Spain to charge 10 cents per can or bottle, according to a forum
Spain will charge 10 cents per container, according to a forum post. In Germany, the rate is 25 cents, and in Portugal, a user mentioned Lisbon asking for its suspension.
English · Original discussion in Spanish · Published
A 10-cent deposit per container: how it works in Europe
The 10-cent deposit per container is the measure that, according to the message initiating the debate, the Government plans to implement. Each can and bottle you buy would carry an extra cost that you only recover if you take the trouble to return the container, whole and legible, into the corresponding machine. Up until there, that is what was known.
For several participants, this is not an idea of the Spanish Executive Branch, but a requirement coming from Brussels within the European package of recycling targets. The avenue for complaint would be in the European Union, not in Madrid. The deposit-refund container system has been running in much of Europe for years, with very different prices, results, and side effects depending on the country.
In which countries does the bottle and can deposit system already operate?
Germany is the reference case: the Pfand, with 25 cents per container, has been in place for over a decade. The Netherlands increased its prices between 10 and 15 cents. Portugal activated its Volta system months ago. Romania also applies it.
The comparison of prices is the first thing that stands out: the 10 cents planned falls short of the German model. The operational comparison comes later, when problems arise. According to one participant who has used the system in the Netherlands, return machines do not accept any container: if the can was purchased before the regulation came into force, or comes from another country, the reader rejects it. The refund is not an automatic right; it is a process with conditions.
The side effect attributed to Portugal: removed containers
The Portuguese case is the most cited in the thread. According to one message, with Volta already operational, the mayor of Lisbon has asked the Government to suspend the system. The reason is not ideological: there are people who seek containers to claim the deposit, which disturbs and empties collection points while municipal cleaning services cannot keep up with removing scattered trash.
How much does the deposit increase the grocery bill
According to a calculation circulating in the thread, a plain brand soft drink can that costs 32 cents today would rise to 42 cents, provided the retailer passes on the full deposit cost. Multiplied by a family's consumption, the extra cost ceases to be anecdotal.
The question that nobody answers with data is what happens regarding the CPI. If the deposit is passed on in full and not refunded, it counts as inflation; if it is refunded, theoretically it does not.
In the scenario presented by one participant, with gasoline at 2 euros and an inflation rate of 4.3% in August, an extra push to the shopping basket would complicate any pension review. Another message points to increases between 10 and 50 cents depending on the product.
Returning the vessel: when returnable containers were the norm
Spain is not inventing anything, and those who remember know it. In the 70s and much of the 80s, glass bottles for soft drinks and beer were returned: the customer brought the empty container to the supermarket, bar, or store and recovered a small amount. This peine with sifters too. Factories washed, disinfected, and refilled them.
The system died out in the mid-80s with the arrival of disposable containers. However, it never disappeared in hospitality: there are returnable and non-returnable bottles, and the latter are still collected, sterilized, and reused. The closed circuit that is now presented as ecological innovation worked four decades ago without anyone calling it a circular economy.
Who keeps the money from containers that nobody returns
Here is the crux of the matter. The deposit is not a payment for recycling: it is a retention that is refunded to you. Whoever does not return the container loses those cents, and that money does not disappear.
The suspicion that keeps repeating is that the measure ends up functioning as a hidden surcharge that swells coffers without needing to raise taxes.
To the financial calculation are added household costs: storing containers at home until the next supermarket visit, carrying them, and dealing with broken machines. Some argue that the container is already paid for in the product price today, so the deposit amounts to paying twice. The most obvious counterargument is that without friction, nobody moves a muscle.
The logic of the system is simple: pocket money is the only incentive that works on a large scale. Making it compatible with opportunism, broken machines, and the Spanish urban landscape is another matter. If Portugal ends up suspending Volta, Spain will have to decide whether the entire model matters or only the part that collects.
The removed containers described in the thread are already the first warning signal.
The 10-cent deposit per container is the measure that, according to the message initiating the debate, the Government plans to implement. Each can and bottle you buy would carry an extra cost that you only recover if you take the trouble to return the container, whole and legible, into the corresponding machine. Up until there, that is what was known.
For several participants, this is not an idea of the Spanish Executive Branch, but a requirement coming from Brussels within the European package of recycling targets. The avenue for complaint would be in the European Union, not in Madrid. The deposit-refund container system has been running in much of Europe for years, with very different prices, results, and side effects depending on the country.
In which countries does the bottle and can deposit system already operate?
Germany is the reference case: the Pfand, with 25 cents per container, has been in place for over a decade. The Netherlands increased its prices between 10 and 15 cents. Portugal activated its Volta system months ago. Romania also applies it.
The comparison of prices is the first thing that stands out: the 10 cents planned falls short of the German model. The operational comparison comes later, when problems arise. According to one participant who has used the system in the Netherlands, return machines do not accept any container: if the can was purchased before the regulation came into force, or comes from another country, the reader rejects it. The refund is not an automatic right; it is a process with conditions.
The side effect attributed to Portugal: removed containers
The Portuguese case is the most cited in the thread. According to one message, with Volta already operational, the mayor of Lisbon has asked the Government to suspend the system. The reason is not ideological: there are people who seek containers to claim the deposit, which disturbs and empties collection points while municipal cleaning services cannot keep up with removing scattered trash.
How much does the deposit increase the grocery bill
According to a calculation circulating in the thread, a plain brand soft drink can that costs 32 cents today would rise to 42 cents, provided the retailer passes on the full deposit cost. Multiplied by a family's consumption, the extra cost ceases to be anecdotal.
The question that nobody answers with data is what happens regarding the CPI. If the deposit is passed on in full and not refunded, it counts as inflation; if it is refunded, theoretically it does not.
In the scenario presented by one participant, with gasoline at 2 euros and an inflation rate of 4.3% in August, an extra push to the shopping basket would complicate any pension review. Another message points to increases between 10 and 50 cents depending on the product.
Returning the vessel: when returnable containers were the norm
Spain is not inventing anything, and those who remember know it. In the 70s and much of the 80s, glass bottles for soft drinks and beer were returned: the customer brought the empty container to the supermarket, bar, or store and recovered a small amount. This peine with sifters too. Factories washed, disinfected, and refilled them.
The system died out in the mid-80s with the arrival of disposable containers. However, it never disappeared in hospitality: there are returnable and non-returnable bottles, and the latter are still collected, sterilized, and reused. The closed circuit that is now presented as ecological innovation worked four decades ago without anyone calling it a circular economy.
Who keeps the money from containers that nobody returns
Here is the crux of the matter. The deposit is not a payment for recycling: it is a retention that is refunded to you. Whoever does not return the container loses those cents, and that money does not disappear.
The suspicion that keeps repeating is that the measure ends up functioning as a hidden surcharge that swells coffers without needing to raise taxes.
To the financial calculation are added household costs: storing containers at home until the next supermarket visit, carrying them, and dealing with broken machines. Some argue that the container is already paid for in the product price today, so the deposit amounts to paying twice. The most obvious counterargument is that without friction, nobody moves a muscle.
The logic of the system is simple: pocket money is the only incentive that works on a large scale. Making it compatible with opportunism, broken machines, and the Spanish urban landscape is another matter. If Portugal ends up suspending Volta, Spain will have to decide whether the entire model matters or only the part that collects.
The removed containers described in the thread are already the first warning signal.
Summary of a discussion on Burbuja.info - Foro de economía, actualidad y política., translated from Spanish and reviewed before publication. Read the full discussion (171 replies).
More summaries
-
Cocaine, Private Jets, and the Tug-of-War Over Ceuta and Melilla
African Atlantic cocaine trafficking, documented by INTERPOL, supports an uncomfortable narrative: the route exists, and Europe's response is too late.
-
Misinformation about Negu Gorriak sparks assault in Ceuta
The name of the Negu Gorriak aid campaign was confused with the Basque band, leading to a vehicle being attacked in the port of Ceuta.
-
Euthanasia in Old Age: Autonomy vs. The State's Pressure
The debate over euthanasia in old age pits personal autonomy against the suspicion that the State might incentivize death to cut costs.
-
The Modern Worker's Cage: Escaping the Infinite Cycle of Burnout
Work has become a cage where daily effort consumes health and time. Discover why we push ourselves so hard and how to break the cycle.
-
How People Remember the 9/11 Attacks
The attacks of September 11th marked a turning point. Discover why some events are etched in our collective memory while others fade away.
-
Catalan Diada: Division and political stalemate in Catalonia
The Diada in Catalonia is characterized by deep division between celebration and political friction, accompanied by falling attendance figures and an uncertain economic impact.