The onus for taking back empties should be on the individual stores that sold them. So basically a change in law.
In Europe customers can return their own empties when they go shopping, by dropping the bottles into fully automated machines that dispenses the refund. So they get to benefit, and the problem is distributed.
In California, in my experience, the scarcity and sheer nastiness of return centers keeps most individual consumer from returns.
My one time attempt of returning empties in California took three trips to the distant and frequently unmanned center, and finally yielded a voucher only valid in the supermarket on which's premises the center was located. No thanks.
Edit: After my post I found this gem in the comments, enough said!:
A Functioning CRV System
These dynamics are fascinating to me because I've lived in both San Francisco and Michigan. Michigan is one of the states with the highest redemption values for cans at 10¢ each, plus the cost of living (and thus salaries) are much lower than in San Francisco, so each can returned makes a much bigger impact on everyone's finances. The result was EVERYONE returned their own cans, every family from the lower class to the wealthier ones has a trash can in the kitchen and "a place where they put cans".
It was shocking to me when I moved out to California and nobody saved their cans - the culture in Michigan is that throwing away cans is like throwing away money. Then I realized why after I tried to return a bag full - in Michigan, almost every major grocery store has machines that process can returns - completely self service, at almost every grocery store. The grocery stores use it to get customers in the store, and recycling is organized and incented. In California, when I tried to return that first bag, I had to go to a recycling center that was nowhere close to where I lived and in the middle of nowhere. I waited inline behind 20 or so homeless people, and the facility was filthy. In Michigan, the machines counted every individual can and gave you a receipt readout with precisely how many cans, glass bottles, and plastic bottles you turned in. In California, they sloppily weighed your bag and handed you cash. It was way more difficult to turn in the cans and it was less accurate and half the value per can. The whole system felt like a rip off & waste of time.
The crazy thing is what people perceive the point of the can redemption system to be. In Michigan, everybody gets that its supposed to get people to recycle, and it clearly works. Its like an easy way to save a little spending money or get some cash off your grocery bill every couple weeks. In California, a lot of the people I talked to about it thought it was a program to help the homeless, because they were so used to the trashcan foraging activity. I don't know how to respond to the idea of closing recycling centers, but having lived in Michigan where the can redemption system is functioning, it feels like keeping recycling centers open to help homeless people have an income is masking the harder problem, which is what do we do to help these people get work and stop relying on entrepreneurial trash collection as a living?
I came here to say the same thing about Michigan where I lived before moving to California. When I moved to California I was under the impression that it was a very environmentally focused state and that they surely would have as good of a system as Michigan but I was quite surprised when it turned out not to be true.
> almost every major grocery store has machines that process can returns - completely self service, at almost every grocery store. The grocery stores use it to get customers in the store
I was under the impression that any store that sold a returnable was actually required to accept them. Stores that didn't have automated machines counted them manually and gave you a cash refund.
When I first moved from California from Michigan I dutifully saved my cans and eventually asked someone how to turn them in since I hadn't seen any bottle returns in the store. When I found how you actually redeemed the deposit I was quite upset. Not only is it hard to find a recycling center but they are often not even open. It is a good example of the implementation of the same thing having vastly different outcomes in unexpected ways.
As a side note, Michigan is quite interesting in general when it comes to taking care of the environment. In many respects the people care a great deal about keeping the endless lakes and streams clean and keeping nature healthy. Unfortunately there are still a lot of remote areas where it is very difficult to do the best things. I once lived in an area that had no garbage service and the nearest garbage and recycling center was over an hour away. Most people in that situation end up burning their garbage. And, of course, air pollution in general is nearly ignored due to the love affair with large, old automobiles.
So is the original supplier, and the only reason it is stocked is the person buying it. Perhaps taking some actual personal responsibility would be a good thing instead of legislating it on someone else.
That is a bit of an odd jump since the transaction takes place at the merchant where recycling doesn't.
The merchant is part of and in control of the transaction generating the sale tax, but has no say on where the product goes after the transaction. That part is all on the customer.
This is the case in most of Oregon; it is merchants who collect the deposit, and the same merchant must collect recyclables and return the deposit to customers.
I say "most of" because retailers in Clackamas County lobbied successfully to abolish the merchant collection requirement, and the county now provides recycling centers. Ostensibly it was to reduce the burden on merchants, but there was a subtext that customers and retailers alike didn't enjoy the constant presence of homeless at the many retailers that provided recycling machines.
> what do we do to help these people get work and stop relying on entrepreneurial trash collection as a living?
If picking up trash/recycling and depositing it at a centralized location is work when a garbageperson does it then it is still work when homeless people do it.
That's how it works (sort of, I think) in NYC. The Duane Reade has a sign posted outlining the limit per day for unsolicited bottle/can deposit redemptions. If it's scheduled, you can turn in much more at a time.
In Europe customers can return their own empties when they go shopping, by dropping the bottles into fully automated machines that dispenses the refund. So they get to benefit, and the problem is distributed.
In California, in my experience, the scarcity and sheer nastiness of return centers keeps most individual consumer from returns.
My one time attempt of returning empties in California took three trips to the distant and frequently unmanned center, and finally yielded a voucher only valid in the supermarket on which's premises the center was located. No thanks.
Edit: After my post I found this gem in the comments, enough said!:
A Functioning CRV System
These dynamics are fascinating to me because I've lived in both San Francisco and Michigan. Michigan is one of the states with the highest redemption values for cans at 10¢ each, plus the cost of living (and thus salaries) are much lower than in San Francisco, so each can returned makes a much bigger impact on everyone's finances. The result was EVERYONE returned their own cans, every family from the lower class to the wealthier ones has a trash can in the kitchen and "a place where they put cans".
It was shocking to me when I moved out to California and nobody saved their cans - the culture in Michigan is that throwing away cans is like throwing away money. Then I realized why after I tried to return a bag full - in Michigan, almost every major grocery store has machines that process can returns - completely self service, at almost every grocery store. The grocery stores use it to get customers in the store, and recycling is organized and incented. In California, when I tried to return that first bag, I had to go to a recycling center that was nowhere close to where I lived and in the middle of nowhere. I waited inline behind 20 or so homeless people, and the facility was filthy. In Michigan, the machines counted every individual can and gave you a receipt readout with precisely how many cans, glass bottles, and plastic bottles you turned in. In California, they sloppily weighed your bag and handed you cash. It was way more difficult to turn in the cans and it was less accurate and half the value per can. The whole system felt like a rip off & waste of time.
The crazy thing is what people perceive the point of the can redemption system to be. In Michigan, everybody gets that its supposed to get people to recycle, and it clearly works. Its like an easy way to save a little spending money or get some cash off your grocery bill every couple weeks. In California, a lot of the people I talked to about it thought it was a program to help the homeless, because they were so used to the trashcan foraging activity. I don't know how to respond to the idea of closing recycling centers, but having lived in Michigan where the can redemption system is functioning, it feels like keeping recycling centers open to help homeless people have an income is masking the harder problem, which is what do we do to help these people get work and stop relying on entrepreneurial trash collection as a living?