This case study of the value of aluminum recycling consists of the following parts:

1. This page, which is a summary of the potential values of recycling aluminum cans and poses the question of how we can set up recycling programs that are acceptable to everybody involved.

2. A framework for examining the nature of the problem and how we can get the parties to adopt coordinated strategies. This coordinated strategy framework is the first section of a broader approach for analyzing institutions.

3.A link to a paper that presents the factors that might be necessary to continue the demographic transition in some countries.
go to: http://www.container-recycling.org and click on "The ten-cent incentive to recycle" pdf report.

4. The application assignment for unit 2 that extends this approach to other recycling problems.

 

Analysis of a Common-Pool Institution Institution

Many of the problems that we face in environmental sciences and policy involve exploitation (use) of a resource that has both the properties that it is subtractable (any unit used isn't available for other uses) and that it is difficult to exclude potential users. In this cases study, we are going to look at the details of aluminum beverage can recycling as a solution to three types of pollution; air, water and litter pollution caused by aluminum cans. First, Aluminum cans that are thrown away represent a lost opportunity to save energy and thus reduce greenhouse gas emissions. It only takes 5% as much energy to recycle a beverage can as to make a new one from aluminum ore. Second, Smelting aluminum ore into useable aluminum stock also uses a large amount of water and creates a toxic sludge by-product. Third, single use beverage cans are targeted for consumer convenience and portability and, because of that market, represent an unusually large percentage of litter pollution (in states without can deposits).

Extension to other problems

Although a deposit on beverage cans has been very successful in the states where the bottle bill has been enacted, there are still 40 states without such a bill. Why has it been so difficult to expand the bottle bill to other states? This is more a problem of politics and special interest groups, industry groups have lobbied aggressively against bottle bills and funded attempts to repeal existing bottle bills. All of the repeal attempts have been unsuccessful, but this shows that this is still an active question. What's interesting is that many of the industries don't necessarily want to fight the bottle bills but they fell more responsibility to their clients (the bottling industry) than to the public. It is not even generally accepted that recycling deposits would harm the bottling industry. In 1980, the president of the National Soft Drink Association stated that if they would just embrace recycling they might be better off than to spend hundreds of millions of dollars to fight it.

Recycling other consumer goods is only likely to become a more prominent question. Industry, citizen and government groups are addressing the issue of the complete life cycle of a product; what happens to a computer or a car when it has outlived its usefulness. Some countries and industries are moving aggressively toward what is called "extended producer responsibility", in which the manufacturer needs to take the product back after it has been used. Germany has regulations that require that the automakers accept cars for recycling. These laws set up conditions in which the manufacturer designs the product for durability AND reuse. They find ways to make it easier to disassemble and reuse spent consumer goods.

Proceed to reading the coordinated strategy framework that lays out simple steps for analysis of the aluminum recycling problem.

References

Ostrom 1990.