Refillables Stoty and Photos by Chris Figenshau Illustrations by Paul Ollswang Containers used to be built to last. Nobody would throw them away, just as today we wouldn’t toss out our fine dinnerware or cleaning buckets. In cities, before supermarkets or public plumbing, overworked milk and water carriers came into town to meet urbanites who carried their own empty containers. For the wealthy, carriers would come to the doorstep to scoop new liquid into waiting bottles. Later the bottle was delivered full, and used bottles picked up in return, essentially adding washing to the service. Eventually the sealed bottle became a commodity sold in the marketplace, so people brought their used bottles back to these points of sale. And as the consumer/producer relationship became more anonymous, vendors charged a deposit for bottles to ensure their return. People habitually saved soda and beer bottles to collect these deposits. The bottles found their way to the beverage company where they were washed, refilled, and redistributed. Containers were easily reused, often for other than their original purpose, because lids were standardized. The decline of the reusable system came soon after World War II. With post-war affluence, beer and soda consumption rose sharply. Steel and aluminum industries, in a partial slump after the war, began to produce cans in place of artillery. In the steel-dependent city of Pittsburgh, signs urged consumers to HELP SELL STEEL. BUY SOFT DRINKS IN CONVENIENT CANS. The advertisements argued that throwaway containers provided a convenience worth a few extra cents. In 1960, only 4% of all beer and soft drinks came in non-returnable containers. Seven years later that figure rose to 33%. In 1978 it jumped to 80% and by 1986, 90% of all beer and soda containers were thrown away. According to the National Solid Waste Management Association, between the years 1958 and 1976 US per capita consumption of bottles, cans, boxes, wrappers and other packaging increased by 63%. In 1990 packaging accounted for some 30% of the municipal solid waste stream. Recycling is often touted as the solution to this solid waste crisis. But why break a container down and send it through an energy-intensive process of melting, purifying and re-molding when the same container could simply be washed and re-used? A study by the Franklin Associates found that use of a refillable glass bottle consumed as much as eight times less energy than any other container, including recycled containers. An EPA survey concluded that savings from refdlable containers ranged from 60 cents to $2.00 per case for beer, and from 3.5 to 5 cents per container for soft drinks. Refilling is clearly cheaper and more efficient than immediate recycling or disposal. Deposit legislation is helping the refillable bottle make a comeback. In 1990 refillable bottles made up over 16% of packaged beer sales in the nine states requiring a minimum 5 cent deposit on beer and soda containers, compared to less than 4% in non-deposit states. The Rainier Brewing Company began refilling bottles shortly after the first bottle law, established in Oregon in 1971. The overall cost of their Page 24 RAIN Spring 1993 Volume XIV, Number 3
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy NTc4NTAz