Greenpeace Admits that Recycling Plastic Is Feel-Good Folly

Reduce, Reuse, Recycle. 

This environmental adage became popular in the 1970s. I remember it being reinforced multiple times throughout my childhood. It was a way of developing an environmental ethos. What I noticed is that more emphasis was being put on recycling, perhaps because recycling is the easiest of the three to accomplish in a consumerist, throwaway society. Reducing one's consumption when bombarded by advertisements and using material consumption to fill a void is difficult. Reusing involves forethought and planning. Recycling involves some labor, especially when cleaning recyclable goods. Even so, throwing away goods in the recycling bin is easier than the other two R's. 

Recycling also happens to be the most feel-good of the three R's. Less than a month ago, the environmentalist nonprofit Greenpeace released a report entitled Circular Claims Fall Flat. In the report, Greenpeace points out why recycling plastics fails:

Mechanical and chemical recycling of plastic waste has largely failed and will fail because plastic waste is: (1) extremely difficult to collect, (2) virtually impossible to sort for recycling, (3) environmentally harmful to reprocess, (4) often made of and contaminated by toxic materials, and (5) not economical to recycle. Paper, cardboard, metal, and glass do not have these problems, which is why they are recycled at much higher rates. 

While this is a step towards a more rational dialogue on environmental policy, Greenpeace is late to the party. In 2013, I went through the economics of recycling and how recycling plastics did not make sense. I did point out that recycling cardboard, paper, aluminum, asphalt pavement, iron, and steel was a more sensible practice. Not only has recycling has become more expensive to sort and transport, but single-sort recycling has increased contamination rates. These trends have made it more difficult to find buyers of recyclable goods, which was something I pointed out last year.

Furthermore, the Greenpeace report proceeds to call for phasing out single-use plastics. That does not seem practical, particularly with public health. Single-use plastics are especially useful for syringes, applicators, drug tests, bandages, and wraps. This does not consider plastics usage in other sectors. Yes, we need to consider our consumption patterns for the long-run. Much like with renewable energy, we need to be realistic and take a more gradual approach to ensure that both economic and environmental considerations are taken into account.