Connecting decision makers to a dynamic network of information, people and ideas, Bloomberg delivers business and financial information, news and insight globally with speed and accuracy
Connecting decision makers to a dynamic network of information, people and ideas, Bloomberg delivers business and financial information, news and insight globally with speed and accuracy
PepsiCo and Coca-Cola have pledged to zero emissions in the next few decades, but in order to achieve their goals, they need to address a problem they helped create: dismal recycling rates in the United States.
When Coca-Cola, Pepsi and Keurig Dr Pepper calculated their 2020 carbon emissions, the results were startling: The world’s three largest soft drink companies collectively pumped 121 million tons of endothermic gases into the atmosphere — dwarfing the entire climate of Belgium’s footprint.
Now, the soda giants are pledging to significantly improve the climate.Pepsi and Coca-Cola have vowed to zero all emissions within the next few decades, while Dr Pepper has pledged to reduce climate pollutants by at least 15% by 2030.
But to make meaningful progress on their climate goals, beverage companies first need to overcome a harmful problem they helped create: dismal recycling rates in the United States.
Surprisingly, the mass production of plastic bottles is one of the biggest contributors to the beverage industry’s climate footprint.Most plastics are polyethylene terephthalate, or “PET,” whose components are derived from oil and natural gas and then go through multiple energy-intensive processes.
Every year, American beverage companies produce about 100 billion of these plastic bottles to sell their sodas, water, energy drinks and juices.Globally, the Coca-Cola Company alone produced 125 billion plastic bottles last year—roughly 4,000 per second.The production and disposal of this avalanche-style plastic accounts for 30 percent of Coca-Cola’s carbon footprint, or about 15 million tons per year.That’s the equivalent of climate pollution from one of the dirtiest coal-fired power plants.
It also leads to incredible waste.According to the National Association of PET Container Resources (NAPCOR), by 2020, only 26.6% of PET bottles in the United States will be recycled, while the rest will be incinerated, placed in landfills or discarded as waste.In some parts of the country, the situation is even uglier.In Miami-Dade County, Florida’s most populous county, only 1 in 100 plastic bottles is recycled.Overall, the U.S. recycling rate has been below 30% for most of the past 20 years, well behind most other countries such as Lithuania (90%), Sweden (86%) and Mexico (53%) ).“The U.S. is the most wasteful country,” said Elizabeth Barkan, director of North American operations at Reloop Platform, a nonprofit that fights packaging pollution.
All this waste is a huge missed opportunity for the climate.When plastic soda bottles are recycled, they turn into a variety of new materials, including carpets, clothing, deli containers, and even new soda bottles.According to an analysis by solid waste consultancy Franklin Associates, PET bottles made from recycled plastic produce only 40 percent of the heat-trapping gases produced by bottles made from virgin plastic.
Seeing a ripe opportunity to cut their footprints, soft drink companies are pledging to use more recycled PET in their bottles.Coca-Cola, Dr Pepper and Pepsi have committed to sourcing a quarter of their plastic packaging from recycled materials by 2025, and Coca-Cola and Pepsi have committed to 50 percent by 2030.(Today, Coca-Cola is 13.6%, Keurig Dr Pepper Inc. is 11% and PepsiCo is 6%.)
But the country’s poor recycling record means there aren’t nearly enough bottles recovered for beverage companies to hit their targets.NAPCOR estimates that the long-stagnant U.S. recycling rate needs to double by 2025 and double by 2030 to provide sufficient supply for industry commitments.”The most critical factor is the availability of bottles,” said Alexandra Tennant, plastic recycling analyst at Wood Mackenzie Ltd.
But the soft drink industry itself is largely responsible for the shortage.The industry has been fighting fiercely for decades over proposals to increase recycling of containers.For example, since 1971, 10 states have enacted so-called bottling bills that add a 5-cent or 10-cent deposit to beverage containers.Customers pay extra up front and get their money back when they return the bottle.Valuing empty containers leads to higher recycling rates: According to the nonprofit Container Recycling Institute, PET bottles are recycled 57 percent in bottle-single states and 17 percent in other states.
Despite its apparent success, beverage companies have partnered with other industries, such as grocery stores and waste haulers, for decades to scrap similar proposals in dozens of other states, saying deposit systems are an ineffective solution , and is an unfair tax that inhibits sales of its products and hurts the economy.Since Hawaii passed its bottling bill in 2002, no state proposal has survived such opposition.”It gives them a whole new level of responsibility that they’ve avoided in these 40 other states,” said Judith Enck, president of Beyond Plastics and former U.S. Environmental Protection Agency regional administrator.”They just don’t want the extra cost.”
Coca-Cola, Pepsi and Dr. Pepper all said in written responses that they are serious about innovating packaging to reduce waste and recycle more containers.While industry officials admit they have been opposed to the bottling bill for years, they say they have reversed course and are open to all potential solutions to achieve their goals.”We are working with environmental partners and lawmakers across the country who agree that the status quo is unacceptable and we can do better,” William DeMaudie, vice president of public affairs for the American Beverage Industry Group, said in a written statement Say.
However, many lawmakers working to tackle the growing problem of plastic waste still encounter resistance from the beverage industry.“What they say is what they say,” said Sarah Love, a representative for the Maryland Legislature. She recently introduced a law to promote recycling by adding a 10-cent deposit to beverage bottles.”They were against it, they didn’t want it. Instead, they made these promises that no one would hold them accountable.”
For about a quarter of the plastic bottles that are actually recycled in the U.S., packaged in tightly bundled bales, each the size of a compact car, and shipped to the factory in Vernon, California, it’s a gritty The industrial suburbs are miles from the glittering skyscrapers of downtown Los Angeles.
Here, in a massive cavernous structure the size of an aircraft hangar, rPlanet Earth receives about 2 billion used PET bottles each year from recycling programs across the state.Amid the deafening roar of industrial motors, bottles rattled as they bounced three-quarters of a mile along conveyor belts and snaked through factories, where they were sorted, chopped, washed and melted.After about 20 hours, the recycled plastic came in the form of new cups, deli containers, or “prefabs,” test-tube-sized containers that were later blown into plastic bottles.
In a carpeted conference room overlooking the factory’s sprawling, uncluttered floor, rPlanet Earth CEO Bob Daviduk said the company sells its preforms to bottling companies , which are used by these companies to package major brands of beverages.But he declined to name specific clients, calling them sensitive business information.
Since launching the plant in 2019, David Duke has publicly discussed his ambition to build at least three more plastic recycling facilities elsewhere in the United States.But each plant costs about $200 million, and rPlanet Earth has yet to pick a location for its next plant.A core challenge is that the scarcity of recycled plastic bottles makes it difficult to obtain a reliable and affordable supply.”That’s the main obstacle,” he said.”We need more material.”
The beverage industry’s promises may fall short before dozens more factories are built.”We’re in a major crisis,” said Omar Abuaita, chief executive of Evergreen Recycling, which operates four plants in North America and converts 11 billion used PET bottles each year into recycled plastic resin, most of which ends up in in a new bottle.”Where do you get the raw materials you need?”
Soft drink bottles are not destined to be the huge climate problem they are today.A century ago, Coca-Cola bottlers pioneered the first deposit system, charging a cent or two per bottle of glass.Customers get their money back when they return the bottle to the store.
By the late 1940s, the return rate for soft drink bottles in the United States was as high as 96%.According to The Ohio State University environmental historian Bartow J. Elmore’s book Citizen Coke, the average number of round trips for a Coca-Cola glass bottle from bottler to consumer to bottler during that decade was 22 times.
When Coca-Cola and other soft-drink makers began switching to steel and aluminum cans in the 1960s—and, later, plastic bottles, which are ubiquitous today—the resulting scourge of trash sparked a backlash.For years, campaigners have urged consumers to send their empty soda containers back to Coca-Cola’s chairman with the message “Bring it back and use it again!”
Beverage companies fought back with a playbook that would be theirs for decades to come.Instead of taking responsibility for the huge amount of waste that comes with their move to single-use containers, they’ve worked hard to create a perception that it’s the public’s responsibility.For example, Coca-Cola launched an ad campaign in the early 1970s that showed an attractive young woman bending over to pick up trash.”Bend over a little,” urged one such billboard in bold print.”Keep America green and clean.”
The industry has combined that message with backlash against the legislation trying to address the growing confusion.In 1970, voters in Washington state nearly passed a law banning non-returnable bottles, but they lost their votes amid opposition from beverage makers.A year later, Oregon enacted the nation’s first bottle bill, increasing the 5-cent bottle deposit, and the state’s attorney general was surprised by the political chaos: “I’ve never seen so many vested interests against a So much pressure from a single person. Bills,” he said.
In 1990, Coca-Cola announced the first of many commitments by the beverage company to increase the use of recycled plastic in its containers, amid growing concerns about landfill spills.It has vowed to sell bottles made from 25 percent recycled material — the same figure it has pledged today, and the soft-drink company now says they will hit that target by 2025, about 35 years later than Coca-Cola’s original target .
The beverage company has rolled out new ill-fated promises every few years after Coca-Cola failed to meet its original goals, citing the higher cost of recycled plastic.Coca-Cola pledged in 2007 to recycle or reuse 100 percent of its PET bottles in the U.S., while PepsiCo said in 2010 that it would increase the recycling rate of U.S. beverage containers to 50 percent by 2018.The targets have reassured activists and garnered good press coverage, but according to NAPCOR, PET bottle recycling rates have barely budged, rising slightly from 24.6% in 2007 to 29.1% in 2010 to 26.6% in 2020.”One of the things they’re good at recycling is press releases,” said Susan Collins, director of the Container Recycling Institute.
Coca-Cola officials said in a written statement that their first misstep “gives us an opportunity to learn” and that they have the confidence to meet future goals.Their procurement team is now holding a “roadmap meeting” to analyze the global supply of recycled PET, which they say will help them understand constraints and develop a plan.PepsiCo did not answer questions about its previously unfulfilled promises, but officials said in a written statement that it would “continue to drive innovation in packaging and advocate for smart policies that drive circularity and reduce waste.”
A decades-long revolt in the beverage industry appears poised to unravel in 2019.As soft drink companies set increasingly ambitious climate targets, it’s impossible to ignore the emissions from their massive consumption of virgin plastic.In a statement to The New York Times that year, American Beverages hinted for the first time that it might be willing to support a policy of placing deposits on containers.
A few months later, Katherine Lugar, CEO of American Beverages, doubled down in a speech at a packaging industry conference, announcing that the industry was ending its combative approach to such legislation.”You’re going to hear very different voices from our industry,” she vowed. While they’ve opposed bottling bills in the past, she explained, “you’re not going to hear us outright ‘no’ now.” Beverage companies set ‘bold goals’ to reduce their environmental footprint, they need to recycle more bottles.”Everything needs to be on the table,” she said.
As if to underscore the new approach, executives from Coca-Cola, Pepsi, Dr. Pepper and American Beverage huddled side by side on a stage framed by the American flag in October 2019.There they announced a new “breakthrough effort” called “Every Bottle” back.The companies pledged $100 million over the next decade to improve community recycling systems across the U.S. The money will be matched with an additional $300 million from outside investors and government funding. This “nearly half a billion” USD” support will increase PET recycling by 80 million pounds per year and help these companies reduce their use of virgin plastic.
American Beverage released an accompanying TV ad featuring three energetic workers dressed in Coca-Cola, Pepsi and Dr. Pepper uniforms standing in a verdant park surrounded by ferns and flowers.“Our bottles are made for remanufacturing,” said the beaming Pepsi employee, adding that his language recalled the industry’s long-standing message of responsibility to customers: “Please help us get every bottle back. .” The 30-second ad, which ran before last year’s Super Bowl, has since appeared 1,500 times on national television and cost about $5 million, according to iSpot.tv, a TV ad measurement firm.
Despite the changing rhetoric in the industry, little has been done to dramatically increase the amount of recycled plastic.For example, the industry has allocated only about $7.9 million in loans and grants so far, according to an analysis by Bloomberg Green that included interviews with most recipients.
To be sure, most of these recipients are enthusiastic about the funds.The campaign gave a $166,000 grant to Big Bear, California, 100 miles east of Los Angeles, helping it cover a quarter of the cost of upgrading 12,000 homes to larger recycling vehicles.Among households using these larger carts, recycling rates are up about 50 percent, according to Jon Zamorano, Big Bear’s director of solid waste.”It was very helpful,” he said.
If soft drink companies were to distribute $100 million on average over ten years, they should have distributed $27 million by now.Instead, $7.9 million equates to the combined profits of the three soft drink companies over three hours.
Even if the campaign eventually reaches its goal of recycling an additional 80 million pounds of PET per year, it will only increase the U.S. recycling rate by more than one percentage point.”If they really want to get every bottle back, put a deposit on every bottle,” said Judith Enck of Beyond Plastics.
But the beverage industry continues to struggle with most bottle bills, although it has recently said it is open to these solutions.Since Lugar’s speech two and a half years ago, the industry has delayed proposals in states including Illinois, New York and Massachusetts.Last year, a beverage industry lobbyist wrote among Rhode Island lawmakers considering such a bill that most bottling bills “cannot be considered successful in terms of their environmental impact.” (This is A dubious criticism, as bottles with a deposit are returned more than three times as often as those without a deposit.)
In another criticism last year, a Massachusetts beverage industry lobbyist opposed a proposal to increase the state’s deposit from 5 cents (which hasn’t changed since its inception 40 years ago) to a dime.Lobbyists have warned that such a large deposit would wreak havoc because neighboring countries have fewer deposits.The discrepancy would encourage customers to cross the border to buy their beverages, causing a “severe impact on sales” for bottlers in Massachusetts.(That doesn’t mention that the beverage industry has helped create this possible gap by fighting similar proposals from these neighbors.)
Dermody of American Beverages defends the industry’s progress.Speaking of the Every Bottle Back campaign, he said, “The $100 million commitment is one that we’re very proud of.” He added that they’ve already committed to several other cities that haven’t announced yet, as those agreements could take a while. to be finalized.”Sometimes you have to jump through a lot of hoops in these projects,” DeMaudie said.When including these unannounced recipients, they have committed a total of $14.3 million to 22 projects to date, he said.
At the same time, Dermody explained, the industry won’t just support any deposit system; it needs to be well-designed and consumer-friendly.”We are not opposed to charging a fee for our bottles and cans to fund an efficient system,” he said.”But the money has to go to a system that works the way everyone wants to achieve a very high recovery rate.”
An example often cited by Dermody and others in the industry is Oregon’s deposit program, which has changed a lot since its inception half a century ago amid opposition from the beverage industry.The program is now funded and run by beverage distributors—American Beverage says it supports the approach—and has achieved a recovery rate of nearly 90 percent, close to the best in the nation.
But a big reason for Oregon’s high recovery rate is the program’s 10-cent deposit, which is tied with Michigan for the largest in the nation.American Beverage has yet to voice support for proposals to create 10-cent deposits elsewhere, including one modeled after an industry-preferred system.
Take, for example, the state bottling bill included in the Get Out of Plastic Act, proposed by California Representative Alan Lowenthal and Oregon Senator Jeff Merkley.The legislation proudly follows Oregon’s model, including a 10-cent deposit for bottles while letting private businesses run the collection system.While Dermody said the beverage industry was reaching out to lawmakers, it did not support the measure.
For the few plastic recyclers who turn old PET bottles into new ones, this solution is the obvious answer.rPlanet Earth’s David Duke said the country’s 10-cent-per-bottle deposit would nearly triple the number of containers recycled.The massive increase in recycled plastic will spur more recycling plants to be funded and built.These factories will produce much-needed bottles made from recycled plastic – allowing beverage giants to reduce their carbon footprints.
“It’s not complicated,” said David Duke, walking off the floor of a sprawling recycling facility outside Los Angeles.”You need to assign value to these containers.”