Monday, March 18, 2019

Recycling

Recycling is an article of faith for so many Americans, but what most don't know is that their recycled goods are just thrown in a landfill or burned to create energy:
Recycling, for decades an almost reflexive effort by American households and businesses to reduce waste and help the environment, is collapsing in many parts of the country.

Philadelphia is now burning about half of its 1.5 million residents’ recycling material in an incinerator that converts waste to energy. In Memphis, the international airport still has recycling bins around the terminals, but every collected can, bottle and newspaper is sent to a landfill. And last month, officials in the central Florida city of Deltona faced the reality that, despite their best efforts to recycle, their curbside program was not working and suspended it.

Those are just three of the hundreds of towns and cities across the country that have canceled recycling programs, limited the types of material they accepted or agreed to huge price increases.

“We are in a crisis moment in the recycling movement right now,” said Fiona Ma, the treasurer of California, where recycling costs have increased in some cities.

Prompting this nationwide reckoning is China, which until January 2018 had been a big buyer of recyclable material collected in the United States. That stopped when Chinese officials determined that too much trash was mixed in with recyclable materials like cardboard and certain plastics. After that, Thailand and India started to accept more imported scrap, but even they are imposing new restrictions.

The turmoil in the global scrap markets  began affecting American communities last year, and the problems have only deepened.
What I get from this is that recycling only works if we have a 3rd world to dump our trash in.
With fewer buyers, recycling companies are recouping their lost profits by charging cities more, in some cases four times what they charged last year.

Amid the soaring costs, cities and towns are making hard choices about whether to raise taxes, cut other municipal services or abandon an effort that took hold during the environmental movement of the 1970s.

2 comments:

Anna A said...

I, frankly, like the idea of burning for energy. With the right kind of afterburn treatment to take care of chlorides, sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides, all that would come out is carbon dioxide and water. Plus the extra energy for electricity.

Auntie Ann said...

I love Penn & Teller's take:

https://www.bitchute.com/video/j0Hd6UfA4MKo/