Say what…cost of recycling?
While most environmental activist or advocates you’ve met probably drove you mad at how annoyingly passionate and idealistic, they can be, which eventually pissed you to the point where you’d rather shut off that’s fine. They also probably won’t be as passionate about sharing the flip sides or trade-offs of the whole go-green efforts, movements or behavior.
However, it is my personal belief to be unbiased in sharing or educating to give a more rounded perspective. So, cost of recycling huh? Yes, in the next 2 paragraphs I’ve included my 2 cents on some commonly discussed points.
Recycling have been criticized by some for not being cost effective. For instance, the cost of recycling may in fact increase the expenditure required for waste disposal in some communities. In Washington, D.C, the Institute for Local Self Reliance argues that for cost savings to truly kick in, recycling must be seen to be a complete replacement for traditional waste management regimes (rather than a tack-on to traditional waste management methods). In such schemes, collection schedules, methods and vehicles should all be redesigned and repurposed in order to achieve economies of scale and realize the cost savings that recycling can potentially and ultimately bring.
Meanwhile, some may argue that the cost of using recyclable materials may exceed the cost of raw materials. This makes using recyclable materials less desirable for consumers, industrial and commercial enterprises. One not commonly explored point is that recycling may in itself contribute towards more pollution. Most would point to the situations in China and India where the recycling of e-waste generates a large amount of pollution. Another stark example is that paper recycling actually results in less tree populations because lower demand for new paper may lead to reduced need for paper companies to farm trees.
Honestly, all these arguments would fail when economic externalities are taken into account to provide an example, when a new piece of plastic is created instead of being made from recycled materials. The financial costs may be cheaper, but it may also result in more pollution and consume more energy. These are social costs that are termed a “externality”, which are often not taken into consideration by buyers or producers. Why? Simply because these costs are unfortunately, not borne by society at large hence it’s often an out of sight out of mind thing.
Surely, recycling may have some costs or trades-off to it, but if we’re looking to reap long term gains recycling still has its merits. A very powerful one. A merit that can save generations to come, and allow future generations to come to enjoy what we can enjoy right now that we often take for granted. Maybe, rather than viewing these as the costs to recycling, I’d like to call them the challenges they post.
After every challenge, comes a breakthrough. These challenges are avenues of creativity, innovation and compassion for mankind to tackle. If we do, we emerge from it stronger too.