Pop Quiz: To Recycle, Or Not To Recycle
by Dominic Muren, Philadelphia, USA on 07. 4.08
Answer: A) #1 and #2
You just finished that great yogurt and, after looking for and finding the recycling symbol, placed the container in the recycling bin, assuming it would be recycled. Unfortunately, if that container didn't have a number 1 or 2 inside the recycling symbol, then it may not be recycled. That's because numbers 1 and 2 (PETE and HDPE plastics) are the easiest to recycle. In truth, there are far fewer facilities that recycle numbers 3-7 (in general, the higher the number, the harder it is to recycle). The numbers refer to the kind of plastic the container is made from; this is important because different plastics melt at different temperatures, and have different compatibilities with one another.
Like This? Check Out:
How to Green Your Recycling
Annals of Recycling: the Beer Can House
Patagonia Launches Common Threads Recycling
Recycle Your Electronics by Mail, for Free
Source: Recycle Arizona
Thirsty for more? Check out these related articles:
- Recycled Tee-shirts With a Story
- Sony's Green Glove is Great...But Catchy
- From the Forums: Concern About Yoplait Yogurt Containers
- Techy Jewlery from Repurposed Computer Gear
Massachusetts Unveils Ambitious Renewables and Energy Efficiency Bill
|
Move to Canada if You Want to Avoid the Worst of Climate Change
|
Harder for WHOM to recycle? The Consumer or the Recycling Company?
Glass and metal recycling have been around a long time, and in terms of unsubsidized value, likely makes more $ sense than recycling plastics and paper. (This of course excludes the not-so abstract value of communities and wilderness' free of strewn trash.)
Those are really neat recycling bins in the picture. I've always thought up of a 4-bin-4-color recycling receptacle. Now I know it's for real.
Can you buy them at some store? Or was it just custom made for that location in the picture? I would like some details.
Oh, and I thought the poll was pretty interesting too. I saw in the newspaper today, to avoid #7 bottles.
Can Treehugger provide a quick list of brands that actually do #7, so I can avoid them? And the ones that do #1 and #2? Thanks.
My question, which I have never had answered to satisfaction: What is it about #6 that makes it so hard to recycle? My curbside recycling takes all but 6. When I called to ask, they just told me "We don't take it."
It seems like the most toxic plastics - 3,6, and 7 - are also the hardest to recycle.
It seems like the most toxic plastics - 3,6, and 7 - are also the hardest to recycle.
from americanchemistry.com:
"Mainly, the properties of polystyrene [#6] that make it an excellent packaging material, e.g., its light weight, energy efficiency, strength and product performance, worked against the mechanics of recycling this material. Just like in the distribution system for polystyrene food service products, transportation distances play a key role. The economics of hauling polystyrene long distances (to the nearest available recycling plant) were not always favorable. The industry learned that polystyrene has to be densified or baled to get a sufficiently concentrated volume to make transportation over long distances cost-effective. Also, food service products of all materials -- paper, metal, plastic, and polystyrene -- are generally highly contaminated, and require cleaning before they can be processed for recycling, which can add significant costs."
...basically it's just not worth it.
#7 plastics are, as mentioned, often the most toxic, but that's not always the case. When the plastic classification systems were developed in the 80s, the #7 category was created as a catch all for "everything else." While we've all heard the warnings about bisphenol-A in our plastics (all in type #7), there are also some benign forms of #7, such as polylactic acid (PLA) plastics - food starch based compostable products. So, while it makes sense to question what's in all your plastics (especially #7), there's no need to automatically assume that #7 = bad news.
Sadly, most plastic is not worth it, it is a feel-good illusion that plastic is worth recycling. The best choice is to only buy in glass or metal. They are both financially viable to recycle. Plastic takes close to the same amount of energy to recycle as it took to create new, and costs municipalities more than it is worth. One statistic from the SF department of Energy was that it cost $4000 to collect one ton of plastic bags, which was then worth $36 as a raw commodity. Now bottles might be more profitable, but by how much?
I assume that by saying the higher numbers are more difficult to recycle, we mean some combination of more labor, more energy, and more toxicity is involved. So unless it takes more energy to recycle than to make in the first place (in which case we should avoid using it or else charge the producer for the additional recycling cost), the relative cost of recycling all 7 numbers should go down as the price of oil (from which much plastic is made) goes up.
So, let us demand more from our curbside recycling programs.