Ann Arbor Times

Michigan’s bottle deposit system, established in 1978, has seen a significant decline in return rates for eligible bottles and cans. A recent report by the Center for Sustainable Systems (CSS) at the University of Michigan highlights ways to modernize the system and reverse this trend.

The state’s “bottle bill” introduced a 10-cent deposit on carbonated drink containers, making Michigan one of the leaders in recycling nationwide. In 1993, almost all eligible containers were returned. By 2019, the rate was still high at 89%, but after the COVID-19 pandemic forced recycling centers to close—the only such complete closure among states with similar programs—return rates dropped sharply, reaching a record low of 70.4% in 2024.

“Recycling is complicated, especially moving forward,” said Shelie Miller, CSS co-director and senior author of the report. “When we talk about the bottle bill, it’s a 50-year-old law and a lot has happened since it went into place.”

The report suggests that upgrading recycling technology and providing more convenient return options could help improve participation. It also notes that millions of dollars from unclaimed deposits are not currently used to support recycling efforts.

“Long-standing policies can serve communities well, but to remain effective they must evolve with changing needs and priorities. At CGLR, we believe modernizing key systems—like deposit return programs—is essential not only for Michigan, but for the health and sustainability of the entire Great Lakes region,” said Lora Shrake, interim executive director of the Council of the Great Lakes Region (CGLR), which funded the study. “By updating these policies to improve outcomes and reinvest resources strategically, we can drive progress toward a stronger regional circular economy.”

Researchers interviewed consumers, retailers, beverage distributors, recyclers, policymakers and environmental groups as part of their analysis. Tamanna Sengupta, graduate student researcher at CSS and lead author on the study said: “Our goal with this study was to move beyond the numbers. By examining why redemption rates are falling, benchmarking Michigan’s system to other bottle bill states in the country, and hearing directly from stakeholders, our aim is to provide a road map for keeping the program effective and resilient in the years ahead.”

Convenience emerged as a key barrier: retailers must only accept returns for bottles they sell themselves. Universal return centers could address this issue by allowing consumers to return all deposit-eligible containers at one location.

Larger retailers generally see higher return rates due to better infrastructure such as dedicated staff and separate areas for returns. Smaller stores often struggle with space constraints or cannot afford reverse vending machines that automate returns.

“Some of the biggest issues are space, hygiene and labor,” Miller explained. “Then you have a lot of older stores that have older infrastructure… They can sometimes have issues with funkiness right where you walk in and that isn’t pleasant for customers.”

Funding improvements remains challenging due to many involved parties; however most stakeholders agree unclaimed deposits could be redirected toward supporting recycling upgrades rather than solely environmental cleanups or retailer distributions as currently required by amendments passed in 1989 and 2021.

“There is, across stakeholder groups, a strong feeling that unredeemed deposits should get reinvested in recycling in the state,” Miller said. “We have this pool of money that has actually gotten larger since the pandemic—because as recycling rates go down those funds go up—and none of that is being specifically rededicated to modernizing or improving recycling.”

Some evidence suggests more bottles now end up in curbside bins; while these materials have value for material recovery facilities (MRFs), returned aluminum through deposit programs tends to be cleaner than what MRFs process from single-stream collections.

Miller concluded: “Getting individuals from different stakeholder groups together in the same room hopefully brings us one step closer to realizing the opportunities that exist to improve our recycling infrastructure.”