Container Recycling Institute c 2003 1
APR Meeting - February 18, 2002Albuquerque, NM
Can the Downward Trend ofPET Recycling be Reversed?
CONTAINER RECYCLING INSTITUTE
CRI
Pat Franklin, Executive Director Container Recycling Institute
Container Recycling Institute c 2003 2
Recycling Rates: PET and HDPE
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002
PETHDPE
38%
20%
Percent
CONTAINER RECYCLING INSTITUTE
CRI
Source: “2002 National Post-Consumer Plastics Recycling Report.” R.W. Beck, Inc. for the American Plastics Council. 2003.
12%
24%
Container Recycling Institute c 2003 3
Two Crucial RPET Supply Issues
Supply from current collection infrastructures is stagnant
More and more volume going to Asian markets
CONTAINER RECYCLING INSTITUTE
CRI
Container Recycling Institute c 2003 4
1388 1713 21692906
3445 4017
986 10711538 2196 2687 3220
402 642 631 710 758 7970
10002000300040005000
1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002Recycled
LandfilledSold
Mm lbs
CONTAINER RECYCLING INSTITUTE
CRI
Source: “2002 National Post-Consumer Plastics Recycling Report.” R.W. Beck, Inc. for the American Plastics Council. 2003.
PET Bottle Growth Strong….PET Bottle Recycling Stagnant
1992-2002
Container Recycling Institute c 2003 5
Exported RPET Sales Growing
656 89
588 183
599 170
600 234
522 275
0 300 600 900
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
DomesticExported
CONTAINER RECYCLING INSTITUTE
CRI
Source: “2002 Report on Post Consumer PET Container Recycling Activity.” NAPCOR. 2002.
Mm lbs
Container Recycling Institute c 2003 6
Domestic RPET End Use Changing
1999
Other16%
Fiber51%
Strapping12%
Containers13%
Film/Sheet8%
2002
Strapping16%
Fiber54%
Film/Sheet2%
Containers23%
Other5%
CONTAINER RECYCLING INSTITUTE
CRI
Source: “1999 and 2002 National Post-Consumer Plastics Recycling Report.” R.W. Beck, Inc. for the American Plastics Council. 2000 and 2003.
Container Recycling Institute c 2003 7
1. Voluntary mechanisms insufficient
2. Stakeholder initiatives have failed3. Deposits have proven record of
success
CONTAINER RECYCLING INSTITUTE
CRI
Container Recycling Institute c 2003 8
Voluntary Systems Inadequate
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
% of Population Served by CurbsidePET Bottle Recycling RateAluminum Can Recycling Rate
Percent
CONTAINER RECYCLING INSTITUTE
CRIS
o urc
e: B
ioC
y cle
, Am
eric
an P
l as t
i cs
Cou
ncil,
A
l um
i nu m
As s
ocia
tion ,
US
Cha
mb e
r of C
omm
erc e
Container Recycling Institute c 2003 9
Stakeholder initiatives have failed to create new supply
APR Supply Committee NAPCOR Initiatives BEAR Multi-Stakeholder Project APC Initiatives NSDA Efforts
CONTAINER RECYCLING INSTITUTE
CRI
Container Recycling Institute c 2003 10
Deposits Have Record of Success
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002
PET Soda
Custom PET53%
10%
31%
11%
Percent
CONTAINER RECYCLING INSTITUTE
CRI
Source: “2002 National Post-Consumer Plastics Recycling Report.” R.W. Beck, Inc. for the American Plastics Council. 2003.
Recycling Rates: PET Soda and Custom PET
Container Recycling Institute c 2003 11
PET Soda Bottle Recycling Rates
31%
70%
10% 11%
0200400600800
10001200140016001800
All CollectionSystems
"Deposits" in 10Deposit States
"Curbside" in 10Deposit States
"Curbside" in 40Non-Deposit States
SoldRecycled
Source: CRI based on data from “2002 National Post-Consumer Plastics Recycling Report.” R.W. Beck, Inc. for the American Plastics Council, 2003 and CRI assumptions.
CONTAINER RECYCLING INSTITUTE
CRI
Container Recycling Institute c 2003 12
Bottle Bills Supply Lion’s Share of CSD RPET
Curbside10 B B States
29% of US Pop50 m m lbs
D eposit System10 BB States
29% of US Pop351 m m lbs
Curbside40 N on-BB States
71% of US Pop137 m m lbs
Supply of CSD R PETin 2002
537 m m lbs
CONTAINER RECYCLING INSTITUTE
CRI
Source: CRI estimates based on APC data for volume of CSD PET bottles sold and recycling rate in 2002 and assuming average redemption rate of 70% and 10% of CSD PET recycled through curbside programs in deposit states.
Container Recycling Institute c 2003 13
Why is the deposit system so successful?
Modeled after the beverage industry’s system for collecting refillable beer, soft drink and milk bottles
Refundable deposit provides financial incentive to return container for recycling
CONTAINER RECYCLING INSTITUTE
CRI
Container Recycling Institute c 2003 14
CONTAINER RECYCLING INSTITUTE
CRI
The perception is that . . . bottle bills are BAD for business allocation of costs are unfair
Why aren’t there more deposit laws?
Container Recycling Institute c 2003 15
Beverage container recycling: Who Pays? At what cost?
Total Annual
Recovery(billions of
units)
Per Capita Recovery
(units)
% of Total US Annual
Recovery
Cents Per Unit
40 Non-deposit States(71% of US Population)
38.2 191 49% 1.25
10 Deposit States(29% of US Population)
40.0 490 51% 1.53
(a) Includes revenues from material sales; does not include the forfeited deposit value of unredeemed
containers.Source: Table ES-1, “Understanding Beverage Container Recycling: A Value Chain Assessment Prepared for the Multi-Stakeholder Recovery Project ,” Businesses and Environmentalists Allied for Recycling (BEAR), 2002.
CONTAINER RECYCLING INSTITUTE
CRI
Container Recycling Institute c 2003 16
What can we expect on legislative front in next few years?
BOTTLE BILL SUPPORTERS
More new bottle bills introduced
More expansion proposals introduced
BOTTLE BILL OPPONENTS
Millions of dollars spent to defeat new and expanded bottle bills
More repeal bills introduced
CONTAINER RECYCLING INSTITUTE
CRI
Container Recycling Institute c 2003 17
CONTAINER RECYCLING INSTITUTE
CRI
What have you got to lose by supporting deposit systems?
What have you got to lose if you don’t support deposit systems?
Container Recycling Institute c 2003 18
“Society is telling us in unmistakable terms that we share equally with the public, the responsibility for package retrieval and disposal. . . . This industry has spent hundreds of millions of dollars. in the attempt to dispute, deflect, or evade that message.”
Dwight Reed, President National Soft Drink Association1980
CONTAINER RECYCLING INSTITUTE
CRI
Container Recycling Institute c 2003 19
New Yorkers Like Their Bottle Bill
Strongly opposed
8%
Don't know/refuse
2%Somewhat opposed
6%
Somewhat support
34%
Strongly support
50%
84% support it; only 14% are opposed
CONTAINER RECYCLING INSTITUTE
CRI
Source: “Survey of New York Registered Voters: Attitudes Toward New York’s Bottle Bill and Proposed Reforms”, Public Policy Associates, Inc, Feb. 2004.
Container Recycling Institute c 2003 20
Potential Supply of RPET
200
160
250
0100200300400500600700
PA, FL (No Proposal atthis time)WV, TN, UT, AR, NH,MS, CO (New BB's)CT, NY, MI, MA, OR, IA(Expanded BB's)
CONTAINER RECYCLING INSTITUTE
CRI
Source: Container Recycling Institute estimates based on data from Beverage Marketing Corporation and Beverage World magazine.
Mm lbs
Container Recycling Institute c 2003 21
New demand for RPET can only develop from new supply.
CONTAINER RECYCLING INSTITUTE
CRI
Container Recycling Institute c 2003 22
Was
te N
ews
N
ovem
ber 2
4, 2
003
Financial Incentives Boost Recycling
Container Recycling Institute c 2003 23
1. Voluntary mechanisms insufficient
2. Stakeholder initiatives have failed3. Deposits have proven record of
success
CONTAINER RECYCLING INSTITUTE
CRI The PET Supply Crisis: A Problem in Need of a Solution
Container Recycling Institute c 2003 24
Can the Downward Trend ofPET Recycling be Reversed?
CONTAINER RECYCLING INSTITUTE
CRI
Container Recycling Institute1911 Ft. Myer Drive, Suite 900
Arlington, Virginia 22209703.276.9800
email: [email protected]
Visit us on the web at:www.container-recycling.org
www.bottlebill.org
CONTAINER RECYCLING INSTITUTE
CRI
Top Related