Bringing Fresh Fruit or Vegetable through California

[Ratty]

The top of the beer can should have the states and various CRV values. No receipts necessary.

[BBadger]

If those cans/bottles show that they can be redeemed in CA, they should allow it. After all the program is supposed to encourage recycling of cans and bottles -- which is exactly what is going on regardless of where they come from. If it's only to encourage it in California, what exactly is this accomplishing in the grand scheme of things besides reducing the size of dumps/litter in streets? I figure it's California's fault that they're losing money if they're offering way above market value of the metal and people are taking advantage of it.

[ygmir]

If those cans/bottles show that they can be redeemed in CA, they should allow it. After all the program is supposed to encourage recycling of cans and bottles -- which is exactly what is going on regardless of where they come from. If it's only to encourage it in California, what exactly is this accomplishing in the grand scheme of things besides reducing the size of dumps/litter in streets? I figure it's California's fault that they're losing money if they're offering way above market value of the metal and people are taking advantage of it.

IIRC, the refund is "state" money, having been collected at the store, so the theory being they are refunding money they didn't collect.

[Elliot]

I agree. And the cans and bottles ARE marked "California Redemption Value" and also the other participating states and their values. Looking at the nearest can, I read...

CT, ME, VT, DE, MA, NY, IA, OR, FL, OK + 5 cents / MI 10 cents REFUND and CA CASH REFUND

I think the CA amount is also 5 cents, like the others except MI. (Why California's 5 cents is not listed on the cans....?)

Anyroad.... Now we know what that was about.

Thanks!

A side note: Here in Clearlake there used to be several redemption locations -- both commercial businesses and the County recycling yard. Over the last year or so the commercial businesses closed except one, and the County closed that part of their operation.

Interestingly, they paid by weight, rather than by count; but I suppose that was far more practical, and close enough.

[FIGJAM]

Well, you would put the money to good use.

[Token]

Here is an angle for you:

You're a CA agg inspector sitting in your booth, lazy weekday like any other ...

Then hoards of vehicles pile through, overloaded, full of arguably mountains of what is considered junk in the real world, stuff not even worthy of being in the slums of Tijuana ...

Driven by folks that look like wasted motorized bums, stinking to high heaven, covered in dust ...

I'd say this is a justified case of profiling if I ever seen one.

[gaminwench]

But every year, they just smile and wave my dusty ass through ...

[Elliot]

*bites tongue*

[BBadger]

IIRC, the refund is "state" money, having been collected at the store, so the theory being they are refunding money they didn't collect.

That's the bed the Californian state legislature made under the guise of trying to help the environment by promoting recycling, while no doubt skimming off the top when recycled goods don't get redeemed. Now they get to sleep in that bed. This is what happens when one creates a (publicly) subsidized artificially inflated market for any good.

In my mind, Californian citizens should consider the state as defrauding them out of their money, not these "smugglers" who are facilitating exactly what the original goal of this subsidized recycling program was for: encouraging recycling.

[Elliot]

I'm not so sure, BBadger. What I understood from the L. A. Times article, was that the "smuggler" obtained cans that had already been collected for recycling. That is, he bought already recycled cans on the wholesale market. So the "smuggler" did not assist in diverting anything from the landfill stream to the recycling stream. He only played the wholesale market -- in an illegal way.

[WileE13]

Those bug stations are a joke. I pass through the one on the I-5 going into Oregon all the time. I don't even stop anymore, just keep rolling, shake my head and drive on. The one by Tulelake is an even bigger joke considering most of the people going through it are coming from California in the first place. They exist to monitor who comes and goes from the State, not to keep bugs out.

[trilobyte]

I'm nudging this thread over to Food & Drink (that board did not exist when the thread was created and eventually went dormant - we just didn't go back that far into the archives when that board was created).

As others said, it's an issue with recyclables and deposits. I'm guessing they've had some issues recently with people trying to bring wholesale amounts of recyclables from Nevada into California or something.

[BBadger]

I'm not so sure, BBadger. What I understood from the L. A. Times article, was that the "smuggler" obtained cans that had already been collected for recycling. That is, he bought already recycled cans on the wholesale market. So the "smuggler" did not assist in diverting anything from the landfill stream to the recycling stream. He only played the wholesale market -- in an illegal way.

From what I've read it was just bringing in recycled goods from states that don't have recycled good taxes to sell off in California to get the redemption fee. In that manner the "smuggler" is still encouraging recycling by putting demand on wholesale goods from other states. It's not like the recycled goods were stolen off the lots in CA. Also, if those recycled goods end up in other states as cheap wholesale goods, that's California's fault for not managing where their oh-so-but-not-so-valuable recycled goods are ending up.

If California wants to limit the effects of their California-only recycling system, they should mark the cans/bottles specifically sold in California, and only accept those. As far as I'm concerned, if a can or bottle says it is redeemable for $0.10 or whatever in a state, that makes it "legal tender" to be exchanged for money.

[Corvus]

That's the bed the Californian state legislature made under the guise of trying to help the environment by promoting recycling, while no doubt skimming off the top when recycled goods don't get redeemed. Now they get to sleep in that bed. This is what happens when one creates a (publicly) subsidized artificially inflated market for any good.

California legislators aren't the only ones. Back in 1999 the Feds mandated that in Arizona at least 1% of the vehicles registered had to be alternate fuel (propane or CNG at the time) or electric. So a law was passed that if you bought a car or light truck and had a conversion kit installed that let it burn propane or CNG, 40% of the vehicle's cost would be a tax write-off. Not the cost of the kit, the whole vehicle. They estimated the first year it would cost about $10-million.

Well, anybody with more than two brain cells to rub together could have predicted the outcome. People were buying one-ton or ton and a half pickups or full-sized SUVs, paying a couple grand for the kit (automobiles are a bit small to take one) and got a 40% discount off the rest. Needless to say, they came loaded with every option imaginable. When the plug was yanked after nine months, the tick was for $425-million, about the state deficit at the time.

Full disclosure: During the period I bought a used CNG-only Honda at a nice price. The guy I'd bought it from had taken a much smaller tax credit before the kerfluffle and passed at least some of it on to me. I did get the natural gas compressor's installation paid for. 325,000 miles and still running.

[Elliot]

BBadger, I agree that having an additional market for Arizona's already-collected cans-and-bottles in the form of an "illicit" trade to California... can (pardon the pun) encourage increased collection of the stuff in Arizona. So in that sense, the "crime" encourages more recycling, yes. But on a rather small scale, I should think.

As mentioned earlier, the cans-n-bottles sold in California ARE marked as such. But it is clearly not realistic to read those marks on every piece -- specially not after they are flattened.

Well, I will plan on having a bit of fun with this next year, along the lines I mentioned earlier.

[BBadger]

Well, anybody with more than two brain cells to rub together could have predicted the outcome. People were buying one-ton or ton and a half pickups or full-sized SUVs, paying a couple grand for the kit (automobiles are a bit small to take one) and got a 40% discount off the rest. Needless to say, they came loaded with every option imaginable. When the plug was yanked after nine months, the tick was for $425-million, about the state deficit at the time.

Ouch!.. well, for Arizona anyway.

BBadger, I agree that having an additional market for Arizona's already-collected cans-and-bottles in the form of an "illicit" trade to California... can (pardon the pun) encourage increased collection of the stuff in Arizona. So in that sense, the "crime" encourages more recycling, yes. But on a rather small scale, I should think.

And to be honest, I'm not even concerned really about where the recycled goods come from -- it's still recycling right? All part of this big program where we take goods and try to reuse the materials. These "smugglers" end up being transporters who are receiving their fee (I'm sure they're spinning it that way too). Hell, if California just allowed it and essentially made this a financially attractive venture it would definitely increase demand. It's also not like this artificial subsidy was ever designed to be market sensitive, so it doesn't discourage people from not recycling in CA because of what they'll receive for their cans.

At least on price, anyway. I do realize that CA will suffer effects to the state budget, but I still think that's of their own making. If you subsidize something, you're going to get more of it -- like people recycling. Maybe they're not only the ones helping to pay for the subsidy though, which is just how it goes.

I guess my thinking is that it's an organization's fault if they create and suffer from programs that assume that people are going to follow unwritten rules.

As mentioned earlier, the cans-n-bottles sold in California ARE marked as such. But it is clearly not realistic to read those marks on every piece -- specially not after they are flattened.

Are you talking about the "CA cash refund" on every can I've seen regardless of state, or other specialty marks?

[GreyCoyote]

An interesting data point: a major bottler of soft drinks has a plant locally. The product, designed to be used within 300 miles of the plant, all have "California Redemption Value".

I'm in Texas.

[Meat Hunter]

The same here in Mississippi.

I suppose that they think that our ol' mule wagons cannot travel that far west.

[Elliot]

Based on the information from GreyCoyote and Meat Hunter... I give up.

[BBadger]

I tell ya man, California is practically inviting these "recycling smugglers". It's entrapment if anything!

[mudpuppy000]

It's probably one of those things like making car emissions 50 state compliant, just in case they decide to sell it in California. You get charged the deposit in the store when you buy the stuff so doesn't really matter where it's made.

[WileE13]

The can recycling gig is a total mess for the State of California. Recycling plants are closing up and down the State because for one the cans are not worth what they pay you to recycle, and for two, all the neighboring States are bringing their cans in without paying the initial CRV.

My cousin, born and raised in just over the border from BRC California, currently lives in Nevada near Reno. He still brings his cans into California, drops them off with his family, then they recycle them. It isn't much, but thousands of people do it and it adds up. The real bad culprits will bring whole truckloads into the State then get a friend or family member with CA ID to drop them off and collect CRV.

The recycling centers know this is going on and they do the best they can to catch people, but it is nearly impossible once the cans are in the State and in the hands of a resident.

[WileE13]

"My cousin, born and raised in just over the border from BRC California..."

Sorry, meant to say IN CALIFORNIA.