Should We Recycle?

Recommend (2) Comments (1)

Most of us, at some point, have heard the mantra: “Reduce, reuse, recycle.”   In generations past, the words might have been “waste not, want not.” Regardless of the verbiage, the message is clear and unwavering. But somewhere along the line, the message got lost. We became a throwaway society.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has set a waste diversion goal of 35% nationally, but except for a few states and individual communities, this goal has not been reached. In 2005, diversion was less than 32 percent nationally.  

Regrettably, many easily recycled materials are still thrown away. For example, in recent years somewhere in the neighborhood of half of all aluminum cans, 75 percent of glass containers and magazines, 66 percent of plastic drink bottles, and 45 percent of newspapers were not recycled. And this doesn’t even factor in electronic waste, yard waste, cardboard, and other materials that pass through the hands – and trash cans – of most Americans on a regular basis. Where recycling is concerned, we are nowhere near our potential.  

In California, the bottle bill has resulted in more than 200 billion aluminum, glass and plastic beverage containers recycled since 1987.   Waste diversion mandates have also proven effective -- a California state law says local jurisdictions must divert 50 percent of all waste from landfills. Most major municipalities in California have already reached or surpassed this goal, providing valuable raw materials for processing into new products and extending the life of landfills.

While the true value of recycling comes from preventing pollution and saving natural resources and energy, it is also largely responsible for averting the potential landfill crisis that came to national attention some years back. Thanks to recycling, the need for new landfills is decreasing. But the cost to send waste to them, both in dollars and to the environment, is on the rise.