California Law Limits 'Recyling' Logo in New Attack on Plastic Waste (msn.com)
- Reference: 0183233489
- News link: https://news.slashdot.org/story/26/05/16/0544201/california-law-limits-recyling-logo-in-new-attack-on-plastic-waste
- Source link: https://www.msn.com/en-us/technology/general/why-banning-the-recycling-logo-is-progress-in-the-fight-against-plastic-waste/ar-AA22YSBD
> The "chasing arrows" symbol, created in 1970 [2]by a college student inspired by the burgeoning environmental movement, has been stamped indiscriminately on plastic bottles, clamshell takeout containers, chip bags and more for decades. The majority of the items emblazoned with the mark have been virtually impossible to recycle for most people. California lawmakers say they want to end the charade: Under what's known as the [3]Truth in Recycling law , plastics cannot use the symbol if they aren't collected by curbside programs serving 60% of Californians and sorted by facilities serving 60% of the state's recycling programs (with some additional requirements). If the law goes into effect as scheduled on October 4, [4]more than half of the types of plastic packaging and products sold in the state can no longer carry the chasing arrows logo. That will affect plastic films, foam, PVC and mixed plastics...
>
> Food and packaging groups have [5]sued the state of California , calling the law a form of censorship whose vague restrictions violate the First Amendment and due process rights.... Advocates of the law counter that corporations deliberately misled the public by turning the recycling symbol into a marketing device that masks the fact that only a small fraction of plastic packaging is ultimately recycled... The mark was originally [6]intended to inform waste processors what polymers a plastic item was made from. But the public reasonably assumed anything stamped with the symbol was recyclable. Millions of tons of worthless plastic trash have since poured into recycling facilities unable to process it....
>
> States are now taking action. Seven have [7]passed laws shifting the cost of recycling onto packaging makers. Oregon and Washington have [8]lifted requirements that plastic containers carry the chasing arrows symbol.
The article notes that Norway already recovers 97% of beverage bottles, while Slovakia recycles 60% of plastic packaging. "But the U.S. only recovers [9]about a third of its PET and HDPE bottles, and [10]just 13% of plastic packaging, according to U.S. Plastics Pact, an industry-led forum.
"It won't be easy for the U.S. to reach higher levels of recycling: The necessary infrastructure and incentives are chronically underfunded, no federal mandate exists for minimum-recycled-content that would create demand and a mix of mostly unrecyclable hydrocarbons still dominates the waste stream."
[1] https://www.msn.com/en-us/technology/general/why-banning-the-recycling-logo-is-progress-in-the-fight-against-plastic-waste/ar-AA22YSBD
[2] https://aspenjournalism.org/the-recycling-symbols-aspen-roots/
[3] https://calrecycle.ca.gov/wcs/recyclinglabels/
[4] https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/Docs/Publications/137532
[5] https://www.flexpack.org/publication/RG93bmxvYWQ6MTY5NA==
[6] https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/plastics-industry-insiders-reveal-the-truth-about-recycling/
[7] https://www.proskauer.com/alert/the-2025-guide-to-epr-packaging-compliance
[8] https://www.oregon.gov/deq/recycling/Documents/recTILlawsToday.pdf
[9] https://www.epa.gov/facts-and-figures-about-materials-waste-and-recycling/plastics-material-specific-data
[10] https://usplasticspact.org/baseline/
It's amazing how much the plastic industry (Score:2, Troll)
Does all these incredibly nasty little things that you wouldn't think about to manipulate us into keeping their products around.
Similarly finding out just how staggeringly evil the company that makes cookies for keebler elves actually is...
Like all these little tiny things that are just kind of part of the background noise of your life and as soon as you find out much of anything about them it's just horrifying.
Thinking about it AI data centers are going to fuck shit up for everybody in a way th
Heard it called this (Score:2)
by a reporter. Down-cycling rather than recycling. A U.S. based reporter thus this story makes sense as this summary says the U.S. doesn't recycle most of it. Plus they added if it is a clear bottle it yellows after a few cycles thus the change to colored bottles or in lots of cases it gets downcycled to park benches and the like.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Honestly, examples like this are a counter argument. They make me think downcycling is a better idea than recylcing.
Most people would rather a bottle end up as a park bench than continue to make more bottles. Each bottle has a high chance of ending up in a land fill forever while the park bench is something that could last for decades and should theoretically replace other materials, such as iron or wood, freeing them up for better uses.
Educate (Score:2)
> "The mark was originally intended to inform waste processors what polymers a plastic item was made from. But the public reasonably assumed anything stamped with the symbol was recyclable"
Then the problem is education, not the mark. Every product with the mark is ABLE to be recycled (methods do exist), but that doesn't mean it can be or will be in your area. I don't recall running across anyone who thought having the symbol means anything more than the number inside it is the type of plastic. And if y
Re: (Score:2)
I disagree that it should be up to every individual to squint at a number on some packaging every time, and even wasting some water on dirty packaging just to be sure. The misunderstanding is not a passive reception on the consumer's part, it is an action on the part of plastic companies to make the consumer feel that the weight of plastic pollution is actually their fault, even though they had no part in choosing to use it. Case in poiint, the famous "crying indian" ad.
Re: Educate (Score:2)
Good point! All we have to do is label everything as, say, poly-2-hydroxypropanoic acid or poly-oxyethyleneoxyterephthaloyl. Everyone will know exactly what that means â" itâ(TM)s unambiguous, after all â" and any resultant awfulness will just be the result of ignorance, aka Freedom!
This is idiotic (Score:1)
Which is right up Cali's playbook. Now the bottle makers will take the lable off and you won't know what kind of plastic it is. They should just require the bottlemakers to put a fraction of the recycled plastic in their bottles which they probably won't do either. Or a better way would be put a tax on plastic bottles and move that money to the recyclers
Re: (Score:1)
> Which is right up Cali's playbook. Now the bottle makers will take the lable off and you won't know what kind of plastic it is. They should just require the bottlemakers to put a fraction of the recycled plastic in their bottles which they probably won't do either. Or a better way would be put a tax on plastic bottles and move that money to the recyclers
Oh, fuck off with your bullshit. There is nothing that says manufactures can't stamp their shit with the resin identification code -- they just can't wrap it with the arrow loop.
Just pull the trigger (Score:2)
Glass, aluminum, steel, and paper/cardboard, taken together, are suitable for packaging 99% of all products sold and are either compostable or infinitely recyclable. Just ban plastic packaging for that 99% altogether. Iâ(TM)m willing to pay three extra cents. Just get the fuck rid of it.
Re: (Score:2)
100% behind you on this.
Re: Just pull the trigger (Score:2)
Beef mince in UK supermarkets used to come in a hard plastic container with a soft plastic film cover. The hard plastic can go into the recycling bin but the film needs to be treated like plastic carrier bags, which in theory means taken back to the supermarket (where there is a bin for soft plastics) but in practice ends up in the non-recyclable waste at home.
A few years ago the packaging changed to a soft plastic pouch. âoeSame product now with 30% less plastic!â, said the labelling. Thatâ(
How to fix the problem (Score:3)
The problem is not that we do not recycle, but that we do not reward recycling enough nor do we punish the creation of non-recyclable waste. Solution: Tax the crap.
7 types of recyclable materials:
Type 1: PET: Most common and very recyclable
Type 2: HDPE: Common and recyclable.
Type 3: PVC: Poor attempts to recycle creates toxins. Most do not even bother. Very rarely recycled
Type 4: LDPE: Styrofoam, very rarely recycled
Type 5: PP/ Polypropylene: uncommonly recycled.
Type 6: PS/Polystere: (egg cartons) Very rarely recycled
Type 7: Other /everything else. These things are never recycled because it is a catchall term - type 7 is not one chemical.
Type 1 and Type 2 are the only ones that recycle more than 10%. Type 5 might someday graduate to more than 10%, but not yet.
Solution:
Tax the stuff that is NOT recycled.
No tax at all for Type 1 and 2 plastics. (PET and HDPE)
50% tax on type 5 plastics (PP)
100% tax on all other types of plastics
Note, instead of passing a law that taxes by type of plastic, better to make the law state that the tax rate is determined by what percent of the plastic produced over the past 5 years was actually recycled.
This will encourage people to change which plastic material they are using, punishing them for choosing types 3,4,6 and 7, and encourages the use of types 1 and 2 wherever possible. If this changes our the mix by only 5%, that would be worth it.
As a bonus it raises cash which could be used to fund recycling, while also encouraging the plastic makers to research how to improve recylcing.
"corporations deliberately misled" (Score:3)
That pretty much sums up the plastics industry when it comes to recycling over the last 50+ years.
Re: (Score:2)
Half the time I don't even bother to put plastics in the recycling anymore. It it takes 2 extra steps to get to the other bin, I'll put my plastic in the trash instead of recycling.
I still try, because I know it could still be useful to have the plastics separated from the general waste stream in the future, when new industrial processes are invented. I just don't try very hard, because I suspect the current process dumps the plastics back into the general waste stream anyway.