Downward Cycle in Pittsburgh City Paper (catchy name) talks about their recycling program. Lots of good stuff in the article, here are some of them:
"Even better, the economics of curbside recycling have cycled Pittsburgh's way. For years, going green meant red ink: It was cheaper to dump garbage in a landfill than to process it for recycling. But with landfill fees rising, the difference between recycling a ton and burying it is $70. In 1992, Pittsburgh paid $31.61 to process a ton of recyclables; now the city earns for $46.46 a ton from its leading purchaser. It's still not a break-even game -- state funds subsidize about half of the city's $1 million-plus program -- but it's headed in the right direction."
"The recycling market is global. The No. 1 U.S. export commodity is now recovered paper, with more than 6 billion metric tons a year bound for fast-growing, deforested China alone. Indeed, unbridled -- and environmentally disastrous -- growth abroad is the big reason recycling pays so well at home."
"And what good is it to fret over a polystyrene clamshell when the hamburger inside ate up so many times more resources? Recycling does little to change how we heat or light our homes and businesses, grow our food, or get from place to place. To focus on recycling may be like fixing a leaky faucet after the reservoir's burst."
2 comments:
There is a term called 'down cycling' that I'm reminded of here. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Downcycling
I'd also think that taking oil that could be used as fuel and making a plastic bottle out of it is downgrading it's value, or food into fuel.
I read somewhere that a massive percentage of all recycled plastic bags go to the TREX corporation so they can make deck boards. That's a good thing. But I have to wonder...as more and more cities and people ban or attempt to reduce teh use of plastic bags, what's going to happen to the price of TREX?
Post a Comment