When an empty drink container is returned to a reverse vending machine, often as part of a deposit return scheme (also known as deposit return system or DRS), it can be recycled back into another container. DRSs help address plastic pollution, increase recycling, and move away from traditional linear “take-make-dispose” models and towards a circular economy. DRSs have been shown to reduce litter, reduce costs, create jobs, among other benefits.
Environmental impact of deposit return schemes
Reduction of litter and ocean plastic pollution
32% of all plastic packaging ends up in nature as litter, with at least 8 million tons entering the oceans each year.¹ DRSs are an effective tool for combatting this. Beverage container litter is reduced by 54% on average as a share of total litter in regions with a DRS compared to those without, with studies showing reductions between 40% and 70% in some jurisdictions, and in other cases even higher.² Regions with a meaningful deposit value experience less drink container litter as a proportion of all litter, compared to those with a low deposit value or no DRS.³
Less reliance on raw materials
Bottle and can recycling enables manufacturers to replace virgin material when producing new goods. This avoids the upstream environmental impacts associated with virgin material extraction, transportation and processing.
Climate benefits
According to an Ellen MacArthur Foundation study, recycling one ton of plastics could reduce emissions by 1.1-3.0 tons of CO2e* compared to producing the same ton of plastics from virgin fossil feedstock.⁴ Modernizing Massachusetts’ DRS to include more beverage containers and reach a 90% return rate is projected to reduce an additional 182 thousand metric tons of CO2 per year, the equivalent of removing 39,600 cars off the road for an entire year.⁵
Containers "saved" from landfill
A staggering amount of recyclable plastic packaging is sent to landfills, incinerators or leaked into nature each year – 86% of plastic packaging in total.⁶ This material is sought after by industries seeking to use it to manufacture new products, which means society is unnecessarily disposing of valuable resources. Deposit systems “close the loop” on packaging by capturing it before it becomes waste, and recycling it at a high quality.
Increasing recycling
More material captured for recycling
The effectiveness of deposit return lies in the unique financial incentive for consumers to return used containers for recycling.⁷ The European median collection rate for PET plastic beverage containers in a curbside system is 50%, vs 87% for deposit return systems.⁷ In the US on average, 25% of aluminum, glass and plastic non-deposit containers are collected for recycling vs 66% of deposit containers.⁸
Recycling in a closed loop
While collecting material is half the challenge, it is also crucial that collection systems preserve the quality of the material – to ensure it can truly be recycled into new, food-grade containers rather than lower-quality applications that cannot be recycled (for example, a park bench). Separate collection and processing of containers in a DRS maintains the materials' purity. This results in more demand from manufacturers, and a significantly higher market value than containers handled by “single-stream” collection, due to contamination.⁹ For example, in April 2025, PET post-consumer bales collected and processed through California’s DRS have a value 88% greater than PET collected through the state’s curbside program.¹⁰
Access to recycling
High-performing DRSs allow all consumers – regardless of demographic or income – equal access to recycling services. Convenient access is key in increasing recycling.
Facilitating transitions to reuse
Deposit return can also accommodate reusable drink containers. DRSs help shift consumer behavior to return containers and build out the infrastructure to make reuse possible. Germany, for example, operates one of the most successful programs for reusable drink containers in the world. It has a 43.3% reuse quota as of 2023.¹¹ Oregon’s program for reusable beer containers started in part because the infrastructure and cost-sharing between producers was already in place through the DRS for non-reusable containers.
Cost savings with deposit return schemes
Litter clean-up cost savings
There is a cost to municipalities, regional governments and private property owners for dealing with litter, and a further, uncalculated environmental cost when this litter escapes into the marine environment and food chain.¹² Modernizing New York’s DRS, for example, is projected to save municipalities US$14 million annually.¹³
Waste disposal cost savings
Disposing of recyclable drink containers in incinerators or landfills incurs a cost through taxes or private waste services. Adding a meaningful deposit has shown to divert most eligible drink containers from disposal, saving money and freeing capacity to process more recyclables.¹⁴
Communities and economy impact of deposit return schemes
Enjoyment of local environment
Research shows that clean, litter-free surroundings lead to better quality of life. Sociology studies have shown that people are willing to pay to live in areas without litter. A Belgian study, for example, calculated the willingness to pay for the removal of beverage litter at the equivalent of US$33.28 per household per year, which if applied across the EU and US would equate to US$11.6 billion (€9.8 billion).¹⁵ ¹⁶
Litter harms our marine environment, but it also affects our communities. We know from studies that litter has a real impact on house prices, tourism, even on mental health. So there’s a lot more indirect costs of litter that are just hidden to us, but are absolutely there every day.
Jobs
DRSs are a job creator in the sense that they create market demand for collection, sorting, counting, processing and recycling services.¹⁷ In 2020, the calculated number of direct, indirect and induced jobs resulting from California’s DRS was over 7,800.¹⁸
Creation of a local circular economy
Regions with deposit systems are also likely to spur the creation of local material processors, recyclers and manufacturers. A good example is New York. It is home to multiple container processing facilities, two PET plastic reclamation facilities, and two glass bottle manufacturers, all of which depend on the deposit system’s reliable supply of clean, high-quality material.
2 “Littered with evidence: Proof that deposit return systems work,” Reloop. June 2025.
3 ”Littered Bottles and Cans: Higher in Virginia Than in States with Bottle Bills,” Longwood University. 2020. Refers to Michigan and Oregon, which have higher deposit values than other US states.
4 “The New Plastics Economy: Rethinking the future of plastics and catalyzing action,” Ellen MacArthur Foundation. 2019.
5 “Why Modernizing the Bottle Bill Would Help Fight Climate Change,” Container Recycling Institute. 2023.
6 “New Plastics Economy: Rethinking the Future of Plastics,” World Economic Forum. December 2015.
7 “PET Market in Europe State of Play: 2022,” Plastic Recyclers Europe, PET Container Recycling Europe, Natural Mineral Waters Europe and UNESDA Soft Drinks Europe, Eunomia. 2022.
8 Testimony to U.S. Senate Environment & Public Works Committee, Container Recycling Institute. 2023. EPS.Senate.Gov
9 RecyclingMarkets.net lists baled PET market value data from deposit streams as 58% to 93% higher than baled PET from non-deposit streams. This refers to deposit vs non-deposit PET in the northeast USA, January-June 2020. Susan Collins of the Container Recycling Institute commented that this is higher than normal due to COVID-19 implications and deposit PET is typically 40% higher.
10 “PET/RPET Market Update Quarter Ending March 31, 2025,” NAPCOR. April 2025.
11 Deutsche Umwelthilfe, Bundesweite Erhebung von Daten zum Verbrauch von Getränken in Mehrweggetränkeverpackungen - Bezugsjahr 2023 | Umweltbundesamt.
12 “The United States’ contribution of plastic waste to land and ocean,” Law, et al. Science Advance. 2020.
13 “New York State Case Study – Expanded Bottle Bill Impact on Municipal Collections,” Eunomia. April 2025.
14 “Fact Sheet: Deposit Return Systems Generate Cost Savings for Municipalities,” Reloop. 221.
15 RDC Environment (2011) “Évaluation contingente du coût des désagréments visuels causés par les canettes dans les déchets sauvages en Wallonie, Raport Final, Etude pour l’O ce Wallon des Dechets, Décembre 2011.” Can litter in 2011 assumed to also be beverage-related litter in today’s environment.
16 Converted using historical exchange rates available at x-rates.com (accessed April 2013). Household data: US - Statista 2019. EU Statista 2017.
17 “Returning to Work: Understanding the Domestic Jobs Impacts from Di erent Methods of Recycling Beverage Containers,” Container Recycling Institute. 2011.
18 “Genie in a bottle: Unlocking the full potential of California’s bottle bill,” Changing Markets Foundation and National Stewardship Action Council, 2020.
Download the "Unlocking Circularity" white paper
Deposit return scheme best practices
