Phasing Out Single-Use Plastics Requires Overhaul of 'Blue Bin' Recyclables Collection

This article is published in conjunction with Crosstown.

In 2020, California enacted one of the most ambitious laws designed to reduce waste, requiring all bottles and containers to have a "minimum content" of at least 50% of recycled materials by 2030. There's just one catch: The state's rickety recycling program isn't collecting nearly enough plastic.

On June 30, 2022, California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed another bill into law — signifying yet another push to make the state more environmentally friendly. SB 54 will require a 25% decrease in single-use plastic packaging and utensils by 2032.

But in recent years, Californians have been recycling less, not more, according to data from CalRecycle, the state agency in charge. The state's beverage container recycling rate now stands at 68%, down from 85% at the program's peak in 2013.

Those declining recycling rates have opened a multi-million-pound shortfall of recycled PET, or polyethylene terephthalate, the plastic most commonly used in water bottles and take-out containers. The situation could worsen as the mandates rise from the current 15% to the 50% level by the end of the decade.

Bottle manufacturers face a race against the clock to meet the recycled content requirements or be subject to a penalty of 20 cents for each pound they fall short of the target amount.

An 800-Million-Pound Shortage

Lauren Laibach, director of data services at the National Association for PET Container Resources (NAPCOR), says California currently generates 461 million pounds of recycled PET. That's enough to manufacture roughly 9.8 billion beverage bottles, according to NAPCOR's model, which is based on average bottle weights from an audit of recycled PET bales done in 2021.

In order to meet the 25% minimum content requirement in 2025, an additional 800 million pounds of recycled PET would be needed in the current market, according to Laibach.

"We would need a 44% increase either in imported material or in stuff that's collected here one way or another," said Laibach.

A few beverage makers have been preparing for this moment and have locked in supplies. Plant manager for CG Roxane LLC Tony Moore said the company, which bottles Crystal Geyser Alpine Spring Water, has been meeting and surpassing the 50% requirement for the past two years. "We have our own recycling plant and are leading the industry. I hope it goes up," he added.

But others, including some heavyweights, are already lagging, according to an April 2022 report from CalRecycle. Crystal Geyser Water Co. met a less than 1% baseline, Anheuser-Busch LLC met a 3% baseline, Niagara Bottling met a 4% baseline and West Coast Liquidators Inc., met a 7% baseline.

Some have been catching up. A Sept. 2021 report from CalRecycle had seven beverage makers lagging behind the 15% baseline, including Coca-Cola North America, but spokesperson Bailey Rogers said the company was able to average a 17% baseline a year later.

"We continue to actively invest in and increase recycled PET in California and beyond," she said, noting the company's goal of using 50% recycled material globally by 2030.

The cracks in bottle collection began to widen in 2017 after China and other countries stopped taking recyclable materials from the U.S. In 2016, China was buying up roughly 500,000 tons of low-grade plastics from California, according to CalRecycle. With such an eager customer across the ocean ready to take everything Californians threw in the blue recycle bin, the state didn't have to worry about processing massive amounts of post-consumer waste.

But beginning in 2017, China began enforcing "Operation Green Sword," which severely limited the amount of recyclables it accepted. When the exports ground to a halt, California was left with a problem: What to do with the plastic material that was piling up?

AB 793, the minimum content law, was supposed to address that problem by making California the first state in the nation to establish minimum levels of recycled plastic in containers. It was authored by Assembly Members Phil Ting (D-San Francisco) and Jacqui Irwin (D-Thousand Oaks) and signed into law by Newsom in September 2020. The rising minimums were supposed to create demand among beverage makers for more recycled plastic. That, in turn, would create a thriving marketplace for used plastic containers. Ting said the minimum content bill is "one of the easiest ways we could reduce plastic usage."

But the bill never considered the state's dwindling ability to collect plastic from consumers. In California, 5 or 10 cents is tacked onto the price of cans of beer and bottles of soda — known as the California Refund Value, or CRV program. Consumers are supposed to be able to get the money back when they turn those cans and bottles into a redemption center. In practice, however, that rarely happens.

In an effort to incentivize California residents to recycle more, Newsom unveiled a proposal that would double the refund value for a bottle or can, from 10 cents to 20 cents for containers over 24 ounces.

The Blue Bin Bungle

When China stopped accepting America's recycled materials, the spot price of all sorts of post-consumer waste, such as cardboard, fell by as much as 60%. That sent shockwaves through the state's recycling system. The state's redemption centers — which are supposed to collect and sort glass, plastic and aluminum and give consumers their nickel back — suddenly had no place to sell their materials.

That sparked a closure of more than 400 redemption centers, equivalent to 30%, in just a few years, crippling California's ability to collect, sort and recycle its waste.

Since then, the state's recycling system has relied increasingly on single-stream collection. Consumers dump all their recyclable materials into one blue bin that gets hauled to a materials recovery facility, or MRF. There, a combination of human labor and machines attempt to separate the different types of plastic from the glass, paper and aluminum alongside it.

While that's simple for consumers, it's inefficient for actually recycling waste and holding beverage manufacturers accountable. The process is rife with contamination, as everything from grease-soaked pizza boxes and Styrofoam pellets get dumped in together with aluminum cans and plastic detergent bottles. More than 30% of what is picked up in the blue bin winds up in a landfill, according to Waste Management, Inc., one of the major private waste haulers in California.

The bales that come from the MRF are referred to as "grade B."

As more material got tossed in the blue bin, and less of it hauled to redemption centers, the state's recycling rates took a nosedive. The declining rates meant more trash being hauled to landfills and less material available for reuse. But it didn't present any immediate crisis until this year, as the new regulations are coming into play.

Now, the minimum content requirements are laying bare some of the problems at the root of the state's recycling crisis: Little is being done to drive collection or increase the supply of bottles that are running through the system, creating a circular supply shortage of recycled material. And the plastic that is coming out of the single-stream recycling, or MRFs, isn't enough or of sufficient quality to shore up supplies.

rPlanet Earth, based in Vernon, California, converts post-consumer plastics into new food-grade bottles and packages. It buys PET from curbside recyclers in California. But that is primarily "grade B bale," inferior quality that can't often be repurposed into drinking or food containers.

"It's more difficult to recycle because it's not just clear beverage bottles; it's got all kinds of stuff in it," said Dustin Morgan, director of sales and marketing for rPlanet Earth. "It can have colored bottles. It could have, you know, silly bottles, sauce, mayonnaise, makeup. Anything that's not necessarily just beverage would be in there."

The high-quality plastic used to come in from the redemption centers scattered across the state. There, consumers are incentivized to return their plastic beverage bottles for 5 to 10 cents.

"They're already sorted. They're mostly clear. It's like the Ferrari of bale material," said Morgan.

But this type of material, often referred to as "grade A bale," is more challenging to get and also "very expensive," said Morgan, as so many of the redemption centers in the state have closed.

Who's Responsible for Recycling More?

State Sen. Bob Wieckowski (D-Fremont), who has been pushing the state to improve its recycling rate, wants to hold beverage producers responsible for making sure their containers get recycled. He thinks the minimum content bills will light a fire under companies to get them to take responsibility for recycling.

"It's a good crisis to have because you hopefully will get some movement," he said.

Wieckowski lambasted the state's recycling program, saying that when people dump all their materials into a blue bin "it all gets mixed up like a blender."

Assembly Member Ting echoed similar sentiments, saying "It's ridiculous that companies make new plastic every time they need a beverage bottle. It's time to make them change their model and reuse existing materials."