BEN CANNON, a Portland representative, held up two cans of Rockstar on the floor of the Oregon Legislature last Wednesday, May 4. One, a carbonated energy drink, was worth a nickel if returned to a recycling center. The other, a coffee concoction, was not carbonated and therefore worthless.

Oregon set a national precedent when it passed the country’s first Bottle Bill in 1971. Last week the House passed a major expansion of the recycling-friendly law, sewing up some of its gaping loopholes.

Under the new rules, energy drink and juice bottles (but not milk, wine, or liquor bottles) will become redeemable in 2018. Redemption rates in Oregon have dropped from 90 percent in the ’70s to 75 percent (likely because a nickel these days has the worth of a quarter back then), but the new bill would bump deposits up to a dime if rates stay below 80 percent.

The bill also encourages the development of giant recycling centers to centralize the redemption operations found at most supermarkets.

Sure, it’s progress, but not until seven years from now.

“It’s longer than I would have liked,” says Cannon, who admits 2018 “reflects a bit of a compromise.” Beverage distributors would have opposed the bill if it kicked in soonerโ€”they keep customers’ unredeemed deposits, so they net millions in nickels when redemption rates are low.

But it’s not Salem politicians, or beverage companies, who will feel the biggest impact of the new bottle billโ€”it’s the people who make their primary income redeeming bottles and cans. I ran the bill past a few regular collectors turning in their daily haul at the Hollywood Fred Meyer on Monday morning, May 9.

BOBBY HILBRAN

Daily Recycling Income: $20

Hours Spent Collecting: Hilbran hits the streets at the “crease of dawn,” usually from about 2-6 am

Bottle Bill Critique: “It’s good. I mean, you can just drive across the bridge into Washington and there’s bottles and cans all over the road.” But the bill should kick in now, not in 2018. “It should have already been done. We were a progressive state once, now look how we lag behind.”

Canning as Career: “It is what it is: an honest living.”

SCOTT MATTHEW

Daily Recycling Income: $40-60

Hours Spent Collecting: 2-3 hours daily

Collecting Tips: Matthew doesn’t have to do a lot of rootingโ€”he sweeps the loading docks of Lloyd District hotels in exchange for their sacks of recyclables.

Bottle Bill Critique: “I think it should go up to 10 cents to give people an incentive to recycle,” says Matthew. But the bill’s plan to centralize recycling in several large redemption centers will create a hardship for people like him, who haul cans on foot or in shopping carts. As for the timing, 2018 seems fatally far off. “I won’t be alive by then,” says Matthew. “But I don’t think they should kick it in sooner, because it’s going to take a long time for people to adjust.”

General Heroism: Matthew, a formerly homeless veteran who got into housing thanks to Central City Concern, says he donates much of his can income to the nonprofit and gets by on disability checks.

DJ SANTINI

Daily Recycling Income: $20-40

Hours Spent Collecting: All day

Best Neighborhood for Collectors: Laurelhurst, or “anywhere with rich people.”

Bottle Bill Critique: Expanding the number of redeemable bottles would make her very happy. “That’d be awesome. As the cops say, at least I’m out canning, not robbing people.” But wine bottles should be covered in the bill, she says. She sees a lot of those, and they’re unredeemable.

Sarah Shay Mirk reported on transportation, sex and gender issues, and politics at the Mercury from 2008-2013. They have gone on to make many things, including countless comics and several books.

5 replies on “Yes, We Can”

  1. Great angle on this.

    I’m totally unconvinced that the amount of metal saved from landfills by the bottle bill is worth all the trouble, money and (most importantly) untold hours spent by the public to get their nickels back. But it is nice that it lets broke folks do the public’s work, with nobody’s permission, while keeping roofs over their heads.

  2. After reading this article the other day, I went to the grocery store and bought a carbonated beverage in a bottle, among other things. For this purchase I used a combination of food stamps and cash. I noticed that not only is the beverage food-stamp elligible, but WIC also pays the bottle deposit. If Oregon bottle distributors’ annual income from unredeemed deposits is $20-30 million, I wonder what portion of that is meant for individuals and families in need? Maybe the distributors should step up to the plate and start making substantial donations to hunger relief programs. Or maybe the Feds should ask for a bit of that cash back?

  3. It’s not the amount of metal saved from landfills that matters, it’s the amount of rubbish at the side of the road.

    Litter begets litter, so we get a triple reward: Throwing away a can is throwing away money, so folk are less apt to do it, less cans on the road means less people drop their cans, and those that are dumped get picked up by folks trying to earn a little scratch.

    Now if we could just put a deposit on fast food wrappers.

Comments are closed.