Kevin, I agree with your idea about working to solve something, however, I can't in good conscience also work to make CCE more profitable by doing this. My assumption is that CCE is interested in this idea because it will drastically reduce their input costs to use recycled material versus having to pay top dollar to develop new bottles from raw materials. While it is admirable to reduce the use of new raw materials, the idea is still inherently flawed because you are promoting a product that offers no real value to society. A better challenge might be to focus on the plastic bottles used for delivery of drinking water such as Dasani, a CCE owned brand. If we put the conversation about sugary soft drinks aside and focus on bottled water, wouldn't the better challenge be to figure how to get people to stop buying bottled water in the first place,? Instead focusing them on buying water in bulk containers and using reusable water bottles? This tactic would cut out much more production of bottles that need to be recycled in the first place? Wasting energy on solving symptoms of a model that doesn't make sense in the first place is inefficient. We should be trying to solve the really big problems - the causes and not the symptoms.
I'm all about getting people to recycle more, but wouldn't OpenIDEO be better off not partnering with a company that sells useless products in the first place? The problem that we should be trying to solve is how to change consumer behavior to not drink toxic products like Coca-Cola. A true solution would be one that protects both the environment and people at the same time. If these products aren't purchased in the first place, we solve the recycling problem, we keep people healthier, and we reduce health care costs for issues such as type II diabetes and obesity. That sounds a like a challenge that is much more interesting to solve. Sorry IDEO, but I think you missed the boat on this partnership. Smells funny to me.