The National Sword program in 2017, when China stopped accepting recyclables unless they met the stringent 0.5% contamination rate, had a big impact on recycling.

China was previously a large importer of US recyclables, which now needed to find new markets. (1/n)
As far as contamination rates go, the Onondaga County Resource Recovery Agency (OCRRA) noted this was "nearly impossible."

Even with a contamination rate of 1%, OCRRA has reported on looking for new solutions:

https://www.syracuse.com/news/2020/03/as-recycling-crisis-deepens-ocrra-asks-charge-for-recyclables-burn-them.html">https://www.syracuse.com/news/2020... (2/n)
According to the article from http://Syracuse.com"> http://Syracuse.com :

"In 2017, OCRRA earned $125,000 from the sale of recyclables. This year, it will spend $2 million or more."

Now, they are considering charging haulers to bring recyclables in or incinerating them altogether. (3/n)
I had the pleasure of visiting the recycling facility last year and chatting with the staff.

I brought up a lot of the information I see in the #zerowaste sphere, namely addressing what everyone tends to say:

#plastic isn& #39;t working, let& #39;s move to #glass.

Not so fast. (4/n)
Because the recycling system in the US is primarily single-stream, all recyclables are grouped together regardless of type (cardboard, plastic, glass) and then separated at materials recovery facilities (MRFs).

This has some disadvantages. (5/n)
Though consumers are more likely to #recycle because it& #39;s less work, single-stream systems can introduce more contamination and require more sorting mechanisms to separate materials into like groups (cardboard with cardboard, #1 PET #plastic with its friends, etc). (6/n)
This type of sorting, in Onondaga County and many other places, means that recyclables go onto a conveyor belt.

So does the glass.

It tends to break along the line and end up with the other small gunk, shredded paper, and other contaminants. You can& #39;t recycle it. (7/n)
Instead, it can be used for landfill cover, incinerated, or end up as #trash.

In 2017, the EPA reported that glass had a 26.6% recycling rate (3 million tons).

1.5 million tons was combusted.

7 million tons went to landfill. (8/n)
Glass is really only the savior the #zerowaste movement portrays it as if it is reused or source-separated.

Source separation happens with some glass bottles, like beer and soda containers accepted at grocery stores. That can be made into new glass! (9/n)
Hence why advocates propose expanding bottle bills, this would allow better source separation and an incentive for people to bring glass in.

To my surprise, the #recycling facility staff I spoke with expressed their markets for plastic are better than glass. (10/n)
According to this local article, there are local markets for plastic (I gathered from our conversation predominantly #1 PET and #2 HDPE plastic) and cardboard.

Not as much for glass and paper.

https://www.syracuse.com/news/2018/09/youll_pay_more_for_garbage_soon_as_global_recycling_crisis_hits_cny.html">https://www.syracuse.com/news/2018... (11/n)
And #compostable #plastic isn& #39;t a solution either.

Compostable bioplastic requires industrial composting facilities to break down since they can reach high temperatures your #compost pile can& #39;t.

They also need to break down within a certain time period (12/n)
#Bioplastic can often be a contaminant.

Some consumers assume they are recyclable, but they only contaminate recycling streams.

If they aren& #39;t labeled as Biodegradable Products Institute (BPI) certified, Onondaga County won& #39;t compost them. (13/n)
So that restaurant that recently switched to #bioplastic?

As much as I wish it wasn& #39;t #greenwashing, it likely is. Especially if you ask them if they compost... and they don& #39;t. (14/n)
So what are some solutions?

I am no economist by any means, but I hope recycling recovers.

However, some products are downgraded in quality when recycled (glass, plastic).

Personally, I& #39;d like to see more systems like Loop and GoBox that have a return and reuse scheme. (15/n)
Decisions on return and reuse should be dictated by detailed Life Cycle Assessments, studies on human behavior, leachables testing, among more!

We can& #39;t implement some complicated system and expect people to do it perfectly.
Look at recycling!
IT& #39;S SO CONFUSING! (16/n)
To summarize:
1) Recycling is in trouble. You can help by understanding your local facility& #39;s rules and following them.
2) Glass is not the answer, it is not easy to recycle in single stream systems.
3) Return and reuse schemes could be a solution... but may be difficult. (17/n)
Lastly, I would sprinkle a nice flavoring of doubt on any "solution" you see advertised as the one true method to end our #recycling and #pollution woes.

As much as I& #39;d love a silver bullet, the answer is far more varied and complicated. That& #39;s why we need to work together!

FIN
You can follow @wastefreephd.
Tip: mention @twtextapp on a Twitter thread with the keyword “unroll” to get a link to it.

Latest Threads Unrolled: