Why doesn't Washington have a deposti on bottle & cans ?

Home Forums Open forum Why doesn't Washington have a deposti on bottle & cans ?

This topic contains 7 replies, has 7 voices, and was last updated by  GAM 2 years, 7 months ago.

Viewing 8 posts - 1 through 8 (of 8 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #81427

    BuffaloHawk
    Participant

    When I walk around I see so many discarded bottle and cans littering the state. I thought we where supposed to be an earth conscious green state. Even if some people still chose to avoid returning them to redeem there deposit I am sure some homeless folks and kids would collect them for the profit.

    #81429

    BuffaloHawk
    Participant

    I also asked this question on Reddit-Seattle and found this response interesting if true.

    from wikipedia… Washington State Latter 1970’s (5¢) aluminum can and (10¢) glass bottle return voted for and unanimously passed. Before implementation, state lawmakers repealed the law stating publicly that Washington State voters did not know what they had voted for. Mostly due to lobbying by large recycling companies not wanting to lose profits.

    #81433

    SmartsyArtsy
    Participant

    As much as I think it is a good way for the homeless and lower income people to make some cash, and possibly a way to increase recycling, it invites intrusive behavior to our side and backyards. Was not a problem in that way in NYC, but does increase trash on the streets because of ripped open bags. Here, at least the recycles must be in containers.

    So, I am conflicted.

    #81446

    JM98107
    Participant

    Street people do collect aluminum cans and sell them by the pound to local metal recycling companies. Not sure how much they make, but we see this happening around Capitol Hill more than Ballard. They travel the alleys digging through the recycle bins, smash the cans and haul them away. It’s pretty common in NYC too. A film was made about it a couple of years ago.

    #81447

    lakreitz
    Participant

    Temporarily, I am in California, a state with a CRV on beverage bottles. Trust me, the tax doesn’t reduce littering – there is litter, including bottles and cans, all over the place. The average consumer doesn’t return the container for the .05 deposit. The ‘deposit’ is taken everywhere. Return locations are few and far between. The closest one to my house is three miles away in a location not really on the way to anyplace I go regularly. So I am not going to pop by to collect by .30 for an empty six pack. My yard is small and I don’t want to collect containers until I have enough to justify a separate a trip. So like most people, I put them in the recycle container. Sometimes they are picked up by scavengers. And scavengers come by at night, make a lot of noise and wake me as they go through containers. Scavenging is illegal, so from time to time there are ‘stings’ and these poor folks are given tickets! Scavenging levels seem down lately. I think it has more to do with the salvage price that cans and glass are getting more than anything else. There are mountains of recyclables in our country looking for their next life.

    Back in the day, I remember that bottle deposit end-run. What jerks! Even though I’ve changed my mind about the effectiveness of the deposit, it doesn’t change my opinion that our legislators were sell-outs.

    #81673

    Richy
    Participant

    BH, anyone can make a wiki post – the ballot was rejected by the voters of Washington state

    Washington Initiative 61 (1979)

    Shall a system requiring a minimum five cent refund on sales of beer, malt and carbonated beverage containers be established?

    Result Defeated

    No 57.63%
    Yes 42.37%
    this is available from the state archives

    Also it was brought back in 1982 as Initiative 414

    Shall a system requiring a minimum five cent refund on sales of beer, malt and carbonated beverage containers be established?

    it was defeated by a 71% vote

    #81675

    electricoutlet
    Participant

    Re BuffleHawk’s comment on the 1979 initiative. How could an initiative unanimously pass? That would mean every single voter voted for it. Ballotpedia also shows the 1979 initiative was defeated. I have lived in Oregon and Washington and I greatly prefer the recycling the way we have it here in Seattle. In the long run I think more gets recycled because it is easy. Returning bottles and cans was a big pain. I did it but I much prefer our current method.

    #81676

    GAM
    Participant

    I took that that to mean it passed in each county. But that’s a stretch considering our typical east/west divide.

Viewing 8 posts - 1 through 8 (of 8 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.