The thing that rubs me the wrong way is that it’s not that #3 or whatever isn’t recyclable, it’s that it’s not commercially viable to recycle it, as if burying it is somehow of more commercially viable.
It literally comes down to some penny pinching now at the expense of a few generations down the line having to deal with land fills.
It’s only commercially viable to bury most of our waste because we exclude the environmental and intergenerational costs of doing so.
As the article mentions, many of the things not able to be put in kerbside recycling can be collected and dropped off at collection centres (different things depending on where you are in the country).
Not mentioned is Terracycle. Various stores or companies that sponsor this have dropoff points, or you can collect up your toothpaste tubes or razors or whatever else is supported and send them in using prepaid shipping labels.
For things not covered under a sponsorship, Terracycle let you to pay to have it recycled. But for lack of a better term, it’s fucking expensive. A small all-in-one box (put anything in it that they accept - which is almost anything) will set you back $315.
One big problem is that while many things are technically recyclable, but it’s not a long term plan. Most plastics are no longer useful after being recycled a couple of times, glass and metals are much more recyclable. However, they are also heavier, so e.g. glass may end up using more oil overall because of the extra weight that needs to be transported. Aluminium is super recyclable and also light, we should use it more, though mining it is not cheap.
Really what we need is closed loop systems. Instead of making stuff from the cheapest product available then asking how to recycle it, we should work out what is the most reusable or recyclable and then make stuff out of that.
The thing that rubs me the wrong way is that it’s not that #3 or whatever isn’t recyclable, it’s that it’s not commercially viable to recycle it, as if burying it is somehow of more commercially viable.
It literally comes down to some penny pinching now at the expense of a few generations down the line having to deal with land fills.
It’s only commercially viable to bury most of our waste because we exclude the environmental and intergenerational costs of doing so.
As the article mentions, many of the things not able to be put in kerbside recycling can be collected and dropped off at collection centres (different things depending on where you are in the country).
Not mentioned is Terracycle. Various stores or companies that sponsor this have dropoff points, or you can collect up your toothpaste tubes or razors or whatever else is supported and send them in using prepaid shipping labels.
For things not covered under a sponsorship, Terracycle let you to pay to have it recycled. But for lack of a better term, it’s fucking expensive. A small all-in-one box (put anything in it that they accept - which is almost anything) will set you back $315.
One big problem is that while many things are technically recyclable, but it’s not a long term plan. Most plastics are no longer useful after being recycled a couple of times, glass and metals are much more recyclable. However, they are also heavier, so e.g. glass may end up using more oil overall because of the extra weight that needs to be transported. Aluminium is super recyclable and also light, we should use it more, though mining it is not cheap.
Really what we need is closed loop systems. Instead of making stuff from the cheapest product available then asking how to recycle it, we should work out what is the most reusable or recyclable and then make stuff out of that.
So I have to pay extra in time and effort because my taxes don’t cover recycling due to a corporation not seeing a profit in it?