It\u2019s a block of text almost ubiquitous on every bottle or can of drink that Australians buy: \u201c10c refund at collection depots in participating state\/territory of purchase.\u201d<\/p>\n
More than 7bn bottles and cans were returned under the schemes last year, but conservationists and the recycling industry have told Guardian Australia that on an individual level, the schemes are underperforming. Some blame the 10c refund rate, and argue it should be doubled.<\/p>\n
Analysis carried out by organisations in the recycling industry shows that \u201creturn rates\u201d \u2013 the percentage of eligible containers returned for recycling \u2013 are well below successful schemes in Europe.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe best word you could use is average,\u201d says Jeff Angel on the performance of Australia\u2019s schemes. Angel is a veteran campaigner on plastics and the director of the Boomerang Alliance of 56 environment groups.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe national return rate is about 65% and that\u2019s leaving billions of containers going to landfill or litter,\u201d he says.<\/p>\n
The Australian Packaging Covenant Organisation \u2013 a not-for-profit focused on reducing packaging waste and increasing recycling \u2013 estimates that in the financial year 2022-23, some 2.7bn cans and bottles eligible for the refund likely ended up in landfill.<\/p>\n
Top performers<\/p>\n
Last month Tasmania launched its own container deposit scheme, making Australia the first continent to be completely covered by the programs, which are aimed at boosting recycling rates and reducing litter and plastics leaking into the environment.<\/p>\n
In Europe, the best performing schemes in countries such as Finland, Lithuania and Slovakia have return rates above 90%, with Germany\u2019s at 98%, analysis from recycling services company Tomra says<\/a>.<\/p>\n But what they all have in common, Angel says, are higher deposit amounts of between 17 and 43 cents.<\/p>\n Sign up to get climate and environment editor Adam Morton\u2019s Clear Air column as a free newsletter<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n Angel, alongside recycling and waste management industry groups, is preparing to launch a campaign targeting politicians to get the deposit rate in Australia doubled to 20c.<\/p>\n \u201cThe argument should not be if, but when,\u201d he says. \u201cIt\u2019s obvious to us that policymakers know that the refund has to increase, but we have a political problem that we have not been able to get states and ministers to move.\u201d<\/p>\n He says the campaign would look to \u201cmobilise\u201d supporters, including local councils and the recycling and waste management industry.<\/p>\n Debate over 10c rate<\/p>\n South Australia\u2019s scheme started in 1977, followed by the Northern Territory in 2012.<\/p>\n Since then, all other states and territories have launched their own schemes, most recently Victoria\u2019s CDS Vic scheme in 2023 and Tasmania\u2019s Recycle Rewards program launched last month.<\/p>\n The deposit paid on the containers \u2013 and what can be recouped if they\u2019re returned \u2013 has sat at 10c since South Australia doubled its deposit from 5c to 10c in 2008. Allowing for inflation, 10c in 2008 is worth about 15c today<\/a>.<\/p>\n Chris Gingell is the vice-president of public affairs for the Pacific region at Tomra, a Norway-based company that provides reverse vending machines and collection services in most state and territory schemes.<\/p>\n \u201cIt\u2019s a deposit [the consumer] has paid and by not returning it, they\u2019re forfeiting that 10c. But it\u2019s obvious \u2013 10c is fast becoming less and less of an incentive for people to return the containers,\u201d he says.<\/p>\n \u201cThere\u2019s only so much that you can do to raise return rates without that financial incentive. It needs to be doubled, at least. It is the number one thing we could change that would immediately see higher return rates.\u201d<\/p>\n No two schemes are organised in the same way, but generally they are paid for by the beverage industry. In 2021, state environment ministers agreed to harmonise elements of the scheme \u2013 such as labelling, deposit fees and the containers that are eligible (Queensland is the only scheme to accept wine and spirit bottles) \u2013 by the end of this year.<\/p>\n Gingell says in Queensland and Western Australia, the schemes are not meeting their 85% legislated target for returned containers.<\/p>\n skip past newsletter promotion<\/a><\/p>\n Sign up to Clear Air Australia<\/p>\n Adam Morton brings you incisive analysis about the politics and impact of the climate crisis<\/p>\n Privacy Notice: <\/strong>Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. For more information see our Privacy Policy<\/a>. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy<\/a> and Terms of Service<\/a> apply.<\/p>\n after newsletter promotion<\/p>\n In Queensland, a parliamentary inquiry began earlier this year into its scheme, which launched in 2018.<\/p>\n Submissions to the inquiry<\/a> show a tug-of-war between beverage industry interests who are reluctant to advocate for a higher deposit, and conservationists, recyclers, waste managers and community groups \u2013 many of which benefit from the schemes \u2013 who want to see the deposit doubled.<\/p>\n