Five myths about recycling

[Squinch]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/five-myths/five-myths-about-recycling/2018/04/20/9971de66-43e6-11e8-8569-26fda6b404c7_story.html?utm_term=.9fb9d6642ea6

Myth No. 1
Recycling uses more energy than making something new. *snip*
But according to the Environmental Protection Agency, recycling aluminum cans saves 95 percent of the energy needed to make new ones from raw materials. Recycling steel and tin cans saves 60 to 74 percent , recycling paper saves about 60 percent, and recycling plastic and glass saves about one-third of the energy compared with making those products from virgin materials. The energy saved from recycling one glass bottle will operate a 100-watt light bulb for four hours.

*snip*

Myth No. 2
Items must be meticulously sorted for recycling.

When recycling was a relatively novel concept, many waste haulers insisted on strict sorting rules. As collection and recycling machinery evolved, many of those rules changed. Confusion abounds: Can I recycle an envelope with a plastic window? Do I have to remove staples from paper? In my Washington apartment building, neighbors have posted conflicting signs about whether glass must be sorted by color or if plastic bags are accepted.

*snip*

Myth No. 3
Products made from recycled content are lower quality.

*snip*

Myth No. 4
Recyclables just end up in the trash.

*snip*

Myth No. 5
Recycling should pay for itself.

[rickford66]

1. What about the cost of needing landfills ?

I didn't see that mentioned and wonder if it was considered when calculating costs. Even if recycling loses money for a community, not expanding a landfill seems more important.

[yortsed snacilbuper]

2. A look inside Pittsburgh's single-stream recycling system and why it's not quite working.

contamination problems

Single-stream recycling is a cheap but inefficient system that experts describe as “rudderless and drifting,” if not outright broken. Contamination is both in and out of the hands of residents who pile recyclables on the curb every other week.
For instance, greasy cardboard pizza boxes and glass or plastic jars with food left in them are considered contaminants. (No water is used during the sorting process.)

Some items that are technically recyclable are not recoverable in every region, or worth it for sorting facilities to bring to market. John Hudock, manager of Recycle Source, the city’s recycling contractor, specifically mentioned the black plastic food containers you might find in the prepared foods section at Giant Eagle as an example. Even biodegradable plastics can contaminate the mix because they contain a different additive.

“The best way to think of recycling is a commodities market, no different than oil or orange futures,” said Justin Stockdale, western regional director for the Pennsylvania Resources Council.
Furthermore, some materials are automatically a loss. According to its contract, the city pays $17.50 for every ton of glass brought to Recycle Source. Because single-stream recycling produces broken, mixed glass — green, brown and clear — its value has decreased. Ironically, glass tends to be the heaviest of recyclable materials. Tiny shards also contaminate the mixed paper and plastics.
“What the packer truck does is squeezes everything inside of it so you don’t have to make trips to the recycling facility as much, saves time and saves money. All the glass breaks immediately. That’s the problem,” said John Dernbach, director of Widner University’s Environmental Law and Sustainability Center and one of the architects of Pennsylvania’s recycling law in 1988.
A 2017 report conducted by 100 Resilient Cities — a Rockefeller Foundation program of which Pittsburgh is a member — described the city’s waste and recycling programs as “a culmination of many programs introduced by many administrations over a period of decades.” The “fragmented and disjointed” program, the report went on, has created “a culture that knows that whatever is placed by the curb will eventually be collected by the city.”

The authors recommended that Pittsburgh implement a “pay-as-you-throw” trash fee system and stricter enforcement to encourage recycling.

The report was produced as a guideline for the city to reach “zero waste” by 2030, a goal Mayor Bill Peduto declared in 2015.
Pittsburgh’s current recycling rate is between 17 and 18 percent, well under the national average which is at 34 percent.
Grant Ervin, the city’s chief resilience officer, said the administration is planning “policy modernization” over the next one to five years, though he could not offer specifics.

https://newsinteractive.post-gazette.com/recycling/

[Zoonart]

3. The big problem with recycling is that

we are washing our garbage. With water becoming a problem and the increasing salinity of our rivers in this country, I think the era of wasting water to wash garbage is bound to end. Also, using my well water to wash the garbage that I PAY to have picked up by a company that then re-sells it, does not track for me.
I do it, but it is backwards. What has to happen is pressure on manufacturing to produce more bio-degradable and re-useable packaging.

Take cosmetics....to put a one oz. plastic tube inside a hard plastic clam-shell and then put that inside of a cadboard box, lined with corrugated paper is just insane.

[mucifer]

4. I Chicago we have different garbage cans for recycling. If one item that is not

recyclable i.e. a cardboard pizza box, is in the container NOTHING in the container is recycled. So not much in Chicago gets recycled. It's a sad fact.

[milestogo]

5. We have a huge recycling bin outside my apartment.

Inside I have a separate bagged garbage can for recyclables, so I just take the bag out. From the looks of what ends up in the bin, it would appear that some people throw just about anything into it.