Beverage Container Waste Sets Record in 1998, Recycling Declines 

Container and Packaging Recycling UPDATE v.X, n.2 Fall 2000

Beverage container waste increased by 48 percent from 1992 to 1998. Americans threw away a record 94.2 billion beverage containers in 1998. These findings are based upon analysis of industry data by the Container Recycling Institute (CRI). The recycling rate for beverage containers dropped from 53.8 percent in 1992 to 44.7 percent in 1998. (see graph on page 8) During the seven-year period beverage sales grew from 137 billion to 170 billion containers. Beverage container waste increased at twice the rate of beverage container sales. The analysis covered the years from 1992 to 1998. Beverages included in the analysis were soft drinks, beer, wine, spirits, water, juice, teas and sport drinks.

CRI identified growth in single-serving beverages as a major factor in the growing waste problem. Single-serve beverages are often purchased and consumed away from home, where there are fewer opportunities to recycle. The wasting of both plastic and aluminum grew dramatically, while glass container waste remained fairly constant. One explanation for this, according to CRI, is the fact that beer bottles comprise 71 percent of glass beverage packaging. Beer is a beverage generally consumed at home or in commercial establishments where recycling opportunities are well established. Recycling rates in states with beverage container deposit systems remain two to three time s higher than in nondeposit states. Those rates, too, are declining. One state, Michigan, continues to recycle deposit beverage container; at rates above 90 percent. The container deposit in Michigan is 10-cents while most deposit states have a 5-cent deposit.

"The state with the highest deposit maintained its recycling rate over the period analyzed. CRTs analysis suggests that in the current strong economy a higher deposit is necessary to maintain high recycling rates," CRI Executive Director Pat Franklin said.

CRI Research Shows Congress Wasted Millions of Beverage Containers Since 1995

Everyday the Congress of the United States is throwing away hard-earned taxpayer dollars and precious resources. After a months-long independent analysis, environmental groups recently released findings showing millions of dollars have been lost over the past. 5 years due to poor recycling and waste management practices at the U.S. Capitol. Records from the Architect of the Capitol, who manages these programs, show that 71 percent of the paper collected in fiscal year 1999 for recycling was so contaminated that Congress received no revenue.

Taxpayers lost at least $300,000 due to failure to separate paper for recycling at the source in congressional offices, and keep it free of contamination. More money was lost in FY-2000, the groups said, due to the higher market value of recycled papers, particularly high-grade office paper, cardboard and newsprint.

The Container Recycling Institute got involved after news reports indicated that the Architect of the Capitol is doing very little beverage container recycling and Congress received almost no revenue for millions of containers discarded in the past several years. "Our elected representatives in Washington should follow the example of the majority of Americans who recycle their beverage containers," CRI Executive Director Pat Franklin said.

Research by CRI shows that an estimated 63 million beverage containers, worth nearly $1 million dollars in secondary recycling markets, have been wasted by Congress since 1995. These findings were presented in a National Press Club news conference on October 2, 2000.

CRI joined Friends of the Earth, the GrassRoots Recycling Network, the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees Local 626 and former U.S. House of Representatives Recycling Coordinator Pat Dollar in detailing major problems in the congressional recycling program. Franklin recommended steps to reduce the wasting of beverage containers, including setting up new collection facilities in public areas such as restaurants, cafeterias and outside on the Capitol grounds.

CRI urges its readers and supporters to write, call or e-mail their representatives in Congress, to institute a successful recycling program that will serve as an example to other government and commercial office complexes across the country.

For more information check the Internet at www.recyclecongress.org.

Plastics Lead Growth in Sales and Waste

Sales of beverages in PET plastic containers grew from 12 billion in 1992 to 34.6 billion in 1998, an increase of 190 percent. PET plastic bottle waste increased by 210 percent during the same period.

Wasting of PET custom bottles, such as' water, juice, sports drinks and other noncarbonated beverages increased 400 percent during die seven-year period.

Aluminum Waste Increased Rapidly

Sales of beverages packaged in aluminum increased by a modest 10 percent from 92.4 billion cans in 1992 to 102 billion in 1998. By contrast, aluminum beverage container waste increased by 44 percent, from 32 billion to 46 billion cans during the same time period.

As in the case of single-serve plastic bottles, beverages in aluminum cans are often consumed away from home and discarded.

Glass Recycling Increases

Sales of beverages in glass bottles increased just two percent, from 32.9 billion bottles in 1992 to 33.8 billion in 1998. Recycling of glass bottles increased by 17 percent during that time period.

Glass is losing beverage market share to plastic, but remains the package of choice in the beer industry. Very little

glass is used for soft drinks and glass is declining in the non-carbonated category of beverages.

Need for New Incentives, Collection Systems

The Container Recycling Institute analysis shows a growing crisis in beverage container recycling. "We see a need for new incentives and collection systems to stem the growing beverage container waste problem," said Franklin.

The American Plastics Council (APC) and the National Soft Drink Association are promoting an'all bottle' program to increase the supply of PET plastic bottles for recycling.

APC reports that the 'all bottle' program increases recovery of PET and HDPE bottles without increasing other resin types for which there are either limited markets or no markets, and reports a decrease in #3's through #7's with no evidence of contamination.

Local officials in some communities are critical of the 'all bottle' program. This summer Albany, New York switched from an all-plastic bottle program to collecting only PET and HDPE, due to contamination problems, according to Joe Giebelhaus, the city's Solid Waste Manager.

Not all of the contamination was due to the 'all plastic bottle' program, but Giebelhaus says that the contamination rate dropped from 40 percent to 13 percent after the 'all bottle program' was discontinued.

Kevin Miller, Recycling Coordinator for the city of Napa, California says the 'all bottle' program perpetuates the notion that all plastic bottles are recyclable. "Nothing could be further from the truth," said Miller. "Our experience with the' all bottle' program in Napa was that bottles were collected and separated, only to be thrown out."

Napa was part of a 1997 APC 'all bottle' pilot study

CRI Executive Director, Pat Franklin cites three major concerns with the 'all bottle' program:

1) Contamination: Polyvinyl chloride (PVC) bottles are a major contaminant to the PET bottle recycling stream
2) Economics: 'All bottle' programs increase collection and sorting costs for local governments and recyclers.
3) Markets: Markets are limited for some of the #3 - #7 plastic bottles and virtually non-existent for others. These bottles will likely end up in a landfill.