Most of us would remember the nursery rhyme beginning with the words: Ten green bottles, hanging on the wall. As children we used to chant the words as to what would happen if one of the bottles was to accidentally fall. To some of us it was, maybe, one of the first times we chimed the numbers: ten, nine, eight ... down to one, until the last bottle accidentally fell.
Today's bottles are much more than ten in number. The count runs into hundreds of millions and they are collected by the Beverage Container Refund Scheme (BCRS).
I would dare say that the BCRS, currently in its third year, is already achieving positive results. At least, so it seems as a result of the large number of beverage containers being collected. However, this is not enough. We must look beyond the numbers. There are a number of problems in the scheme's operation which need to be addressed the soonest.
By now we are undoubtedly aware that the scheme charges us a ten cents deposit at the point of purchase for a number of plastic, glass or aluminum beverage containers. The deposit is refunded when we return the beverage container at the points of collection.
One of the problems encountered is that at the points of collection, a number of machines are being reported as being out of order, frustrating users. This is due to a number of reasons. Misuse of the machines is, most probably, one of the main reasons causing their stoppage. Some still need assistance in using the machines in order to ensure their proper use. Such assistance, if available, would decrease machine stoppage exponentially.
A second problem is in respect of those who turn up with a large number of beverage containers (at times hundreds) keeping the machines occupied for their exclusive use for a long time. This puts off those of us with a small number of beverage containers to deposit in the machine. We cannot be expected to wait hours until those with large quantities end their use. To make matters worse, when it is your turn, the machine is then full and cannot take any more, until it is emptied. Sometimes this simple task takes ages.
A third problem is caused by those retailers who, while providing the relative machines, make access to them as difficult as possible. I know directly of one such case where the machines serving a supermarket are accessible in a basement car park forming part of the same complex. The car park is accessible internally through four lifts most of which have been out of order, continuously, for the past months. In these circumstances, customers are not very much encouraged to use the beverage container machines to reclaim their deposits.
In respect of this particular case, I directly informed BCRS about the matter by email. The reply I got was "Thank you for your feedback. We agree that accessibility plays a crucial role in encouraging recycling. While lift maintenance falls under the responsibility of the premises' management. We appreciate your continued support." Nothing has however changed.
A fourth type of problem is when these machines, generally linked to a retail outlet, are placed in a residential area, annoying residents close by. This occurs in respect of large retail outlets in residential areas.
This week I have been in contact with residents specifically in such a situation. I have been on site and seen the problem myself. The impacts on the residents include noise, primarily generated by bursting plastic bottles and shattering glass, emissions from vehicles kept running, odours from stale residue of beer and other beverages spilled in the surroundings. At times I am informed that this has also led to an incidence of mosquitos, flies and other insects. In addition, access to traffic is at times blocked when the BCRS refuse truck comes to pick up the collected waste.
Damage to residents' cars was also reported particularly when irregularly parked cars, belonging to those using the BCRS machines, restrict the flow of traffic. On windy days, rejected plastic bottles and unutilised beverage containers litter the surroundings. Cleaning up takes ages as no one seems to be bothered beyond the numbers.
From the information made available to me it seems that BCRS has not been helpful in any way to address the inconvenience that residents have and are still being subjected to unnecessarily. The message conveyed is that it does not care about the residents. It is only bothered by the numbers.
These are real issues, which must be addressed by BCRS. They are problems resulting from the successful uptake of the scheme. They cannot keep being ignored: though they may appear as small issues, they are however of considerable significance at the receiving end.
The Beverage Container Refund Scheme is a successful implementation of an environmental tax. It has been on the cards for the last twenty years. It feels good to state that it already appears successful in its first years of implementation. Looking beyond the numbers is however essential.
Before considering whether and how the scheme could be expanded to address waste resulting from plastic containers of toiletries and consumables it would be appropriate if the BCRS management team addresses the problems which the successful uptake of the scheme has generated so far.
Achieving numerical targets is not enough. It is only when all stakeholders are on board that the real targets are achieved.
An architect and civil engineer, the author is a former Chairperson of ADPD-The Green Party in Malta. [email protected] , http://carmelcacopardo.wordpress.com