'Vast Quantities' of Recycled Plastics Are Actually Burned Or Dumped In Landfills (theguardian.com) 172
"A Guardian investigation reveals that cities around the country are no longer recycling many types of plastic dropped into recycling bins. Instead, they are being landfilled, burned or stockpiled..."
An anonymous reader shared this eye-opening report from the Guardian. "From Los Angeles to Florida to the Arizona desert, officials say, vast quantities of plastic are now no better than garbage..." As municipalities are forced to deal with their own trash instead of exporting it, they are discovering a dismaying fact: much of this plastic is completely unrecyclable. The issue is with a popular class of plastics that people have traditionally been told to put into their recycling bins -- a hodgepodge of items such as clamshell-style food packaging, black plastic trays, take-out containers and cold drink cups, which the industry dubs "mixed plastic". It has become clear that there are virtually no domestic manufacturers that want to buy this waste in order to turn it into something else.
Take Los Angeles county, the most populous in America. The Guardian has learned that recycling facilities are separating "mixed plastics" from those plastics which still retain value -- such as water bottles, laundry detergent bottles and milk jugs -- and, contrary to what customers expect, sending them directly to a landfill or incinerator. Los Angeles county public works estimates that in 2018, the county sent more than half a million tons of plastic to four different landfills, and nearly 20,000 tons of plastic to its waste-to-energy incinerator. And it appears that many other recyclers are doing exactly the same thing...
"Most people have no idea that most plastic doesn't get recycled," said John Hocevar, the Oceans Campaign Director for Greenpeace USA, referencing a study which found that just 9% of all plastic ever produced has been recycled. "Even though they are buying something that they only use for a few seconds before putting it in the recycling bin, they think it's OK because they believe it is being recycled."
The Guardian concludes that Americans "continue to throw away millions of tons of plastic each year, even as they run out of ways to dispose of it." But there's also an interesting observation from Coby Skye, the assistant deputy director of environmental programs at Los Angeles county public works: that it's never been possible to recycle some plastics that Americans were putting into their recycling bins.
"[China] would just pull out the items that were actually recyclable and burn or throw away the rest. China has subsidized the recycling industry for many years in a way that distorted our views."
An anonymous reader shared this eye-opening report from the Guardian. "From Los Angeles to Florida to the Arizona desert, officials say, vast quantities of plastic are now no better than garbage..." As municipalities are forced to deal with their own trash instead of exporting it, they are discovering a dismaying fact: much of this plastic is completely unrecyclable. The issue is with a popular class of plastics that people have traditionally been told to put into their recycling bins -- a hodgepodge of items such as clamshell-style food packaging, black plastic trays, take-out containers and cold drink cups, which the industry dubs "mixed plastic". It has become clear that there are virtually no domestic manufacturers that want to buy this waste in order to turn it into something else.
Take Los Angeles county, the most populous in America. The Guardian has learned that recycling facilities are separating "mixed plastics" from those plastics which still retain value -- such as water bottles, laundry detergent bottles and milk jugs -- and, contrary to what customers expect, sending them directly to a landfill or incinerator. Los Angeles county public works estimates that in 2018, the county sent more than half a million tons of plastic to four different landfills, and nearly 20,000 tons of plastic to its waste-to-energy incinerator. And it appears that many other recyclers are doing exactly the same thing...
"Most people have no idea that most plastic doesn't get recycled," said John Hocevar, the Oceans Campaign Director for Greenpeace USA, referencing a study which found that just 9% of all plastic ever produced has been recycled. "Even though they are buying something that they only use for a few seconds before putting it in the recycling bin, they think it's OK because they believe it is being recycled."
The Guardian concludes that Americans "continue to throw away millions of tons of plastic each year, even as they run out of ways to dispose of it." But there's also an interesting observation from Coby Skye, the assistant deputy director of environmental programs at Los Angeles county public works: that it's never been possible to recycle some plastics that Americans were putting into their recycling bins.
"[China] would just pull out the items that were actually recyclable and burn or throw away the rest. China has subsidized the recycling industry for many years in a way that distorted our views."
We Need Packaging Standards (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: We Need Packaging Standards (Score:4, Interesting)
Your fears are unwarranted.
Composting carbon rich materials like paper will not attract anything that could be classified as vermin.
For a few years I composted nothing but wood shaving, sawdust, coffee grounds and grass clippings. All in large quantities. The only somewhat objectionable creatures were fruit flies. Covering the mix with a thick layer of wood shavings eliminated them.
Re: (Score:2)
Use paper for structural support, put a few microns of plastic and aluminium on the paper for barrier purposes.
Even transparent windows can be made from paper using nanocellulose.
Re: (Score:2)
Traditionally no, but there are companies which promise water soluble layers which can be put in between so they can be separated during recycling of the paper.
We need recyclable packaging standards. (Score:5, Insightful)
No stripe, no recycle. Take all the confusion away.
Let the products that don't have a stripe be shamed by just sitting there on the shelf.
Re:We need recyclable packaging standards. (Score:5, Interesting)
The main point of recycling is to make people who drive 4 ton SUVs feel like they are "doing their part" to deal with environmental problems.
Recycling aluminum makes sense. Recycling cardboard is also cost effective, but far less so. Recycling other paper, and plastics, has very little benefit. It is done mostly to make people feel good. Glass recycling is a net loss. Glass is inert and harmless in a landfill, and new glass can be made with fewer resources from sand.
We would be doing far better if we put half the effort into reduction that we put into recycling.
I recycle cardboard. I don't recycle aluminum because I don't buy anything that comes in aluminum cans. I recycle plastic, but I don't delude myself into believing it makes much difference. I throw glass in the trash.
Re:We need recyclable packaging standards. (Score:5, Insightful)
On the other hand, Glass is significantly reusable. Require beer, wine, and pop to be sold in refillable containers. In British Columbia, most bottled beer is sold in the Industry Standard Bottle. You pay a $0.10/bottle deposit. On average, each bottle makes it through the system 15 times.
Re: (Score:2)
Require beer, wine, and pop to be sold in refillable containers.
Or, even better, educate people enough so that they realize "glass pollution" is a non-existent problem and we should be focusing our money, time, and political capital on things that actually matter.
Re: (Score:2)
Walk barefoot someday and you will find out just how much a problem glass pollution can be.
No thanks. I prefer to dress and behave like an intelligent adult human.
Re: (Score:2)
Do you also put shoes on your pets? Or wear them at the beach?
Re: (Score:2)
and new glass can be made with fewer resources from sand
Mining sand is not such a good thing as you seem to think. Recycling glass is better. https://www.theguardian.com/ci... [theguardian.com]
Re: (Score:2)
We DON'T need recyclable packaging standards. (Score:3)
I used to return glass bottles for the small deposit on them. Then I just realized that because of their weight, fragility, and so on the messing with them wasn't worth the trouble. I put them out on the street for collection by the city now.
One morning I was woken up by the sound of a truck running and the sound of glass being jostled. At first l thought it was just the city collection trucks coming early that day. But the sound continued longer than the usual time it took to lift the bucket and dump i
Re: (Score:2)
The "Mining sand" problem in the article refers to concrete-sand. This is completely different from, as well as scarcer than, glass sand.
Re: We need recyclable packaging standards. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You can mine sand, make a bottle, clean it, and fill it cheaper than just taking a bottle cleaning it and filling it?
And before you say the glass gets damaged let me ask you what kind of crappy glass recycling system so you have where you don't return bottles perfectly intact?
Re: (Score:1)
How is refining unsorted sand and melting it down into glass going to use fewer resources than simply melting down already perfectly refined glass?
This is completely backwards. Glassmaking from raw silica is a standard process. Used glass has a wide mixture of additives and dyes. Also, silica can be just scooped out of the ground, while recycled glass needs to be collected from millions of homes, cleaned, sorted, and then processed to get rid of the additives. This is a far more resource intensive task.
Recycling glass is stupid and wasteful.
We do it to make people feel good about "doing something good", not because it actually make sense.
Re: (Score:1)
Glassmaking from raw silica is a standard process. Used glass has a wide mixture of additives and dyes. Also, silica can be just scooped out of the ground, while recycled glass needs to be collected from millions of homes, cleaned, sorted, and then processed to get rid of the additives. This is a far more resource intensive task.
More lies and pure baloney. Sorting a bottle is far less labor intensive than sorting individual grains of sand. You don't need to clean -- glass has a high melting temperature so any residual food stuff is just going to vaporize and burn off by itself anyway. Additives and dyes? Are you retarded? Those would burn up in the glass making process. The only thing glass contains for adding color is some mineral impurities. If you're making glass from sand, you're going to have a whole lot more minerals to purif
Re: (Score:3)
While I agree to most of your comment I think you are wrong about glass. Recycling glass didn't happen by chance, indeed it has been a net economically bonus for decades. At both levels: direct re-use of standard bottles or melting glass bottles and re-use raw material at the cost of energy.
Recycling glass bottles is a net economic bonus.
Plus sand is going to become a depleted resource because of intensive exploitation: http://theconversation.com/the... [theconversation.com]
Don't you think it would be stupid to bury a perfect,
Re: (Score:2)
You are right though, Pyrex and the likes can't be recycled as glass bottles. However we may imagine they can be re-used under other forms: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Cheers.
Re: (Score:1)
The main problem there is that there aren't universal standards across the US about what is and isn't recyclable. Such a product marking would receive a huge fight from the manufacturing industry because they wouldn't be able to mark it in a way that would apply across all those municipalities.
I wish we would go back to the system where you looked to see what number was on the plastic and then recycled it or not based upon the number. That at least gave some assurance that we were properly sorting things. A
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is, there is nothing that is approved for recycling universally. It varies by state, or even county, or even city. Some places can take all plastics 1 through 7, others can take a subset. Some can take mixed paper, others cannot, It's really a big mess.
But it can be better. First off, there are some things that are universally non-recyclable - mylar, or metal coated plast
Re: (Score:2)
No stripe, no recycle. Take all the confusion away.
Let the products that don't have a stripe be shamed by just sitting there on the shelf.
If the product with a stripe costs $0.10 more, then it will be the one languishing on the shelf instead.
I disagree.
Just my 2 cents.
Re:We Need Packaging Standards (Score:5, Interesting)
Not only does excessive packaging was plastic and fill landfills, it also affects transportation. You don't need to put a small flash memory card in package that's bigger than a mousepad. You don't need to put metal foil on a toothpaste box. You don't need to put a power supply or a bottle of booze in a velvet bag. And do you know what? We don't need to buy things that have excessive packaging. You vote for plastic waste with your money.
We need something a simple as restricting the amount of packaging based on a formula. Ever noticed how that box of cereal is only half full by volume, and is also far from the optimal shape to save material. It's designed to look as big and eye catching as possible on a shelf because.... every other box of cereal is like that. A simple regulation about packaging surface area vs volume and shelf front presentation maximum size and suddenly you have wiped out about half the packaging in a supermarket.
Re: (Score:2)
So we can look forward to spherical cereal boxes rolling around the breakfast table and replacing our pantry shelves with basketball cages?
Re: (Score:3)
Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
Re: (Score:2)
Paper bag style packaging is suddenly not good enough?
Re: (Score:2)
Not only does excessive packaging was plastic and fill landfills, it also affects transportation. You don't need to put a small flash memory card in package that's bigger than a mousepad. You don't need to put metal foil on a toothpaste box. You don't need to put a power supply or a bottle of booze in a velvet bag. And do you know what? We don't need to buy things that have excessive packaging. You vote for plastic waste with your money.
What would all the YouTube unboxers do without excessive packaging?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Not only does excessive packaging was plastic and fill landfills, it also affects transportation. You don't need to put a small flash memory card in package that's bigger than a mousepad. You don't need to put metal foil on a toothpaste box. You don't need to put a power supply or a bottle of booze in a velvet bag. And do you know what? We don't need to buy things that have excessive packaging. You vote for plastic waste with your money.
See, that sounds really good in theory. I've been voting in favor of
Re: (Score:2)
What's a mousepad? Some kind of vermin control device?
Re: (Score:2)
That only works for online stores - standard retailers prefer the large box because it curtails shoplifting. A small box is easily pocketable, something as large as a half a sheet of letter-sized paper isn't, And those plastic Alpha cases (the hard plastic boxes that they sometimes use on small items) get nasty and opaque quickly making it hard to see the product inside.
And smaller packages aren't a panacea because onli
Re: (Score:2)
We don't need to buy things that have excessive packaging. You vote for plastic waste with your money.
I'm sorry to rain on your parade but the last 20 years of watching "the market", I've been apalled at the idea that human beings have any free will or responsibility at all. I'll use the example of the videogame industry.
In the late 90's and early 2000's the videogame industry was plotting to remove game ownership from customers PC's via using mmo's as an in to take control of the software out of customers hands. People fell for it of course buying everquest, Wow and guild wars, that lead to the rise of s
consume less... (Score:1)
Use aluminum (Score:3)
I wish companies would switch to using aluminum in packaging. It's cheap, light, durable, shapeable, contains no toxic leaching chemicals, and is virtually infinitely recyclable. It's a great packaging material.
Re:Use aluminum (Score:4, Informative)
Aluminum (in high doses) is known to cause Alzheimer's disease, bone and brain diseases, nervous system degradation, etc... Plus, a lot of times where aluminum is used, BPA is used as an internal liner... So, yeah, enjoy your wonderful aluminum packaging... It ain't no silver bullet.
Yes, in HIGH DOSES. Not doses people could get from aluminum food packaging. This is a risk pretty much limited to miners and welders, where the aluminum can get vaporized or atomized. It might happen to people with a combination of certain medical conditions and food, cosmetics, or medications that have high concentrations of aluminum. The aluminum has to be put in the product as part of it's production, just rubbing off from the packaging won't produce enough aluminum to cause any harm.
Do you weld aluminum with any regularity? Do you have some kind of severe medical condition affecting you liver, kidney, or digestive tract? If you answer no to both those questions then your chances of having any aluminum poisoning is so close to zero it is effectively zero. If you answered yes to one of them then your chances are still pretty close to zero. If you answered yes to both then workplace hazards and your medical problems will still likely kill or harm you first.
I was going to include some citations but a quick search of the internet gave me nothing that could even imply any harm from aluminum except for people that are using aluminum as a pizza topping.
Re: (Score:2)
aluminum is attacked by acidic foods and there are open questions about the toxicity
Re:Use aluminum (Score:5, Informative)
aluminum is attacked by acidic foods and there are open questions about the toxicity
Also, aluminum is recycled at a rate of barely over 50%. So half of it goes to landfills on each cycle ... and that is mostly cans. If aluminum was used more in pouches and packets, the recycling rate would fall even lower.
Expanding the use of aluminum in packaging would be wasteful and foolish.
Aluminum can recycling falls significantly [resource-recycling.com]
Re: Use aluminum (Score:3)
Given the current crisis in plastics, it might be possible to convince people to be better about aluminum recycling. But honestly, it would still be better to send aluminum to the landfill than plastic. We do not have to worry about the same level of environmental pollution from aluminum. And at least aluminum is in principle recyclable, which apparently many plastics are not.
Re: (Score:2)
it might be possible to convince people to be better about aluminum recycling.
Good luck with that.
Recycling rates, at least in the 1st world, are going DOWN, not up.
Walk around your office and look in the recycling bin. Then look in the trash bins. See if you notice any difference in the contents. If your coworkers are typical, about half will try to recycle, and the other half will use the two types of bins interchangeably, contaminating the recyclable materials with trash and obviating the efforts of the first half.
Any "solution" that requires anonymous cooperation from millions
Re: (Score:2)
The rate of sorting in the office here is pretty good. Most of the contamination that I see is of people unsure of whether something is recyclable or not. Like, disposable coffee cups in the recycling. But that's understandable; nearly everyone I talk to is surprised to find out that they're NOT recyclable. But at the very least cans go into the right bin. It's marked 'cans and bottles', which is nice and clear. I can't remember the last time I saw a can or bottle NOT in that bin, or something that wasn't a
Re: (Score:3)
Any aluminum sent to a landfill could be reclaimed at anytime in the future.
Re: (Score:2)
Any aluminum sent to a landfill could be reclaimed at anytime in the future.
You could say the same about plastic.
The big difference, is that plastic requires far less energy to produce.
So we are wasting fewer resources, and producing fewer emissions now.
Re:Use aluminum (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm betraying my age here, but we still had a Milkman when I was a boy. Leaving bottles out in the evening so the Milkman could come early in the morning and take the old bottles, leaving fresh milk on you step was part of my daily routine. Also, soda was still in glass bottles, and the price of the bottle was baked into the cost of the soda. The incentive to return the bottles was that you got a nickle per bottle at any store that sold soda (and in the days when comic books were 35 cents, this was no small incentive for a boy to scour the streets for bottles to exchange for the latest issue of of your favorite title).
I realize costs would be greater, and there's always going to be that guy that doesn't give a rip and smashes his bottle on the pavement for funsies... but in my advancing years, I've began to miss that way of doing things. Like everyone else, I love the convenience of "disposable", but I also realize that disposable comes with costs of its own. I'm not a greenie by any means, but the older I get, the more I dislike waste and piles of plastic. I've switched to a safety razor, and am using metal and glass objects more and more. I think I prefer the slightly higher costs in the short run to the costs of the piles of plastic in the long run.
Family resemblance (Score:3)
Yeah, back in the day it was also important to not look like the milk man.
Re: (Score:2)
Glass is great too. The only real problem with glass is it's weight. It ultimately costs as much to produce and ship the packaging as the product.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Aluminium manufacturing and recycling is however overly energy intensive. It does however make sense to go this route of you can ween yourselves off coal.
How is this a shock? (Score:2)
It is no secret that most recycle programs are failures or failing to live up anywhere close to what their objectives are. Our regulatory landscape and big business sees very little gain in recycling because well... the regulations required to do it make doing it hard, not to mention the lack of funding for research on how to recycle things. It's a serious problem very few folks actually care about.
Most people don't care, they just say they do and they all get to feeling better when they think government
Re: (Score:2)
The answer is actually much simpler than you seem to think. Just quit allowing corporations to make obscene profits while leaving the cost of cleaning up the mess they make to taxpayers. It's not that the regulations are hard...it's that the regulations are a fucking joke.
Re: How is this a shock? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Okay, considered.
So, do YOU want to be held legally liable for something you had control of three months ago, but haven't seen since?
If not, why?
Because that's what you're doing by making "every producer and supplier of anything physical take responsibility for its entire lifecycle". Such
Re: (Score:2)
If I produced cyanide say and sold it to you, then I certainly would have a responsibility for making sure that you were not the sort of person that would dump it into a reservoir. I'm sure the laws already exist for this, because the connection between my producing this dangerous product and the harm it could do if provided to someone who could dump it in the wrong place is clear and obvious.
There are many more situations where the connection is not so easy to make, and there are numerous people and comp
Re: (Score:1)
Actually the solution is to put taxes on packaging. The less packaging material used the lower the tax; the more recyclable the packaging the lower the tax...
Re: (Score:2)
That approach has been adopted with considerable success in Europe, along with, to some extent, the precautionary principle.
North America, sadly, has chosen a different path. Corporations are allowed to "externalize costs", and routinely get away with the most egregious abuses.
Re: (Score:2)
Part of the problem with recycling fatigue is the notion that we should recycle everything. Remember the big push for buying paper and pencils from recycled stock? It made no sense. Recycling paper and other wood products uses more energy and water, and in the end you get a more expensive yet less refined product.
Perhaps recycling programs would be more effective and popular if we concentrated on things that it makes sense to recycle... metals and glass... and admitted to the public that most of the plastic
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If you take the naptha produced by the natural gas industry, and you turn it into packaging before you burn it for energy, instead of burning it for energy immediately, that's recycling.
Beware 'Guardian' (Score:2)
Re: Beware 'Guardian' (Score:2)
Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, you've just shocked us. The Guardian Newspaper is widely regarded in Britain as a well-balanced,, respectable Newspaper.
One of the better papers on sale.
There's no such thing as a balanced newspaper in Britain (or perhaps anywhere for that matter). All newspapers and channels have a slant. Some are just more honest than others in admitting it. The Guardian flaunts their politics, as does their opposite, the Daily Mail.
The difference between British and American papers is that the British papers are honest about their slant, no matter what side they fall on.
Re: (Score:2)
All newspapers and channels have a slant. Some are just more honest than others in admitting it.
That sounds about right. I wish they didn't try to tell me how "balanced" they are because it often doesn't take long for the imbalance to show. Instead they should just be honest about which side of the balance scale they placed their thumb. Or, just maybe, they could be actually balanced and surprise me by giving all the facts.
fine to burn it for fuel (Score:2)
Burning all plastic waste in plants with proper scrubbers and filters makes negligible contribution to carbon load of Earth compared to fossil fuel
Europe and China are already doing this, time for the USA to get on board
With the right tech that would work well. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The main use of natural gas is burning it. If you are going to burn it, what is the point of saving it from being burned in the first place?
It is almost as useless an idea as the recently announced breakthrough to make diesel from plastic. What The Actual Fuck are those people thinking.
Re: (Score:2)
not useless for plastics that can't be recycled. the people are thinking of doing something useful with a waste product. it's good.
Re: (Score:2)
I'd rather burn plastics as fuel than bury the plastic and pump more oil.
Picking Nits (Score:2)
"Vast Quantities' of Recycled Plastics Are Actually Burned Or Dumped In Landfills"
Shouldn't that say "Recyclable Plastics" because they aren't actually recycled?
Never kept secret (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
But you honestly can't reason with most "environmentalists".
Right! It's all the fault of those damn "environmentalists" which is pretty ironic given that today is the 50th anniversary of the Cuyahoga River catching fire [businessinsider.com].
Re: (Score:2)
Most of today's environmentalists were alive and politically active in the 1960s? Did you just make that up?
Wrong word (Score:5, Funny)
Dumping in landfills ?
Surely, you mean "carbon sequestration"
this is why NOT to send to china (Score:3)
Now, what is needed is to do a cleaner job of separating trash and recycling here, OR change how we make things here.
In the meantime, yes, keep putting plastic in dumps or burning it. The dumps will allow us to save it for future use, while burning is how much of Europe gets rid of their plastic.
Re: (Score:2)
There's only one problem with that theory. China is the one stopping the recyclables from being shipped to their country [npr.org] from anywhere [nytimes.com], and the U.S. is the one scrambling to find other market [cnn.com]
Re: (Score:2)
China continues to import trash from all over, esp. the US. WM still sends LOADS of 'garbage' to CHina. Difference is that NOW China is selective. Have you seen GOT JUNK? THat company is selective in what they get and work closely with Chinese government to send them metals, known plastics, etc. There are multiple companies that do the same.
And actually no, most of America is doing fine with our plastics and trash. It will be an issue down t
Re: (Score:3)
Wrong person is boringly wrong [minipakr.com].
Re: (Score:3)
You do realise that they use completely different kinds of ships to transport containers [wikipedia.org] from China to America, and for transporting minerals and bulk goods [wikipedia.org] back the other way.
China NEEDs to have their ships filled BOTH WAYS to make dumping their goods on the west feasible.
Clearly they do not. They just need to charge enough to be profitable. It's common sense. It would be more profitable to be full both ways, but it's not the same as a NEED.
Re: (Score:2)
Cool story, but China are the ones no longer accepting the West's trash.
There's plenty of land for landfills. (Score:3)
The complaining is silly. Prepare more landfills, bury the waste, then process it in the future when technology catches up.
The imaginary need to act immediately netted bad results. Land isn't rare or precious everywhere and transportation is cheap.
20,000 tons of plastic to its waste-to-energy (Score:2)
War on Plastics (Score:1)
There is a series of TV programmes on the BBC called - War on Plastics which showed that a fair bit of so-called recycled plastic in England actually gets sent aboard and then a third of it gets illegally dumped.
I asked my own Scottish council and they said Biffa don't export it. But then, so did the English Council....
She drove two towns over? (Score:1)
Errr.. So she burned up gasoline to dispose of the demon plastic items in some sort of extra-perfect manner that even Berkeley didn't attain? Jesus lady, it'd make a LOT more sense to just burn the shit along with your other garbage and generate electricity. But most municipalit
1 & 2 (Score:2)
>"The issue is with a popular class of plastics that people have traditionally been told to put into their recycling bins -- a hodgepodge of items such as clamshell-style food packaging, black plastic trays, take-out containers and cold drink cups"
I don't know where that is. Here, we have NEVER been told those are acceptable (and those are typically #5). Only #1 and #2 plastics are accepted here. Anything else is garbage, and it has been that way for as long as recycling (25 years?).
Now, they have tot
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know where that is. Here, we have NEVER been told those are acceptable
Penn and Teller did a fun stunt where they went to San Francisco and intentionally tried to come up with the most convoluted and hard to follow recycling rules, then tried to be as obnoxious as possible when "testing" the procedure with some eager volunteers. Including blowing an air horn (BLAAT!) when you got something wrong. This [youtube.com] is a short segment.
The saddest point was when they interviewed the "subjects" afterwards and they all, eager to please and be accepted, and with careful editing, seemed to think
Sort of a joke (Score:2)
Two years ago my city said don't bother sorting stuff out anymore.
I figured it was because they would do it, or the recycler now could efficiently.
But no! "Let God sort it out!"
Recycling (Score:2)
Oh come on, it's always been a con and we knew it and said it 10-20 years ago.
The sheer fact that my local council now have THREE teams of people, coming to collect three separate bins, into three separate lorries, running all around the city burning three different tanks of diesel tells you all you need to know.
It's not anything to do with saving the planet. It's to subsidise a company that's making a pittance out of recycling a tiny proportion of waste, at taxpayer's expense. Buying "green" credentials
Re: (Score:2)
How do you demand that the store give you something that they don't have?
Switch stores.
I can't buy things in cardboard packages if they don't exist.
Buy other things.
Oh yeah. The urban hipster "I don't need a car" generation. You have to shop at the corner bodega. Because it's the only market you can reach. And you have to buy their shitty and limited selection of poorly packaged products. Again, because you have no choice. It's out of your control.
Re: (Score:2)
Anguished handwringing post number 58,805,040 about how doing anything at all to address real problems makes us doomed to "totalitarianism".
Re: (Score:2)
Anguished handwringing post number 58,805,040 about how doing anything at all to address real problems makes us doomed to "totalitarianism".
You're not really doing anything substantial. And the emotionalized gestures you are acting out are bad for people.
Plus the constant doomsday sales pitch is ruining lives by the thousands. If your plan was to make young people give up on everything and commit suicide, then congratulations on achieving that. If your secondary plan was to make sure many of the survivors of your first plan could never have any happiness, then bravo.
Re: (Score:1)
Would you stop your damned handwringing?
Re: (Score:1)
Would you stop your damned handwringing?
You know what's worth caring about? People. You should try it.