Here’s how city will soon boost its recycling rate

Recycling rates in Baltimore have been below the national average for years. But Baltimore’s recent embrace of a bold and innovative public-private partnership could make it a blueprint for cities nationwide on how to ramp up the collection and remaking of recyclable materials for a true circular economy where products are remade instead of landfilled.

Many families in Baltimore have been using outdated, inadequate curbside recycling bins. The bins aren’t big enough to handle the usual amount of recyclable materials that households generate so many recyclable bottles and cans are wasted. That is about to change. Mayor Brandon Scott has announced plans to ensure equal access to recycling. This initiative will dramatically increase the amount of recyclable materials that are collected and recycled into new products, and protect the health and safety of materials collection workers.

Baltimore has become the latest city to take part in “Every Bottle Back,” an initiative by the beverage industry that joins together municipalities, environmental groups and businesses to invest in stateof-the-art collection systems and educational campaigns that makes recycling more effective.

For our part, Every Bottle Back is helping our industry reduce its plastic footprint by increasing the amount of our plastic bottles that are collected so they can be remade into new bottles.

Together with The Coca-Cola Company, Keurig Dr Pepper, PepsiCo and national and global environmental groups The Recycling Partnership, Closed Loop Partners and World Wildlife Fund, we’re investing $1.65 million in Baltimore to upgrade its recycling system. This investment will help 205,000 households upgrade to lidded recycling carts that will be provided by the city to collect and process more recyclable materials. This modernization will also limit contact between sanitation workers and make for a safer recycling process.

The investment will result in the collection of 40 million pounds of new recyclables annually which amounts to an 80% increase of recyclables per household. Additionally, the program will create 29.6 million pounds of new recycled plastic over 10 years.

As industries and municipalities in Maryland join forces to upgrade recycling systems, the city will launch a new recycling campaign to assist with vulnerable communities that are impacted most by waste and litter.

Our hope is that Baltimore will serve as a model for Maryland and localities nationwide on how progress can be made through cross-industry partnerships and municipal collaboration.

To truly achieve a circular economy, we must all be environmental champions.

Require a driver’s license to vote? Not so fast.

Letter writer Richard Webb omitted much in his recent call for photo IDs (“Requiring photo ID is not voter suppression,” June 25).

First, he said that you can get a photo identification for free. But he didn’t say that if you had lost your birth certificate and needed another, that will cost you. You have to go to a bureaucracy, which often has long lines. If you need to take time off from work, that will cost you as well. Sometimes, transportation is another hassle.

Mr. Webb said he had a list of things for which you need an ID. Even without seeing the list, I can be sure that with one exception, these are all privileges. Driving is a privilege: It’s so inherently dangerous that the states may deny licenses to people who can’t pass tests of knowledge and skill. Drinking is a privilege: The 21st Amendment said that while the federal prohibition of alcohol was no longer banned, states could maintain their own bans. Even “the right to keep and bear arms” is constrained by language calling for the “militia” to be “well-regulated.”

I also can be sure that everything on his list is a convenience. Driving is so convenient that just about anyone who can is willing to go through the bureaucracy to get their license to do it.

But picture someone who can’t drive, say because of a disability. If for everything else on Mr. Webb’s list they could either find a workaround or do without, why should they need to put up with the bureaucracy to get an ID that they don’t need? Would such a person be incapable of handling adult responsibilities?

I think this argument that anyone can get an ID is “able-splaining,” not taking the time nor using the imagination to put yourself in the position of someone who had heretofore not needed an ID.

Finally, what’s with all the fuss? If all who advocate for voter IDs really think they’re needed, why don’t they render all assistance to get them to eligible voters? I think that the push for photo IDs was instigated by Republicans who want the collateral damage from people who can’t get them.