Recycling is a great idea, (1) to prevent filling of land fills, (2) to help cleanup our environment, (3) to preserve the loss of raw materials, (4) and to reuse available resources, etc. However, not all “recyclables,“ and certainly not all “recycled“ recyclables, are actually reused. Many end up in land fills anyway. The end user recycles them, but the recycler does not recycle them. Therefore, not all “recycled” recyclables end up actually being recycled. They end up in land fills, despite our efforts. The recyclers feel good about recycling, but in truth, this is often “actually“ a waste of time and effort, for both the recycling do-gooder, and the professional recycling expert.

So, …why is this happening?

Having spoken with pro-recyclers, I have learned that some things are not cost effective to recycle. They are recyclable, but it is cheaper and more cost effective to use NEW, raw material In the manufacturing process. Other things are too expensive for the end user to access, so, …they use cheaper, new raw materials.

However, the “appearances“ of recycling are often more “politically correct,“ and more “practical” and more “cost effective” than the actual substance of recycling itself. A couple of examples are appropriate at this point:

1. A city in Tennessee used both a trash container, and a recycling container on trash day. Every one was recycling, using both containers appropriately. But no one was watching, or paying attention at trash pick-up. This went on for years, until one day someone did pay attention. They noted both containers being dumped into the same truck. A phone call was made, and the story made it into the local paper. Well, Poop hit the fan (as they say).

2. Although some towns maintain separate trucks, “some“ dump both trucks at the same central facility, mixing their two contents. Recycling occurs, but expensive “hand separating“ occurs at site. Hummm! When asked, it is said that not all “recycled” material can actually be recycled. Reason?, no call for it, no end user is willing to pay for the cost of recycling of the material. It is cheaper to access new material.. So, recycled material goes to the dump, (sanitary land fill).

3. Even recyclers often can not use the recycled material. It is in an unusable state, or no market for it.

There are yet other examples that could be offered, but, for now, this is a sufficient exampling. I am interested in either your responses, or your examples. I am looking forward to your contributions to these observations.

Recycling: The Truths and the Lies

Recycling is often portrayed as a silver bullet for environmental sustainability, but the reality is far more nuanced. While recycling offers tangible benefits, there are also misconceptions, inefficiencies, and unintended consequences. Let’s break it down.

The Truths About Recycling

The Lies and Misconceptions About Recycling

How to Make Recycling More Effective

Conclusion

Recycling is a crucial part of sustainable waste management, but it is not a panacea. To achieve true sustainability, we must prioritize waste reduction, invest in recycling systems, and move towards a circular economy. By understanding the truths and lies about recycling, we can make informed decisions that genuinely benefit the environment.

If something was fabricated using steel, glass, paper, plastic, certain grains, Portland cement, etc., there is no reason that there can be excess ,and then going to a landfill.

All of them, no exceptions, can be reused following a circular economy.

Steel, as scrap in blast furnaces or in smelters producing a myriad of different products

Glass, to produce more bottles, flasks, flat glass for windows, windshields for cars, shop windows, etc.

Plastic, to fabricate plastic products supplying hundreds of industries in most fields

Certain grains as fertilizers and fuel, for instance the peanut shells, etc

Portland cement. reduced to chunks for mixing with fresh Portland cement for roads

Worn tires, that after trituration have uses as soft pavement in some places like children play areas, etc.

Even used oil from restaurants, (that can be refined as new)

Mattresses from hotels, water in buildings and for gardening, human wastes as fertilizers after treatment, food waste as fuel for Portland cement furnaces

The question is to find a use of recycled material in the circular economy.

Rain is the best example. We are using the seawater for centuries, after Nature recycles it by evaporation, forming clouds and then converted in rain in an endless cycle

Do you know that since decades ago some cities have plants to recycle meat and bones of dead animals, and producing jellies?

#Nolberto Munie

Rugayah Al-ani

You seem to have missed the point of my original entry. There is, like in so many other government programs, Politics, misinformation, misrepresentation, …beautiful “fronts” that belly what is actually going on. Politics makes money off of such programs, when, in reality, they present great looking fronts, that are designed to mask what is really happening. I agree, we should be recycling! However, in many recycling programs there is a dark reality. Things are not what they seem. The end game gets lost in money making skeems. The “people“ think they are doing the right thing, being good little robots, doing what they are told. That is where local government steps in, making people “think” government is running with the ball in one direction, when, in reality, they are undoing all the “good” people are doing with that government program. Government “thinks” no one is watching. To their embarrassment, in so many cases, some people are watching, and raising the flag of warning. Do you now see the point?

Yes, recycle, but keep an eye on government and what they are doing at their end. Do not ASSUME they are doing what they SAY they are.

Well I bear witness that at least in a country that I know very well, is the government that initiated the circular economy, building places in the large cities for people to deposit their items for recycling.

One is for instance, the house waste that is treated by a private company and then used as a fuel for their furnaces.

The other is the multitude of small city familiar undertakings that go to the recycling sites and select by free materials to built gods that are further sold, and thus making a living.

There is another private company that uses worn tires, convert them in small pieces which are sold to the municipality that uses them to build safety floors in citify squares in children playgrounds

What about the aluminum cans that are collected, baled and sent to the Aluminum foundries, which means large savings in electricity and on natural resources.

What about the appearance of second hand shops, that sell used clothing

I am giving you real-life examples, you use only words. Yes, most possible the government gets some undue benefits, but at least it developed a system that reutilize waste, save landfill space and make a living for many people

What is wrong with this? Is it good for the economy or not?

It is also false for you the saving of water from rains and waste water, that is recycled and used to irrigate parks, trees, and street cleaning?

Good, if your city, town, province or state is “actually doing,“ and not just “saying” they are doing; the latter is the case in many towns and cities in the U.S. Often the “appearances” is considered important, held up like a big poster board. The big lie. Liberal “politics.”

Dear Var

I do not doubt that the policy that I described and that is working in the region I mentioned, is not followed by many other communities, but I bear witness that is working in less or greater degree in the country I live, Canada, which is not the country i referred to in my former answer.

Here recycling is effective, albeit and I do not know its intensity, especially when you can find daily that many objects, including computers in good working order, are put in bins for recycling

Var St. Jeor, We recognize the effectiveness of the recycling process in reducing domestic solid waste so we try to ensure as many items as possible can be recycled. However, you have to think about the recycling results, the process, the costs that must be incurred and so on, so that the recycling results can be used appropriately and the recycling results can replace other materials at a cheaper price. Here, careful calculations and processes are needed, so that all recycling results can be collected by the user without having to go into the trash again. The incident that recycled products end up in the trash may be due to a lack of planning for the purpose of recycling results for industry, household crafts, or processing them into new products. The recycling results may be able to suit the needs, both shape and price of the user for sustainable use. That's just a quick thought, thank you.

Bernadetha Susianti

I believe recycling is worth doing. We should reuse what we can, and not wast material in landfills. But, I want “real” recycling, not “pretend” recycling; designed as a feel good, everyone on board, see what we are doing kind of thing; which is what I see going on In many cities and towns. The “impression” of recycling is, in fact, what is occurring in many cities, town and rull communities. The “appearance“ of doing things is pure politics, and shows up in others areas of government, and is a useless wast of funding and amounts to nothing less than “lying to the people.”

I am taking a stand, here, as a way to bring these governmental indiscretions and lyes to the attention of the public. Is every recycling operation falsifying their processes? No, but for some, …I am afraid YES!

Cost-vs-policy is often the cause for such lies and underhanded falsehoods. Political pressure to do politically correct things. The cost of recycling often, though not always, exceeds the budgetary constraints of the recycling operation, so it ends up not being cost effective to recycle. When this occurs, recycling becomes the great lie to the public.

I would recommend a visit to your local recycling-landfills, and recycling centers, as a way of educating yourself regarding what is occurring where your trash is dumped, to see what is really occurring in your areas. But be careful, the “appearances” of recycling are easy to display.

If recycling was really that cost effective? There would be “mining“ of old land fills by the private sector for “valued” recyclables. Something that is seldom, if ever done. Too expensive, and not cost effcitve.

Bernadetha

I agree with you. Recycling is a matter of education and organization

If you educate children to put in their pockets the paper that wrap a candy and then later dispose it in a appropriate section of the garbage can unit in the sidewalk of a street, there is a large contribution to recycling because that garbage arrives at classification areas already separated in paper, aluminum cans, boards, and bottles. How much it cost? Nothing, and actually has been done for decades is some countries.

If a City Hall in a city of any size, open some vacant sites for people to deposit freely bulky items like kitchen ovens, refrigeration units, air conditioners, etc. on dedicated spaces of the plot, the city will have done without cost, a large task in separating items in metals, electrical, mattresses, wooden furniture, metal scraps, etc. and , allowing people to pick up free what they need, or selling it to foundries and thus, making a profit.

If apartment buildings have special containers for each type of garbage for the tenants to deposit paper, bottles, cans, food waste, etc., and have them emptied once a week in large municipality garbage trucks, again the city will have materials that suffered a first classification at no cost, other than the collection cost that anyway has to be done

If there will be a future third war, it will not be for land, oil or lithium, it will be for water. What are we waiting for establishing municipal regulations to recycle waste water in the same place where it is produced and where the tenants pay for it?

I can continue with many more measures, that cost very little to the governments but that require the work of the citizens

Var St. Jeor : it's good opinion. Thank you.

The paradox of recycling is that while it's intended to reduce waste, it often creates new problems. One significant issue is that the supply of recyclable materials exceeds demand. As a result, many items collected for recycling ultimately end up in landfills, defeating the purpose of recycling.

This phenomenon is often referred to as "aspirational recycling," where people feel they're doing their part for the environment, but in reality, their efforts are being undermined by inadequate recycling infrastructure and market demand. It's essential to develop more efficient and effective recycling systems, increase public education and awareness, and promote the development of markets for recyclable materials.

Interestingly, land fills were “originally” thought to allow the decay of biologicals overtime. However, things that slowly decayed, AND things that decayed relatively quickly, were both found to be surprisingly slow to decay when buried deeply in land-fills. In fact, many such things (hotdogs for example), when a land-fill was excavated (after decades of use) that reopening of the landfill, showed those hot dogs still look like hotdogs. Very little, if any decay had occurred. This indicates to me that land fills will remain persistent for many, many generations; and that what was thought to decay, is highly hindered from decaying (likely lack of oxygen) by being buried deeply. They will not simply disappear with time. I hope that, with time, it will become possible to mine our land fills ‘economically‘ to pull useable, or recyclables out for re-use. And to compost compostables for helping to build soil frtlility.

Bernadetha

I agree with you. Recycling is a matter of education and organization

If you educate children to put in their pockets the paper that wraps a candy and then later dispose it in a appropriate section of the garbage can unit in the sidewalk of a street, there is a large contribution to recycling because that garbage arrives at classification areas already separated in paper, cans and bottles.

How much it cost? Nothing, and it is actually have been done for decades is some countries.

If a City Hall open in a large cities some open spaces for people to deposit freely bulky items like kitchen ovens, refrigeration units, air conditioners, etc. on dedicated spaces of the plot, the city will have done a without cost, a large task in separating items in metals, electrical, mattresses, wooden furniture, metal scraps, etc.

If apartment buildings have special containers for each type of garbage from the tenants to deposit paper, bottles, cans, food waste, etc., and have them emptied once a week in large municipality garbage trucks, again the city will have materials that suffered a first classification at no cost

If there will be a future third war, it will not be for land, oil or lithium, it will be for water.

What are we waiting for establishing municipal regulations to recycle waste water in the same place where it is produced?

I can continue with many more measures, that cost very little to the governments but that require this work of the citizens

Nolberto Munier

if our system (after the recyclable is recycled) is broken, or there is no ”financially” sound market for that class of recycled materials, what happens to THOSE recycled materials? Will our hard earned tax dollars be forced into the system to MAkE it work? (Subsidizing) Or at least make it APPEAR to work, ...like electric cars?

I guarantee; if some form of recycling is financially feasible, the private sector WILL be doing it. Is that not what we are seeing now? There will be no need for taxes to be used in supporting an, otherwise, non-feasible (financially) process.

Recycling works, where no tax dollars are needed in support. However, if extra tax dollars are needed to MAKE it work, …it is NOT working.

Another concern: Recycled lawn clippings, pruning, leaves, food scraps, etc., (compost materials), …such processes work, …or at least CAN work, …at home! If we choose to do it!!! I have a large fruit and vegetable garden, plus landscaping. I compost heavily, including neighbor’s recyclables. But, …to make it work, one needs a little education. It is not an easy process, it requires a little education, work and time, especially in turning the “pile,” …optimally, perhaps once per week. And, and at least two separate piles, new and old compostings.

So, a good alternative is to ”recycle” your materials at the local land fill, or at a city or county composting facility, …where such exist.

However, such municipally-run facilities can (often) be poorly run, producing a poor product that is only “partly” composted, and often contain contaminations, such as plastics, non-chopped-up pruning’s, and so forth. Even weed seeds, (non-composted) are very undesirable.

Doing composting, on such large scale, requires an income to buy needed equipment and to pay needed personnel, and a (supervised) incoming material stream. If such facilities are intelligently run, they can pay for themselves by selling that quality product. There are several local, and at large, markets. But, …those markets most assuredly want a quality product.

So, the (assumption) that a specific composting facility is working properly, may be doing more damage than good, to the associated potential market, and to the idea of composting as a whole.

Sometimes, …being able to SAY one has a composting process has more (political value) than ACTUAL value, and can be worse than not having one at all.

Dear Var

Answer to your first question

Well, you need to perform a market study for that, of course, without it, you may be recycling something that nobody wants. You forget that recycling is also developed to decrease using mineral resources, that are the natural capital of a county, like aluminum, iron, plastics, wood, water, etc.

What do you mean by saying that electric cars appear to work?

Only two plants manufacturing electric cars in the world, BYD (China), and Tesla (USA) produced 5,000,000 electric cars in 2023

You speak about taxes and it is true, but for a company fabricating say aluminum cans, it is much cheaper to melt recycled aluminum cans than use virgin aluminum, and consuming by far less electricity. You don't need education fort this, its is financial business

Dear Var

Answering you second question

Here in Canada, recycling food, clips, leaves, etc. has been on for decades, and it works.

Composting is not a big deal, I have done it for years, and the municipalities, deliver the com poster for a few dollars and also give instructions. There is not too much to learn and than can be a acquired in less than an hour

In some Latin American countries, state university are free, and some also dictate free courses about recycling, and they are attended by thousands

I am not referring at composting at large scale, rather as family enterprise. Every Spring, here in Canada, you can see in the supermarkets yards, thousands of bags containing compost, and they are sold, therefore, it appears not to be a bad business.

Regarding your last not very optimistic paragraph, which is for you the solution?

Nolberto Munier

I appreciate your contributions, thank you!

Here are a few reasons why EV's fail to be popular, plus some other interesting notes:

-Most EV charging’s are by way of fossil fuel, wood fuel, or petroleum products, so the environment is not being saved all that much. It also appears that we will be consistently needing that support.

-Too, once a solar cell starts being used, it also slowly starts to become less efficient, reducing the total electrical output.

-Solar vehicles are among the most expensive cars on the road; and, are not likely to reduce much in initial cost. Tax dollars, my hard earned money as a non-EV user, are going to subsidize the purchase of EV’s (because they are so expensive only the wealthiest would normally be able to purchase. Plus, we are using very rare elements to create the batteries, with very limited supplies of those available within the earth.

EV's are expensive to produce, and without government subsidies, would not be affordable to the common man.

Ev's tend to be used in cities and towns, because of the inconvenience of charging over long trips. This is a real drawback. (More on this below)

Too, EV’s have occasionally been known to blow-up (the batteries). I would not want to experience that.

What about wend generation, or solar? They are not the constants we would like them to be:

“Why wend and solar are not enough”

“In most installations to date, intermittency has not been much of a problem. Because renewables are still a small part of the energy mix, it has been easy to fill the power gap from the grid.  But using the grid makes for dirty emissions. Most grid power is generated by the only reliable sources available—usually coal or natural gas, or wood.”

-Sometime hydroelectric, geothermal-

“So whereas we’d like to believe that building wind and solar farms will allow us to close dirty power plants, it’s not so. Those old fossil-fueled plants have to be kept online to power the grid at night, or whenever clouds cover the sun, or the wind quits.  And because sun and wind outages can last for a week or longer, those old power plants actually need to run most of the time.”

https://democracyjournal.org/arguments/why-wind-and-solar-arent-enough/

Too, wend and solar will never be able to supply all our needs.

Plus, the moment you initiate a solar generating field, the solar panels slowly start to become less efficient, and continue to march in that same direction throughout their lives.

Too, have you seen the wend mills in our junk yards, …ugly.

Too, most of the time, charging takes several hours., fast charging is possible, but dramatically shortens the life of the batteries.

“The Dangers of Relying On Public Fast Chargers”

“However, reliance on direct current (DC) fast charging is a real threat to the longevity of EVs that we all expect and embrace. A ruined battery with a stunted lifespan is not only an expensive fix, it’s horrible for the environment.”

“This is great for road trips, but be careful not to abuse the privilege. If you rely on DC fast chargers at Electrify America or Tesla Superchargers all the time simply because you can, you may end up wishing you didn’t when your range slips away quicker than expected.”

https://caredge.com/guides/fast-charging-battery-degradation

The ideas of electric vehicles are not catching on, for obvious reasons. Plus, we will likely run out of the needed rare earth elements before such vehicles ever become commonplace (if that happens at all.)

Composting: Commitment to the composting program, not just having it so one can say “we compost.”

Composting takes commitment from local government in order for it to work In a city, or county level. Saying “we have it” and being committed to composting, can be two entirely different things in government, in my 1st hand experience. I have seen it all! I have seen quality operations, and l have seen everything else. It’s is often shameful. Much of the poor operations only produce garbage compost: half composted, half uncomposted, and some garbage (wood, plastic, and other garbage).

This bad description fits our local landfill’s composting program here, locally. You can pick up compost for free, but the quality is really poor, barely useable, and full of other “stuff” that must be separated out (by the customer).

Nolberto Munier

If some idea requires government tax dollars to keep it alive, that idea is failing. I am, in all reality, being forced to subsidize a failing project with money I could be using to both help others in my immediate area, and to better support my own family. Just another episode of government saying we know better than you about what I should be doing with the limited funds I have.

Nolberto Munier

Regarding composting: As a botanist and agriculturalist, and scientific researcher, I fully understand composting, in every aspect; good and bad. I have been composting for many years. I have composted on a 40 acre farm, and in my back yard vegetable garden. I have taken soil that is entirely dead (soil that would not even grow weeds) and brought it back into quality production.

Too, I have composted using several entirely different composting methods, and I have selected my favorite method for my own personal composting.

But, I also know that if a composting program is not being done correctly, IT IS FAILING. And I have seen many failing compost programs, private, city/county, and commercial. Composting is fairly easy and straight forward, BUT, it requires knowledge, knowhow & a commitment to quality. Otherwise, …it will fail.

Nolberto Munier

A quality “commercial“ or “city/county“ composting program DOES cost money. And must be attended to daily. On larger scale, water is needed, and a means for turning the very long piled organics is Needed. And salary is needed for the operators. Space (land) is needed, and a sieving process is needed for a quality product. Bags are needed so that that quality product can be sold, …hopefully at a price that will, at least, pay for the entire cost of operation. A commercial chipper shredder is needed to handle tree limbs and stumps, all of which show up at commercial operations. Otherwise, the operation is failing.

Well, of course you are right regarding expertise and cost for composting, by recycling is not limited to that

Nolberto Munier

Of course recycling is not limited to composting, but that was questioned above. To show “variability,” another form of “recycling” includes taking old clothes (that are still useable) to facilities that sell used clothing. That too is recycling, a form that may not be thought of that way.

Another form of recycling, using old lumber to build new things. I recently used old barn wood from a barn blown down by a tornado, to build 2 buildings, a green house and a tool shed. I accomplished 2 things that way, helping to clean up the mess in someone’s yard, and reusing that lumber.

Recycling is more than just putting things into a recycle bend, to be hauled away from the street by a recycling truck.

However, that latter form (a ben in front of your house, hauled away by your city recycle truck) does seem to be the source for the troubles I have been exampling, and the center of this discussion.

Sincerely it is difficult\lt for me to understand your reasoning. Of course some recycling as

composting needs expertise for the people doing it, but there is a myriad of items that the expertise is in the indusial companies that buy recycled items, for instance:

Glasses from bottles, aluminum cans, scrap metal, some type of domestic food waste, used oil from restaurants, water, tires, mattresses, tools, used clothing, computers, printers, furniture, kitchen ware, fans, electric cables, etc. I have developed many years ago recycling cycles drawings for different items, that I can share with you

For instance, institutions like the Salvation Army as well as others, have thrift stores where they sell thousands of different household donated items

Nolberto Munier

Look, I am sorry, the discussion drifted, a little, from the original intent. We spent a lot of time on compositing. bottom line? Either they know what they are doing, or they do not; Producing either a good product, or a bad one. A lot of questions on composting, I did not expect that.

However, recycling, itself, is not the perfect little princes it might seem to be. I have worked in a recycling center, so I know a little about the reality. At home, we put things out in some kind of container and it disappears when the truck picks it up, right? We assume, "Of course it is recycled, my stuff went to the recycling center."

Well, ...that is what happens most, ...or some of the time. The reality is that there is not always a market for what we have recycled (put into the ben). Take news print, magazines, cardboard. Sometimes the market is saturated, and this material must sit around in the center for a while, sometime a really long while, long enough that at least some of it must be, eventually "taken to the dump" to make room in the recycling center for more recyclables. Yes, recycled materials going to the dump. It never completes the recycling "cycle." But all the people feel good, because they recycled, right. This discussion board was designed to inform people of reality.

Not every “recyclable“ is recycled! Not even when the item is “marked recyclable.” We may put a recyclable in the recycling ben, but it can end up in a landfill anyway. Recycling is not the perfect system we are led to believe.

Here is another case. I once lived in a town with a proud recycling program. Everyone had a ben, and was recycling. The "recycling truck" would come around and pick up all he recycling and hall it off to the recycling center, ...or so we thought.

It turns out there was some suspension in someone and they checked things out by following the truck. The truck never went to the recycling center, rather, it went to the dump. Well, at the next city council meeting, the proverbial "poo" hit the fan. And, of course, that news hit the news paper and the entire town was now in the know. Recycling, as it turns out, is not always working as we are told.

We are all told to do the right thing and recycle. So, many, perhaps most, do so. But what is really happening to those materials, do we "really" know?

This is not to deride recycling centers that are doing things right, but it does give one pause for thought, doesn't it?

It is my opinion that if Recycling really worked, and really payed for itself, as I have said before, the private sector would be mining the old land fills for recyclables and making money at it.

Another example of "recycling" is the old, but in good condition, cloths we send to the various Good Will type stores. How many of us actually do that? Or, do we just throw out our old cloths.

There is a lot more potential recycling that can be done, than meets the eye. Are we doing it? Or, is recycling just a feel good program?