Plastic recycling doesn’t work & will never work (empty virtue posturing politics)

[C C]

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archiv...al/661141/

INTRO: Americans support recycling. We do too. But although some materials can be effectively recycled and safely made from recycled content, plastics cannot. Plastic recycling does not work and will never work. The United States in 2021 had a dismal recycling rate of about 5 percent for post-consumer plastic waste, down from a high of 9.5 percent in 2014, when the U.S. exported millions of tons of plastic waste to China and counted it as recycled—even though much of it wasn’t.

Recycling in general can be an effective way to reclaim natural material resources. The U.S.’s high recycling rate of paper, 68 percent, proves this point. The problem with recycling plastic lies not with the concept or process but with the material itself.

The first problem is that there are thousands of different plastics, each with its own composition and characteristics. They all include different chemical additives and colorants that cannot be recycled together, making it impossible to sort the trillions of pieces of plastics into separate types for processing...

[...] Another problem is that the reprocessing of plastic waste—when possible at all—is wasteful. Plastic is flammable, and the risk of fires at plastic-recycling facilities affects neighboring communities—many of which are located in low-income communities or communities of color...

[...] Yet another problem is that plastic recycling is simply not economical. Recycled plastic costs more than new plastic because collecting, sorting, transporting, and reprocessing plastic waste is exorbitantly expensive. The petrochemical industry is rapidly expanding, which will further lower the cost of new plastic.

Despite this stark failure, the plastics industry has waged a decades-long campaign to perpetuate the myth that the material is recyclable. This campaign is reminiscent of the tobacco industry’s efforts to convince smokers that filtered cigarettes are healthier than unfiltered cigarettes... (MORE - missing details)

[Kornee]

Much of the article's points make good sense. That green and clear PET bottles cannot be recycled together was a shock, but maybe that is predicated on back-to-bottles-only recycling as option. That black plastics of any types are, with possible minor exceptions, non-recyclable period (not discussed there) was another shock:
https://www.greenmatters.com/p/black-plastic-recyclable

A truly disciplined, personal responsibility more than individual rights/grievances oriented society could well cope with efficient recycling. Ever get sick of neighbors who sneak in their unwashed, food laden or just plain half-eaten fast food, into your recycle bin full of carefully sorted and rinsed bottles etc.? I do.
It's just part of the stark differences between e.g. an ugly graffiti and curbside trash polluted typical western city or town, to what one will find in say Japan or Singapore.
They understand what we have - by design not just 'accident' - lost sight of.

Burning plastic waste in high temperature incinerators ('recycling' into energy generation) as some countries have tried is just silly.
That said, there are likely a number of practical steps, other than all important education reform, that could ease the apparently hopeless situation.

One annoying and persistent issue easily fixed is the use of overly adherent sticker labeling. This especially effects plastic film wraps etc. Make them easy to remove - by both the consumer and recycling facilities.
Better still, adopt stickerless labeling where possible:
https://packagingsouthasia.com/type-of-p...ut-labels/

Industry needs to more aggressively figure ways to substitute non-recyclable plastics with recyclable ones and eliminate recycling incompatible multi-plastic composites.

Large strides have been made in bacterial/enzymatic degradation of plastics back into useful feed-stock. Remains to be seen how overall cost effective and resistant to 'poisoning' that approach will be. If even a small fraction of the funds now spent on so-called 'defensive' weaponry were channeled that way, the expectation imo is, or rather would be, overall success.

Coordinated commitment at the political, industrial, and personal consumer levels is needed.

As for the contrast with paper recycling's relatively high recycling rate, evidently that is locale specific or has dramatically improved in recent years.
Back in the late 1980s to early 1990s, a large retailer I was employed at admitted their investment in used cardboard box compactors and contracted transportation to 'recycle centers' was a farce. In fact it evidently all finished up in landfill. But it looked good on the 'doing our environmental responsibility thing' books.

[confused2]

I must admit I'm not seeing the problem with burning plastic as fuel. It isn't like we don't use oil as fuel so it's just like you take the oil and turn it into something useful and when it's no longer useful you burn it like you would have done if you hadn't made it into plastic. Obviously (?) it needs to be burned at a high temperature rather than in heaps by the side of the road so cement production and possibly power stations are the ideal places for it to be used as fuel. Unless I'm missing something - only a state of mind prevents a waste product from being used as fuel.

[stryder]

Part of the problem of recycling is the fact that every person put as much or as little effort into doing it as they see fit.

One of the main problems in the UK is soiled waste (Waste that hasn't been cleaned before being put into the bin prior to being sent to a sorting yard) Soiled waste can spoil the material making it non-recyclable. While councils ask people to clean their waste, it's of course a burden that people don't want to undertake not just for the "extra effort" but the "extra cost" (Cleaning requires water and cleaning fluids which the person has to pay for themselves)

What it suggests is really we should look at rolling back to the old "rag-and-bone" man method of recycling. A fixed day in a week where a guy with a vehicle "processes" materials that are given to him. Namely people come out with a bunch of bottles and he (or she/it) could put the bottle through a bottlewash on the back on their vehicle and then store it in a bin for processing.

Doing it this way means you have "Collection, Cleaning and Processing" even before it gets back to a recycling station.

It also means that the recycling "rag-and-bone" man (woman/it) can refuse to take materials that can not be processed. (So no more processing staff moaning about having to rummage through dirty nappies)

[confused2]

Part of the problem of recycling is the fact that every person put as much or as little effort into doing it as they see fit.

One of the main problems in the UK is soiled waste (Waste that hasn't been cleaned before being put into the bin prior to being sent to a sorting yard)  Soiled waste can spoil the material making it non-recyclable.  While councils ask people to clean their waste, it's of course a burden that people don't want to undertake not just for the "extra effort" but the "extra cost" (Cleaning requires water and cleaning fluids which the person has to pay for themselves)

What it suggests is really we should look at rolling back to the old "rag-and-bone" man method of recycling.  A fixed day in a week where a guy with a vehicle "processes" materials that are given to him.  Namely people come out with a bunch of bottles and he (or she/it) could put the bottle through a bottlewash on the back on their vehicle and then store it in a bin for processing.

Doing it this way means you have "Collection, Cleaning and Processing" even before it gets back to a recycling station.

It also means that the recycling "rag-and-bone" man (woman/it) can refuse to take materials that can not be processed.  (So no more processing staff moaning about having to rummage through dirty nappies)

Back in the day you got money when you took a bottle back to wherever it came from. No going to a special place miles away in your 20mpg SUV. Closed circuit recycling. My last rag-and-bone man came on a cart pulled by a horse. Horse clopping + "Ragbone." = rag-and-bone man, ppl would run out with their stuff and he would pay them for it. Bottles were always clean when returned because mum would wash them out with hot water and washing-up liquid. Strangely, back in the day, washing-up liquid came in a plastic thing - possibly even cavewomen would have got their washing-up liquid in a plastic thing.

---

Only since 1950..

1950 saw the launch of Fairy Liquid by P&G. Manufactured in West Thurrock, Fairy was marketed in a white plastic bottle with green graphics and a red top. The plastic bottle enabled housewives to squirt the green liquid into their sinks, providing satisfying piles of foam.

From: https://www.packagingnews.co.uk/features...26-10-2015

I do remember it as my first encounter with 'plastic' - a strange and marvellous material - little did I know what what the future held.

[Kornee]

I must admit I'm not seeing the problem with burning plastic as fuel. It isn't like we don't use oil as fuel so it's just like you take the oil and turn it into something useful and when it's no longer useful you burn it like you would have done if you hadn't made it into plastic. Obviously (?) it needs to be burned at a high temperature rather than in heaps by the side of the road so cement production and possibly power stations are the ideal places for it to be used as fuel. Unless I'm missing something - only a state of mind prevents a waste product from being used as fuel.

I will modify 'just silly' comment in #2, to 'has a limited interim role', based on this imo comprehensive and well-balanced article:
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/envir...stic-waste