Slashdot Mirror
Is Recycling Really Worth It?
sickofbluebins asks: "If one does a google on Why To Recycle there is a staggering amount of information on how recycling saves trees, resources, reduces pollution and generally is A Good Thing (tm). However, I recently read this article which comments that most recycling (besides aluminum) is not really worth it, and most of the recycling push is not based on science, but rather just by more politically based groups. I remember having people in my college classes be shocked when I informed them (being from a small town in the middle of logging country), that old growth forest was NOT being used for paper, as those trees produce the best lumber for things like houses and decks. The shock continued when I also stated in fact most paper comes from trees planted just for that purpose. All this makes me wonder how accurate the typical recycling information is.
So I ask you, Slashdot readers, have any of you seen a true 'scientific' study of the benefits (or lack thereof) of recycling, especially renewable resources such as paper. I would really like to know what recycling really helps our planet out, and what is just a bunch of hype."
My favorite is glass recycling. It would be hard to come up with a more pointless waste of time and effort. That isn't to say some people don't try (e.g. cutting the loops in the plastic that holds six-packs together so that dolphins don't get them stuck on their snouts and drown, or buying products from people you disaprove of in order to publicly burn them).
Glass is essentially sand that has been cleaned and melted. The main cost is the energy to melt & form it; the second most significant cost is the energy to transport it. The actual cost (both in dollars and environmental factors) of the sand and the cleaning are negligable compaired to these. If glass containers can be reused in the same process (the way you used to refill milk bottles), great. But to collect all sorts of assorted glass containers and transport them a great distance to someplace where they can be ground up to make sand is plain silly.
IMHO.
-- MarkusQ
Reuse is becoming cheaper than disposal for lots of things.
Things might be different over there in the land of the freely available, but here in Europe, the push to recycle has as much to do with not generating waste. We're running out of space to put the stuff, and noone wants incinerators built near them, so every attempt to build one gets held up in court for years.
And yes, sand for glass is pretty damn cheap, but in some places, it can be a lot easier to turn old glass into new glass than to find a new quarry, or beach that isn't vanishing due to everyone driving down and taking sand and rocks for their gardens.
The economic arguments aren't all focused on costs of production, or sustainable use of resources anymore (since we're supposed to have learnt the lessons by now).
You hit the nail on the head: Recycling IS pointless if the materials don't get used again. I'm not anti-reuse. I'm simply a realist.
Ponder this: Newsprint was usually worth about 25 USD per ton before the SupahGreens got us all whipped up and recycling. That's right. People would buy it. Now, because of the glut of old newsprint it costs about 50 bucks to have it taken off the hands of the collection station.
Do you actually KNOW what happens after you dutifully separate all of your newsprint from everything else, bundle it up, and toss it into the green bin? You would like to think you did. Chances are about half that it will get stored in a warehouse for a while, and it may end up in a landfill, yet. (At an additional cost to the community, which now paid twice: once for the recycling program and again for the landfill usage.)
That's an important point.
: ;-)
A few years ago , our town's landfill, well, filled up.
But... due to a rather amazing bit of short-sightedness there's a two year delay in getting the new landfill online! What to do?
Well, in our case, they've gotten the Recycling Nazi's to take over operation of the landfill (which is rapidly turning into a large hill, there's a good view from the top).
Now everyone going in gets their load of junk inspected for anything recyclable by the Recycling Nazi's. Boxes / glass / paper / car parts / old fridges / oil / any domestic appliance gets taken and so on. The only thing that makes it to the landfill now is domestic refuse. Of course, when I use the phrase "Recycling Nazi" I'm being facetious - they're quite friendly and will happily sift through your junk without any effort on your part.
The upshot of this is of course
- Our landfill grows at a slower rate than it did previously. Which is lucky , because for a while there we all thought it would start blocking out the sun soon
- That one man's junk is another man's treasure and they make a bit of cash selling used parts cheap.(Eg I bought an A/C compressor for my car for $5, as opposed to $400 new)
You are in a twisty maze of processor lines, all alike.
There is a lot of hype here.
I recently read an article in a scientific journal (I think it was 'Water & Environment Manager') about how recycling paper is actually detrimental to the environment; not just in terms of the energy costs involved in, but in long term damage to the unique biosystems of landfill sites.
As paper decomposes it encourages the growth of microorgamisms that effectively 'eat' trash. Without these microrganisms, material such as plastics are taking much longer to degrade. So, rather ironically, putting less paper into the landfills is actually a bad thing.
Unfortunatly, because it has been long been government policy to tell people that recycling is a 'good thing' (not just in the states, but practically everywhere), you aren't exactly going to be told 'put your paper in with the rest of your trash' anytime soon.
If there was ever a post tat deserved a +1 insightful, it's the parent post.
Recycling is about anything but saving te environment. It's about economics.
Practically nobody who is in a position to really 'clean things up' is motivated to do so. People who run recycling plants by and large don't give a hoot about the environment - they're trying to make a profit. Recycling only happens when it's easier/faster/cheaper/more profitable than using new materials. And you can make all the federal laws you want about it, you know how well those work...
=Smidge=
Sure (most of these references are in swedish, but
What there IS a shortage of is ENERGY.
Do you agree now that recycling is scientifically based, and saves energy?