Taxing all non-carbonated beverages by expanding Connecticut's bottle bill simply doesn't make sense.  Why?

HIGH COST: Expanding the bottle bill would be extremely expensive considering the small benefit.
• Recycling beverage containers through the bottle bill would cost more than $5,000 per ton of material recycled. That compares to $500 per ton for the current bottle bill and $150 per ton for curbside recycling.

INCONVENIENT: You can already recycle these bottles with Your other recyclables.
• Who wants to separate juice and water bottles from other containers and drag them back to the store? Redeeming containers is slow an inefficient.

• Putting these bottles in your curbside bin with the rest of your recyclables takes less time and costs a lot less.

INEFFECTIVE: Expanding the bottle bill would have an insignificant environmental impact.
• The impact of deposits on litter would be negligible. Non-carbonated beverage containers as a whole account for less than 1.3% of total litter; water bottles are only a fraction of that.

• The same goes for recycling. All the expense to expand the bottle bill would add less than 1/3 of 1% to Connecticut’s statewide recycling rate.

---

4 Reasons to Oppose Bill No. 1289 and Expanding the Bottle Bill (pdf).

Read the testimony of Kevin Dietly (pdf) of Northbridge Environmental about the significant financial impact but minimal recycling increase if the bottle bill were to be expanded.

Read the testimony of Warren Boyle, owner of Fitzgerald’s Foods in Simsbury, on the impact expanding the bottle bill will have on small independent supermarkets.

View a diagram (pdf) of how much more complicated and expensive expanding the bottle bill would be rather than relying on the already effective use of curbside recycling.