Implementing A Mandatory Recycling Program

Implementing A Mandatory cycle ProgramIn a world w here world(a) warming and going green atomic number 18 common terms in the English language, it dismiss some generation be problematic to decipher what it all means and just what the one-on-one can do to help. Recycling is a major issue today and though there is inclination roughly whether it is necessary and how necessary it may be, implementing a mandatary cycle program is imperative for the environs and the plurality that live in it. Recycling comes with many benefits and prevents capers such as pollution and habitat destruction. Currently, our cycle programs be poor, and in order to improve them, a mandatory measure needs to be taken. many oppose to it because they claim that it is costly, ineffective, not as surroundally sound as some other options, and does not earmark the stage business opportunities needed. All of these oppositions be not reasoned or strong arguments and give be proved wrong. Recycling is necessary to the earth and its inhabitants.Recycling can be defined as re outgrowthing discarded upstanding materials into radical, useful products.1It can reduce water pollution which would then protect species and reduce habitat destruction. Recycling reduces air pollution as well which would then reduce the effects or process of global warming. Further, it reduces solid dotty governing as well as energy demand which make terminate supplies last longer. Creating a program to require recycle from everyone would clearly benefit a variety of environmental processes. Individual households as well as workplaces produce quint major types of materials that can be reused. This includes makeup products, glass, atomic number 13, steel, and some plastic. In order to understand the benefits of a mandatory program, the two ways recycl sufficient materials can be reprocessed need to be addressed. The first way is called primary or closed loop recycling. This is where permissive wast e is recycled into brand-new products of the same type. For example, a newspaper is recycled back into a new newspaper. The second way is called lowly recycling or downcycling. This is where waste materials be converted into different products. For example, a newspaper is recycled into cellulose insulation. There are two different types of wastes that can be recycled preconsumer and postconsumer waste. Preconsumer waste is generated in a manufacturing process and recycled instead of being discarded. Postconsumer waste is generated by the consumers use of the product. Both types are equally important to be recycled. Theoretically, anything can be recycled but it comes down to two important things. These two things are important in deciding how the mandatory program will work successfully. The first question that needs to be addressed is will the relic be recycled? In the process of separating the wastes furled for recycling, some of it gets mixed with other wastes and sent to landfills or incinerated. Secondly, will consumers actually purchase the recycled products and complete the cycle to make it profitable? In aid to a mandatory program, it would help if the government required a label that indicated how often of the product contained recycled material.12Our recycling evaluate are poor, and settlem even worse when analyse them to the rates of other developed nations. Both Switzerland and Japan recycle well-nigh half of their municipal solid waste or MSW, while the United States only recycles astir(predicate) thirty portion of its MSW. With a mandatory recycling program, studies show that the US and other developed countries could recycle sixty to eighty percent of their MSW. Some believe that we do not feel a line with our waste management. If the previous percentages were not enough, then the following statistics are to a greater extent than convincing. The United States wastes enough aluminum to rebuild the countrys entire airline fleet eve ry three months enough tires each year to circle the planet almost three times about 2.5 million nonreturnable plastic bottles every time of day enough office paper each year to build a wall eleven feet senior extravagantly school across the country from New York City to San Francisco.13Clearly, wasting what could be recycled is a big issue in America. Requiring citizens to recycle would help reduce the severity of these waste problems. Now that the different types of recycling and the magnitude of the recycling problem has been outlined, claims to why we should not implement a program can be easily, successfully, and intelligently declined.It is argued that recycling is more expensive than trash collection and disposal. However, when designed right, recycling programs are hail-militant with trash collection and disposal.2 When comparing costs of both methods, the cost of curbside recycling is usually compared with the cost of conventional disposal alone. The fallacy here is th at with recycling, the costs of collection and disposal are displaced. Instead of this comparison, the fair(a) cost of collection and disposal should be compared with the overall average cost of collection and recovery. Through this comparison, the costs are very impressive.2 Additionally, the United States spends five-hundred million dollars a year on picking up litter.1 Mandatory programs would put down this number significantly. It has been institute to be true that recycling is expensive in some communities. However, it needs to be noted again that when through with(p) correctly, it is much cheaper. Recycling costs less than traditional trash collection and disposal when communities achieve high levels of recycling.2 The communities that the data is reflecting an expensive program are still recycling at very low rates and are treating recycling as an paraphernalia to their traditional trash system rather than as a replacement for it.2 This is of ecstasy the problem when cri tics are evaluating the costs of a program. They often treat it as an add-on cost, and it is therefore expensive. 2 Baltimore Maryland is a great example of how you should transition into the program. They use the same trucks to collect recyclables as they do trash, separately and at different times. By doing this, Baltimore made their upfront costs minimal and created no increase in their solid waste budget.24The sparings of the entire situation improves when recycling is not an add-on to trash disposal, but it is integrated into the process.It is falsely assumed that we can only recycle cardinal to thirty percent of our waste. This number was considered a maximum in 1985, however today it should be considered a minimum and a much higher percentage is achievable.2 Currently the US does only recycle about thirty percent of its MSW. Because of these two statistics, those opposed to the program often think of this percentage as a cap. However, this is untrue. Although the derive of solid waste generated has leveled off individually, it has continued to increase on a national measure and there is therefore more potential waste to be recycled. Rates of what is being recycled have increase dramatically since the 1980s and early 1990s. The growth of the recycling programs is especially responsible for the increase. A dozen states are recycling about thirty percent or more of their MSW, but among those states communities are recycling up to fifty percent.2 These numbers are much higher in these communities and are continuing to grow because of aspects of programs they have implemented. They have put into effect waste prevention strategies, convenient services such as curbside and drop-off, economic incentives, and resident participation. If all of these strategies and more were implemented on a federal level to require a recycling program, all of our statistics would improve. 2The third argument that those against recycling programs use is that landfills and inci nerators are more cost effective and environmentally sound.2 However the truth of the matter is again, when designed correctly, recycling programs are cost competitive with their competition. Further, recycling programs provide pollution prevention benefits. When recycling, the pollution normally generated from landfilling and incinerating materials is avoided, and the environmental burden of extracting virgin materials and the manufacturing process is reduced.25Even with low landfill top sideping fees, it is still the preferable option to recycle. Currently, twenty two states have less than ten years of landfill capacity left.2 Some southern states even have as low as five years. Now, why is this important to k right off? We need to look towards the future. The new landfills that would need to be created could cost much more than the ones that are here today.2 Recently, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), has issued that municipal landfills must install liners and leachate, the perspicuous that drains from the landfill, collections systems. Because of these new regulations, hundreds of landfills are closing, and fewer and larger in private owned landfills are remaining open. Fewer landfills results in increased transportation costs. As of now there might not be scarcity in land for new landfills, but new landfills are being created large distances from population centers. Long haul and disposing municipal solid waste at distant landfills is already costing some cities on the wolfram and East coasts between $40 and $70 per ton.2 These privately owned landfills may increase these costs. Studies show that privately owned landfills are much more expensive than publicly owned landfills by twenty percent, and publicly owned ones provide greater control over disposal activities. This all means that the existing landfills are a precious possession and recycling extends their lives.2 Although lack of land is not currently the problem for new landfills, comm unities do not exactly want to be dumped on. Therefore, a policy that reduces the burden on the environment and on local communities from the transportation and dumping of trash should be put into place.2Incinerators are very expensive and recycling would be much more cost effective. Tip fees at incinerators built between 1989 and 1993 average $60 per ton.2 Incinerators built more recently have had to lower tip fees simply to compete with other disposal facilities. Montgomery County, Maryland is a great example of the how expensive the option of incinerators is. Montgomery County had to essay taxes to property owners just to cover the operating costs of its newly built incinerator after it lowered the facilitys tip fees in order to attract waste.26Claiming that landfills and incinerators are more environmentally sound is not a valid argument. Even the best landfills contaminate groundwater from eventually leaking. As far as incinerators are concerned, thirty percent by weight of tr ash enteringexists as ash.2 This ash is a waste that contains high levels of harmful residue. Furthermore, they emit carbon dioxide, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide, and other acid gases that landfills do not. One study found that Floridas largest incinerators were burning significant amounts of recycling materials. This is due to the fact that contracts are requiring governments to bring a certain amount of waste to incinerators. These contracts are posing a major disincentive to maximize recycling or waste reduction programs.2 In summary, although landfills and incinerators may have some benefits, they are preventing us from moving forward and implementing more environmentally friendly and cost effective methods. We need to plan for the future because what is cheap and easy now will not be in the future. It is much easier to prevent a problem, then to fix the problem once it is already out of control.The next myth about recycling is that landfills are significant job generators fo r rural communities, and recycling programs would take these jobs away. However, the fact is that recycling creates many more jobs for rural and urban communities than landfill and incineration disposal options.2 Simply sorting the recycled materials alone would provide ten times more jobs than landfilling. The biggest pay-off though is making new products from the old products. So many aspects of the recycling process provide thousands of jobs. New recycling-based manufacturers employ even more people and at higher wages. Recycling-based paper mills and plastic product manufacturers, for instance, employ 60 times more workers than do landfills. Product reuse also sustains significantly more jobs than disposal options. Computer refurbishing repair, for example, creates 68 times more jobs than landfills.27There are 25.5 million tons of durable goods discarded into the landfills in American each year. If just half of them each year were reclaimed through reuse, over 100,000 new jobs i n the recycling industry would be created alone.2 Recycling is entirely sensible from an economic standpoint.3There are doubts about just how willing citizens would be to adapting a new waste disposal method. As we can see from this problem, it is evident that many households do not recycle at all. It is a valid point to question, would people even go along with a mandatory program? The answer, through polls, is yes. A survey conducted with Wisconsin residents ascertained that ninety-six percent responded that they believe their recycling efforts are worthwhile.3 Although some may argue the statistic would be lower across the board of the United States, a number that high is very promising. It does not seem difficult to educate people on the environment so they understand why it is necessary for a program. heedless of the doubts some people may have, a recycling program is extremely necessary for the people, the United States, and the full planet. The benefits of recycling should d iminish any doubts. Arguments against a program have all been proven to be worn out arguments and even the biggest issue of economics has been addressed. It is a much better choice financially to implement a full recycling procedure. In a world where global warming and going green are common terms in the English language, everyone should be able to say they are doing something to help. Everyone should be able to say they are recycling.