The disagreements over the state’s bottle recycling program are as widespread as the mountains of recyclable bottles and cans that litter Rhode Island’s roads, beaches and waterways.
It is no surprise, therefore, that debate over the bottle bill was once again clouded with controversy on Wednesday night.
In a stuffy hearing room on the second floor of the state Capitol, arguments raged for hours as supporters and opponents sat elbow to elbow, waiting to present their cases before the House Environment and Natural Resources Committee.
Their arguments, punctuated by the intermittent blaring of cellphone alarms signaling the end of their two-minute speaking time, sounded much the same as in years past. Environmental activists supported the deposit-refund scheme as a way to reduce waste and encourage recycling, but retail owners and business associations vehemently opposed what they saw as an unwelcome financial and administrative burden.
However, the latest version of the bottle bill legislation, The bill, introduced May 24 by Rep. Carol McEntee, a Democrat from South Kingstown, is a stark departure from previous versions, leaving many of the most controversial elements up to state regulators and beverage manufacturers to decide.
“We intentionally left this bill vague so that there could be tweaks,” McEntee said in an interview before the hearing. “This is a framework. We have the framework, but we need to make it work for Rhode Island.”
Like previous proposals, this billIt will provide a refundable deposit scheme for recyclable beverage containers (plastic, glass and aluminium bottles and cans), ranging from small 50ml alcohol containers (known as “nips”) to three-litre soda bottles. 10 other states Customers across the US, including in Connecticut, Massachusetts, Maine and Vermont, will pay a 10-cent fee per bottle at stores and get a refund if they return the empty bottle, can or nip.
Rather than dictating where empty bottles should be sent (a contentious issue among retailers in the past), the bill calls for the rules to be written by a new non-profit contractor hired by beverage manufacturers. The Producer Responsibility Organization (PRO) will work with the Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management (DEM) to set up and execute the required bottle return and exchange components.
PROs will also be responsible for helping meet state recycling goals, including mandating a 90 percent bottle return rate by the eighth year of the program’s implementation, and working with producers to increase the percentage of containers made from reusable materials.
“This is the simplest, least restrictive bottle bill in the country,” McEntee told lawmakers on Wednesday, “and it gives the beverage industry some leeway to write the rules.”
And because producers pay the administrative costs of running the PROs, there’s no cost to state taxpayers, McEntee said. The lack of federal funding has been a big selling point for states across the country, 35 of which have adopted an “extended producer responsibility approach” and are committed to some form of recycling, from paper and plastics to electronics, batteries and mercury thermostats. of October report from the National Conference of State Legislatures.
Rhode Island’s recycling problems are no secret: From sidewalks and ponds to the mountains at the sprawling 154-acre Central Landfill in Johnston, recyclable bottles and cans are increasingly being tossed in places they shouldn’t be.
This is the simplest, least restrictive approach to a bottle bill in the country, giving the beverage industry the leeway to make the rules.
– Rep. Carol McEntee, Democrat from South Kingstown and sponsor of the bill.
In Rhode Island, less than one-third of recyclable bottles and cans are recycled. According to a January 2023 report: The Rhode Island Resources Recovery Authority is a quasi-public agency that runs the state’s central landfill and materials recycling facility. Most of it ends up in landfills or thrown away as trash. The landfill operator says nips are a particular problem because they’re too small to be separated by recycling equipment.
Not so concisely named Special Joint Legislative Committee The Rhode Island Environmental Protection Commission, which studies and recommends ways to protect the environment and natural resources from plastic bottle waste, has been talking with environmental groups, business representatives and experts from other states for the past 10 months about how to reconcile competing interests for Rhode Island’s program. McEntee co-chaired the committee, but he stressed that the bill does not reflect the views of all 18 commissioners.
But, she added:Much of the information about this bill was heard and made available to me and other members of this committee.”
One option: A Maine company has developed a QR code-based automated bag drop redemption system for recyclable bottles and cans. ClickCEO Matt Prindiville was in Providence on Wednesday. Explaining his company’s technological solutions The company has maintained high customer satisfaction and increased recycling rates in its operational states of Maine, New York, Oregon and Iowa, and plans to soon expand into Connecticut.
“Extended producer responsibility alone won’t solve the waste problem,” he says. “You need a return system, and the best system is one that maximizes convenience and value for the consumer.”
McEntee, along with other members of the study committee, supported a bag drop return system, but the bill leaves it up to PROs and DEMs to decide how and where customers can return their empties.
That worries Jed Thorpe, Rhode Island state director for Clean Water Action. Making the return process convenient for customers is widely considered a key principle of a successful program. Offering too few options could defeat the program’s objectives, Thorpe said in an interview Wednesday.
““Without a few more details for convenience and a few more safeguards, we get a little nervous,” Thorpe said.
Strong opposition from the alcohol and beverage industry
Dozens of liquor store owners and beverage industry lobbyists also cited a lack of specifics as the reason for the pause.
““Without understanding the obligations we have, it’s nearly impossible to respond thoughtfully for our business,” said Jackie Mancini, senior vice president of business operations for West Greenwich-based wholesaler Mancini Beverages, who also sits on the study committee representing the National Beer Wholesalers Association.
“There are a number of issues in the bottle bill that our industry cannot support,” Mancini said.
When asked what that challenge is, she replied, “I don’t know yet.”
Pressed by lawmakers for preferred alternatives, many of the opponents were unable to offer one, or fell back on a familiar refrain heard in past legislative sessions: a combination of education and upgrading the Central Landfill’s 20-year-old Materials Recycling Facility (MRF).
Tensions rose above the atmosphere as lawmakers grew frustrated when critics were unable to clearly answer questions about whether they supported the bottle bill in any form or had another solution in mind.
“Please, please, come up with something, otherwise we’re just going to pass a bill and you’re going to have to figure out how to pay for it,” said Rep. Kathleen Fogarty, a Democrat from South Kingstown.
“I’m looking for ideas, you’re looking for ideas, and this is the best idea I’ve ever seen,” said Rep. Jason Knight, a Democrat from Barrington. “Why not give PRO a chance?”
Lawmakers, following standard practice in the first hearing on a bill, put McEntee’s bill on hold for further consideration.
But the clock is ticking on a legislative session that is widely expected to end next week, as well as a June 10 deadline for the bottle study committee to submit its recommendations to Congress.
Thorpe acknowledged that the chances of meeting either deadline were fading fast, and he framed Wednesday’s hearing as an opportunity to solicit input rather than an attempt to pass the bill before the end of the year.
“There are lots of different avenues to explore, so it makes sense to have some concrete things on paper that people can respond to,” Thorpe said. “It helps get the conversation going.”
House Speaker K. Joseph Shekarki and Sen. Dominic Ruggerio echoed similar sentiments in a joint emailed statement on Wednesday.
“The bottle bill is a highly complex issue with strong divided opinions,” they said. “We are committed to working with all stakeholders and want to extend the life of the bipartisan joint committee because there is still much work to be done to reach an agreement.”
What about Gov. Dan McKee?
““If this bill passes the state Legislature later this year, the Governor will review the version that reaches his desk,” Olivia DaRocha, a spokeswoman for the governor’s office, said in an email Wednesday.
McEntee remained optimistic even though his bill was introduced late in the session and a companion bill has not yet been introduced in the Senate.
“I would like to see the bill passed this year,” she said before the hearing.
DEM has not taken a position on the bill, department spokesman Evan LaCrosse said in an email Wednesday.
If approved, the bill would go into effect on July 1, 2024, but the original program requirements for producers would not apply until July 1, 2025.
Get morning headlines delivered to your inbox
