit. It is passed on from distributor to store to consumer. That is the simple version of any business. So how is it the distributors can claim it costs them money?! The bottle bill works. It has the best rate of recycling. I dare to say, that if there was a way to… Read more »
Thanks for reporting an error with the story, "Coca-Cola officials claim bottle bill adds unneeded cost to recycling..."