Laserfiche WebLink
. \, <br />Minority Committee Report filed by Mr. James Prokasy, Member Environmental <br />Control Committee, at Council Meeting on February 6, 1973. <br />It is easy to be on the popular side and listen to the hue and cry to <br />reduce pollution by banning non-returnable beverage containers, but what <br />is the factual effect of the Resolution being introduced tonight? <br />Let's look at the two specific ordinances proposed by Cleveland that by <br />our Resolution No. 73-7 we are urging be passed. Proposed Cleveland Ord. <br />No. 1710-72 will ban only non-returnable lg ass beer and soft drink <br />containers. It does not ban cans: The effect will merely be to increase <br />the sale of beer and soft drinks in cans, so there will not be an effective <br />change in the problem. Proposed Cleveland Ord. No. 1730-72 imposes a tax <br />of .06G per bottle on non-returnable glass beer and soft drink containers. <br />This again will only result in people switching from glass to cans. <br />The Resolution before us tonight is also defective in that it urges <br />passage of both these Cleveland ordinances which are not compatible. <br />If you have by one ordinance banned the non-returnable bottle you cannot <br />then tax this same bottle with another ordinance. So it would appear on <br />the surface we cannot urge passage of both ordinances. <br />Let us look at the effect of these ordinances if they did pass in their <br />present form and that all glass non-returnable beer and soft drink containers <br />were effectively banned in Cuyahoga County. <br />First, as noted before, there would be a tremendous switch to cans. <br />Secondly, non-returnable bottles make up only 2.8% total of the roadside <br />litter according to the National Academy of Science - a small amount. <br />Third: Non-returnable bottles make up only .8 of 1% of the total solid <br />waste according to the Bureau of Solid Waste Management of the Federal <br />Government. <br />If the point is to reduce solid waste these laws will reduce the solid waste <br />(in weight) by only .8 of 1~, leaving still the 99.2% to dispose of. If the <br />point is to reduce roadside litter we will only eliminate 2.8% of the total <br />- the other 97.2% remains. Such a ban on non-returnable glass containers <br />will have little, if any effect. <br />The question should be asked why is the beverage industry singled out? <br />If these bottles add to solid waste then why are not liquor bottles, wine <br />bottles or glass bottles in grocery stores, such as ketchup, mustard, etc. <br />or any other kind of glass container sold in grocery stores so treated? <br />If all such containers were treated in the same manner then you would have a <br />substantial reduction in solid waste. It makes as much sense to ban non- <br />returnable glass containers in the beverage business as it would to ban them <br />in the grocery business. <br /> <br />,~~rn~~ <br />,:, <br />