Waste not, want not pays off

Before 1980 Connecticut residents out for a roadside stroll often waded through a sea of cans and bottles tossed thoughtlessly by motorists either too lazy or too stupid to dispose of their refuse properly.

That year the state passed the so-called "bottle bill" requiring consumers to pay a 5-cent refundable deposit on most beverage containers, and almost overnight cans and bottles began disappearing from litter.

True, cigarette butts, fast-food wrappers and foam coffee cups were still flying from car windows, but drivers in large part were hanging on to their empties. In addition, scavengers who didn't mind getting their hands dirty found they could make a few bucks by picking up discarded redeemable containers.

The point is it took a financial incentive to force people to do the right thing.

Connecticut municipalities also are discovering that more residents will recycle - or better yet, "pre-cycle" by buying in bulk to reduce packaging and carrying groceries in reusable bags - if they can save money.

The town of Stonington discovered this in 1992 when it began requiring residents to put all their non-recyclable curbside trash in special yellow garbage bags that cost them 75 cents for a 15-gallon size or $1.50 for a 34-gallon. Residents quickly made sure they weren't filling up those bags with cardboard, newspapers, magazines, cans and other recyclables that the town picked up for free, and today the town's recycling rate is about 40 percent - 10 percent higher than the state and national average.

Stonington's success story - it is one of about a dozen towns in Connecticut with such a "pay-as-you-throw" system - was reported this week by CTMirror.org, the website of The Connecticut Mirror, and this newspaper encourages other communities to follow suit.

As landfills continue to reach capacity and the rising cost of such alternative waste disposal programs as incineration strains municipal budgets, towns and cities must more effectively control the amount of discarded materials that either get buried or burned.

Many, such as Groton, which initiated one of the region's most comprehensive recycling programs decades ago, found that composting leaves and grass clippings not only cut down on the volume of waste but also produced rich soil for residents' gardens.

These and other creative solutions certainly help alleviate the growing problem of solid waste disposal, but the disappointing fact remains: Vast amounts of material that could be recycled still wind up in landfills, up in smoke or along the side of the road.

Still, even a meager recycling compliance rate of 30 percent annually saves the equivalent of more than five billion gallons of gasoline and reduces dependence on foreign oil by 114 million barrels, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency calculates.

Last week Gov. Dannel P. Malloy announced the creation of an 11-member task force that will study new ways to increase recycling and lower associated municipal costs.

We'd like to see the deposit for bottles and cans increased for inflation - say, to at least a dime. At only a nickel, many consumers choose to chuck a can or bottle in the trash, or out the window, instead of redeeming it.

Providing incentives to encourage communities to adopt volume-based disposal fees, as Stonington does, also deserves consideration.

The group has 10 months to complete its report.

The sooner the better - Connecticut residents generate an estimated five pounds of garbage every day, so by then the state will have to deal with at least 5 billion more pounds of trash.