Buried Treasure

With a recycling rate in the vicinity of 50 percent, the aluminum industry certainly appears to have successfully conveyed its recyclability message to consumers in the United States. However, the recycling rate for these used beverage containers has declined continually during the past five years and is substantially lower than the 65 percent recycling rate achieved in 1992.

The Container Recycling Institute (CRI), a non-profit organization based in Arlington, Va., that studies beverage container sales and recycling trends, estimates that more than 1 trillion cans have been disposed of since 1972. These trashed cans amount to buried treasure for the aluminum industry, recyclers and municipalities.

"If [Americans] knew that they were wasting $500 million a year in aluminum cans, I believe that more people would do something about that," Robin King, vice president of Public Affairs for the Aluminum Association, Washington, says.

Additionally, primary smelters are being built outside of North America, representing lost job opportunities for North Americans and exerting a significant toll on the environment.

"New smelters are being constructed in the Brazilian rainforest, on fertile lands in Mozambique and in the heart of Europe’s largest remaining wilderness: the Vatnakoejull Glacier in Iceland," CRI Research Director Jenny Gitlitz says. "One of these smelters might produce 300,000 tons of aluminum per year, less than half of what thirsty Americans toss in the garbage can each year."

The factors contributing to the declining UBC recycling rate are many and varied, according to industry observers. Among those most often cited are the stagnant scrap price, light-weighting of aluminum cans, increasing away-from-home consumption and the public’s disinterest in recycling.

CONTRIBUTING FACTORS. "Each regional market has its own quirks," Darryl Young, director of the California Department of Conservation, Sacramento, says. "In California, there is a lack of financial incentive to recycle. Whether or not you are in a deposit state, the relative value of the aluminum has not necessarily kept up with inflation. That is one of the reasons why in California we have increased the deposit," he says. "There was a UC-Berkeley study that said if we increased the CRV (California redemption value), that we could increase the recycling rate up to about 90 percent."

In January of this year, the CRV increased to 4 cents from 2.5 cents for beverage containers holding less than 24 ounces and to 8 cents from 5 cents for containers holding 24 ounces or more.

Young says preliminary results reveal an increase in the number of cans collected. However, the numbers for the first quarter of this year have yet to be finalized.

King says that consumers are not acquainted with the true value of the aluminum can because conflicting information dilutes the message. "Deposits in some states are five or 10 cents. Therefore, the consumer is left thinking that it is really worth five or 10 cents or that a plastic bottle is equally worth five or 10 cents, and that is not true."

He continues, "There is a tendency for these programs to not convey any sense of value of the material, and that is a big barrier."

In addition to price, Tom Mele of Connecticut Metal Industries, a company based in Monroe, Conn., that specializes in recycling aluminum packaging scrap, says consumer indifference contributes to the declining UBC rate.

"Recycling no longer has the political cache it enjoyed in the ‘80s, and our retail price for cans last year was the same we paid back then," he says.

"We paid 40 cents [per pound] for cans when minimum wage was $2.25 an hour. Today, we are still paying close to that, and McDonalds is $7 to start, with free lunch and a uniform," he continues.

Ken Goldberg at Gold Metal Recycling, Dallas, agrees that depressed pricing has affected the recycling rate. When coupled with the weight reductions cans have undergone throughout the years, the numbers no longer add up for many scavengers.

"Until the last six months, the price has been depressed for so long, combined with the fact that it takes so many more cans to make a pound, that it got really frustrating for the people that were out there recycling," Goldberg says.

Gitlitz’ figures illustrate that point. In 1980, it took 25 aluminum cans to make a pound, while it currently takes 33.5 cans to make a pound, she says.

"In 1980, you needed 160 cans to make $3.10, which is what you would get for working one hour at minimum wage," she says. "You had to collect 345 cans in 2001 to make $5.15, which is what you would earn for one hour at minimum wage."

Gitlitz adds that macro-economic forces are also at work. "For many years, there was a glut of primary aluminum on the market worldwide," she says. "That depressed secondary prices, too."

The increase in away-from-home consumption of beverages also has affected the number of aluminum cans captured through curbside programs, many industry observers say.

"While it is true that the recycling rate has fallen over the past few years, we should not lose perspective that fully half of aluminum beverage containers are still being recycled," Lise Herren, executive vice president and COO of Anheuser-Busch Recycling Corp., St. Louis, says.

"That being said," she continues, "we realize that returning the recycling rate to previous levels will be a challenge. We believe that in this highly mobile and convenience-oriented society, recycling has declined for that very reason. It is not always convenient."

Herren says it is important to create convenient recycling opportunities that are sustainable and economically viable.

OFFERING SOLUTIONS. The Aluminum Association is participating in three pilot projects with municipalities in Orlando, Brevard County, Fla., and Cincinnati in which it intends to communicate to the public the value message about aluminum cans.

King says the Aluminum Association hopes to demonstrate that by educating the public on the value of the can, the weight of cans recovered will increase, as will the economic benefit to the municipality and the hauler.

These pilot projects were launched in March of this year, and the Aluminum Association intends to actively promote its value message for four or five months before calculating the data, he says.

King says one of pilot program’s components takes bin size into account, as the suspicion is that aluminum is getting edged out of the bins by larger recyclables.

Young also suggests that bins pose a problem, particularly in office buildings. He suggests offering a bin dedicated to aluminum cans, which otherwise can be obscured by paper in commingled collections, resulting in confusion as to whether the office program accepts cans.

Gitlitz says the tonnage of material captured by curbside programs is declining because of the voluntary nature of the programs. "I think other studies have shown the most successful curbside programs combine their recycling programs with pay-as-you-throw garbage collections and a few other elements, such as mandatory recycling," she says.

Individual scrap dealers can do a few things to increase their take of aluminum cans. For instance, Golden Metal Recycling has increased its market share by buying from the buy-back centers and the dealers who buy cans in the Dallas area.

"In our part of town, it is pretty saturated right now," Goldberg says. "When we started out in the ‘70s, we were one of two or three people in Dallas that bought cans. Now, there may be 50, and there are 10 within a five-mile radius."

"Anheuser-Busch recommends that scrap dealers who buy back aluminum cans market themselves," Herren says. "This includes adequate signage alerting people to their locations, a presence in the Yellow Pages and advertising regularly in local papers. Reviewing their process and procedures to assure that they are recycler-friendly will also help."

Young also suggests that offering the highest financial incentive possible to consumers will help to draw out more cans.

Additionally, Young suggests that scrap recyclers should become more service oriented and that those with the financial and physical capacity to offer collection services to customers should do so. "It’s no longer a function of just being at their site," he says. "They have to go where the cans are. They have to be inventive and market themselves as providing a service."

While advocates of deposit systems point to higher recovery rates (ranging from 75 percent to 90 percent) relative to states that only use curbside recycling, detractors say the system is inefficient.

"A deposit system does generally produce higher recycling rates, at least initially," Herren says. "However, the real question is, at what cost? Deposits are not only an archaic solution to a current problem, but an expensive solution to recover a very small part of the waste stream, 2.9 percent by volume and 3.7 percent by weight."

She adds, "The cost of a deposit system is enormous in terms of the systems that need to be established at retail, wholesale and by the manufacturer.

"Curbside recycling is a current, all-encompassing solution to the problem. Our challenge is to get the homeowner to use the system," Herren says.

However, Gitlitz and CRI advocate for bottle bills because they do establish an infrastructure. Gitlitz says "token" programs such as the Aluminum Association’s partnership with Habitat for Humanity has not changed the recycling rate by a single percentage point. "These are not infrastructure programs."

King defends the connection between charity and recycling as a way to increase recovery and to generate charitable funds. "We have an extensive program where about 560 communities around the country contribute aluminum cans for the redemption value that goes to Habitat for Humanity to build homes." He says more than $1 million annually in aluminum value is donated to Habitat.

Young says the beverage industry realizes that it needs to play a role in developing recycling opportunities and is investigating ways to do that without implementing deposit systems. "We all need to put down the orthodoxy that this is the one solution. There is not just one solution to solve the myriad of problems."

The author is associate editor of Recycling Today and can be reached via e-mail at dtoto@gie.net.