Dear Friend of Recycling:
I am writing to respond to the letter you 
received from The Coca-Cola Company concerning 
issues raised by the GrassRoots Recycling 
Network's recent New York Times Op Ed page 
ads.  We received an identical letter when we 
wrote Coke to ask them to live up to their 
promise to use soft drink bottles made from 
recycled plastic.  
Coke's spokesperson claimed:  "Soft drink 
containers ... are America's most recycled 
package.  In 1997, 58.7% of all soft drink 
containers were recycled."  Coke is trying to 
switch the subject, from plastic soft drink 
containers to all soft drink containers, and 
from the recycled content of bottles to 
recycling rates of empty containers.  
Recycling rates for plastic soda bottles have 
fallen dramatically from a peak of 50 percent 
in 1994 to 35.6 percent in 1998, according to 
industry data. In other words, 2 of every 3 
plastic Coke bottles are wasted, going to 
dumps or becoming litter.  And those that are 
recycled are not recycled into Coke bottles, 
but into low value products like fiber and 
carpet. 
Recycling rates for plastic soda bottles, 
which is what we're concerned about, have 
fallen dramatically from a peak of 50 percent 
in 1994 to 35.6 percent in 1998, according to 
industry data. In other words, 2 of every 3 
plastic Coke bottles are now wasted, either 
going to dumps or becoming litter.  And the 
bottles that are recycled are going into 
carpet and pallet strapping, for which 
recyclers get paid very little.
Coke's attempt to claim credit for high 
overall beverage container recycling rates is 
ludicrous in light of Coke's vigorous 
opposition to container deposits --  the very 
system that is responsible for the high 
recycling rates of beverage containers.  The 
overall beverage container recycling rate in 
the ten 'bottle bill' states where a deposit 
is required on every container is 85 percent, 
compared with 35 percent in non-bottle bill 
states, according to the Container Recycling 
Institute.  Over the years, Coke has spent 
tens of millions of dollars in state 
legislatures across the country to defeat or 
repeal bottle bills.  Coke opposes bottle 
bills because they make producers like Coke 
share responsibility for recycling used 
containers.
Coke also claims that "each year we spend over 
$2 billion on recycled content materials and 
supplies in the U.S. alone."  Coke's figure 
for spending for recycled content materials is 
primarily for aluminum cans, which are still 
the dominant soft drink container.  But Coke 
is switching away from recycled content glass 
and aluminum to plastic with no recycled 
content.  Aluminum cans have 70% recycled 
content.  Coke has all but abandoned glass, 
which has 25% recycled content.
Coke also argues in their response that they 
didn't break a promise to the public to use 
plastic with recycled content, rather the 
limited test they conducted in 1991 was 
"unsustainable" - in other words, it cost too 
much.
Coke's promise is reflected in the public 
record.  In fact, Coke's current chairman and 
CEO, Douglas Ivester, was the point person in 
their early public relations campaign.  Mr. 
Ivester's public statements, taken together, 
create a clear public impression that Coke 
promised to use recycled plastic soda bottles 
to protect the environment.  Consumers and 
public officials concerned about plastic waste 
took it as a promise.  In fact, many people 
today mistakenly believe that the recycling 
symbol on the bottom of plastic Coke bottles 
means the bottle is made with recycled 
plastic.
Coca-Cola claims that "because of the 
additional cleaning and processing necessary 
to make recovered plastics safe for food use, 
it costs significantly more to recycle 
recovered PET into bottles than it does to 
make as many as 50 new products such as fiber, 
carpet and car parts."  
In reality, the extra cost of using recycled 
plastic in three layer plastic bottles 
(currently used by Gatorade and Verifine 
juices) is little or nothing, but Coke 
apparently does not want to invest in new 
machines for this technology.  Another process 
available to them is  blending recycled 
plastic soda bottles with virgin resin 
resulting in an additional cost of only one- 
or two-tenths of one cent per bottle, 
according to one industry source.  
At the same time, profit per bottle in cases 
of 20-ounce pet soft drink bottles is more 
than 20 cents per bottle, according to 
industry sources.  Ironically, Coke presently 
uses 25% recycled content in its bottles in 
Australia, Sweden and Switzerland. 
The fact is that Coke does not use recycled 
plastic in the 10 billion bottles it sells 
every day in the U.S., despite promising to do 
so in 1990.  And Coke's failure to honor its 
pledge has stunted the market for recycled 
plastic, burdening our cities with more waste 
and pollution.  
Coke's failure to recycle is not sustainable 
for our environment and is certainly not 
sustainable for our communities, which 
currently subsidize the recycling of these 
plastics. With plastic waste increasing ten 
times faster than the recycling of plastic 
bottles, Coke needs to take responsibility for 
the waste it is producing.
I hope that this letter clears up some of the 
misconceptions Coca-Cola was attempting to 
create in response to your concerns.  We 
appreciate your taking the time to contact 
Coca-Cola and your continued interest in 
holding corporations accountable for 
conserving resources.
###