Recycle or Not? - Page 2

Jay Taylor · 01-16-2005, 06:27 PM

Thanks for the info Chris.

Another question: What's heavier purposed glass?

Chris · 01-16-2005, 07:29 PM

Heavier Purposed glass is mostly things like stained glass windows, temperatured glass (like glass cookware) etc.

Jay Taylor · 01-17-2005, 11:20 AM

Thanks Chris. In that case heavier purposed glass is not a problem in our neighborhood. We’re more of a Bitburger beer bottle recycler rather than a stained glass window recycler.

Bill Cowmeadow · 01-17-2005, 11:53 AM

An aspect not touched on in this lively debate:

While re-cycling is important in my opinion, a more pressing problem related to the topic is that of junk mail.

I get between 4 and 5 pounds of useless mail a week. AOL, grocery flyers, refinance crap... The list is endless. I know there are ways to limit some of it through the mail system, but that doesn't stop the amount flowing throughout our country each week which ends up in the waste stream.

I see no way junk mail is going to stop

MarkHastings · 01-17-2005, 12:12 PM

I was just reading an article on a complaint to AOL about the tons of discs they send people every day.

Their response was something like: We are willing to recycle the discs if the consumer send them back to us (at their own cost)

Here's a trick with the credit card applications (and similiar items). They always have a pre-paid envelope included, so just tear up the application, then use the pre-paid envelope to send it back to the company that sent it to you. This way, you don't have to worry about recycling it and you stick it to them at the same time.

Marko Berg · 01-17-2005, 02:59 PM

Quote:

I'll not recycle the paper.

I'm not sure what to think of this. Some good questions regarding the ecological sustainability of recycling paper have been made, but ask yourself this: if your neighbourhood provides a bin for recycling paper, don't you think there's a good reason for this? Surely somebody must have figured out recycling paper makes sense. The reasons for recycling may be different in various communities - whether the aim is to preserve trees from logging, to prevent more waste being hauled to a landfill, or to stop water pollution - but someone somewhere obviously thought it makes sense.

Also, regarding bleaching - unless you live in a third-world country where factories use prehistoric paper machines, bleaching involves a lot less harmful chemicals than it used to. While I'm sure the process isn't completely harmless to the environment, a modern oxygen-based delignification process (which apparently takes place before the actual bleaching) is a lot better than a method involving heavy use of chlorine. In addition, modern inks no longer contain the amount of heavy metals they used to; consequently the bleaching process or its by-products aren't necessarily as toxic as you might think. The ingredients are quite different from what they used to be twenty years ago, but because you don't see a difference, you won't know anything has changed unless you research it. I suspect it has become somewhat of a myth that recycling paper is actually less bad for the environment.

According to the web site of one manufacturer of paper machines (http://www.metsopaper.com), some applications actually benefit from recycling:

Quote:

For many end-uses, recycled fibers represent the optimum raw material.

Gordon Moore · 01-17-2005, 03:46 PM

Quote:

but ask yourself this: if your neighbourhood provides a bin for recycling paper, don't you think there's a good reason for this? Surely somebody must have figured out recycling paper makes sense. The reasons for recycling may be different in various communities - whether the aim is to preserve trees from logging, to prevent more waste being hauled to a landfill, or to stop water pollution - but someone somewhere obviously thought it makes sense.

I actually agree with recycling paper.... I believe in the concept but I won't doubt the possibility that it may spawn more air pollution than it's worth. Not sure if that's been truly measured.

I think it's not so much a matter of someone figured it was a good idea but more to the fact that someone found a way for it to be profitable. No recycling plant will do this out of the kindness of their heart....nor could they survive as a company. Like most businesses....the bigger question is "can we make a buck doing this?..."

Jay Taylor · 01-17-2005, 03:56 PM

if your neighbourhood provides a bin for recycling paper, don't you think there's a good reason for this?

Oklahoma City provides a 2 cubic foot plastic bin to each residence for recycling. The residents place paper, plastic, glass & metal into the bin. A recycle truck goes through the neighborhoods, and separates the items into 4 larger bins on the recycle truck on the same day that trash is picked up. This service is paid for by taxing the residents, not by making a profit recycling.

I believe they started this program years ago without knowing how advantageous it would be to recycle each of the four categories of materials. Perhaps they thought that certain items might not be cost effective to recycle now, but may be more effective later as recycling technology improves. I believe they knew it was a good idea in general to recycle and the statistics could come later.

Well, it’s later. It now appears to not be a good idea to recycle paper in most areas but a good idea to recycle metals, especially aluminum. I’m not sure about glass & plastic. It may be time to change our program.

Gordon Moore · 01-17-2005, 04:06 PM

Yes the tax on recycling collection would go into city council coffers but the actual recycling would be done by a plant who tendered the contract with the city (to either do the pickup or purchase the recycled collection or both) and then re-sells the recycled raw material. The recycler would most definitely operate as a for-profit organization...no business survives breaking even. Ideally a city doesn't operate for profit either but they just call those "rainy day funds" and give themselves big raises that go unchallenged

Does your city own the collection trucks and the recycle plant? If yes, then they are most definitely ahead of us because I'm pretty sure Laidlaw Waste Management tenders the contract up here, with their other division doing the collection.

Essentially it's all Laidlaw. BFI is another big materials collection operation.

Jay Taylor · 01-17-2005, 04:47 PM

Gordon, I don't know who owns the trucks or recycle plant and because today's a holiday the OKC offices are closed.

However, perhaps the future of paper recycling lies with China:

China Becomes Major Factor in Recycling U.S. Paper—China’s voracious appetite for recovered paper and higher recycling goals in the United States are two key trends shaping the future of the recycled paper market. China’s massive share of recovered paper exports in the United States is shaping the future of the recovered paper business in the United States and perhaps the future of certain paper and board grades. China is the world’s biggest importer of recovered paper and is in the process of installing multiple paper and board machines based on recycled fiber.

and:

For the first 8 months of 2003, U.S. exports of recovered paper were 8.9 million tons—up 21% compared with the same period in 2002—according to U.S. Census Bureau figures. Exports to China accounted for 41% of those exports, with U.S. shipments to China up 54% to 3.6 million tons. The second largest destination was Canada, at 1.7 million tons. Total U.S. exports could reach 14 million tons in 2003.

from here: Waste Wood and Paper Recycling

Chris · 01-17-2005, 08:48 PM

BTW, many communities provide paper recycling, even though it loses money with few benefits because tax dollars support it (#1) and (#2) because public fundraising for it is incredible.

While some lose money hand over fist, all of them get solid tax breaks for being involved in it, and tax dollars pay greater then cost to do it..

A community is a fool not to take one of the many federal grants out their to be involved in the project.. but just because their are tons of federal grants and state offerings for it doesn't make it good science

China's example works.. in a sense.. because of highly condensed population to the facilities that do the final work, and their use of non-printable paper.. in other words, they are taking mostly paper pulp and recycling it into shipping containers and even mesh that can be used for sheeting.

Meanwhile, in the US, the problem is that our starter paper isn't in as easily processable a format as China.. the thing that really hurts paper recycling here is that the paper we start with is coated with heavier dye ink or we use glossy sheeting.. a pracice that is very rare in China. But this process, which we've all become very familiar with here, makes recycling paper a beastie.

If all of the paper we were trying to recycle was notebook paper or brown sheet paper etc, then life would be good.. but look at your sunday paper at the glossy inserts, etc. and then you know why you have the hitch you do.

Joe Szott · 01-18-2005, 11:36 AM

They used to provide recycling for aluminum, glass, plastic, and paper here in Denver. They've now dropped the paper and will only take aluminum, glass, and plastic in the weekly bins. There are larger newspaper-only dropoffs I have seen around town, but virtually no way to recycle magazines that I know of.

Can't say I really care too much. I get my news online, we haven't gotten a paper delivered for years. We get a few magazines, but that's about it (except for the continous flow of paper junk mail.)