Essay/Term paper: Can we say "no" to recycling
Essay, term paper, research paper: Society
Free essays available online are good but they will not follow the guidelines of your particular writing assignment. If you need a custom term paper on Society: Can We Say "NO" To Recycling, you can hire a professional writer here to write you a high quality authentic essay. While free essays can be traced by Turnitin (plagiarism detection program), our custom written essays will pass any plagiarism test. Our writing service will save you time and grade.
Can We Say "NO" To Recycling
Dr. Nadia El-Kholy. English 113. Tamer Wadid Shalaby. Final Draft Paper.
Lately the earth's capacity to tolerate exploitation and absorb solid wastes
disposal has diminished, due to excess trashing. People dispose lots of stuff,
and simply do not care. Therefore scientists found out a way to reuse things and
that process was called "recycling". This new approach seemed quite successful
at the beginning, until its true identity appeared. Recycling first started as
man's best friend, people were intrigued by this new phenomena. What could be
better than using things that were already used. Recycling has been very useful
especially that man is constantly consuming, burning up, wearing out, replacing
and disposing at an alarming rate.(Durning 1992). However, unfortunately
recycling has proven that it is quite costly. Although recycling of wastes
material solves the problem of garbage disposal at landfills, and saves
resources, it does nevertheless entail large hidden costs in collecting, sorting
and manufacturing; therefore, it is necessary for the government to overcome
such problems of recycling to be worth while and for manufacturers and consumers
to consume less. Recycling has proven its efficiency in solving the problem of
garbage disposal at landfills1. By the accumulation of garbage throughout the
years, space available for garbage has largely diminished. In the states for
example almost 67% of their waste stream ends up in landfills.(Scott 25). This
has in fact increased the price of disposal. As Kimball stated "tipping fees" at
landfills, is so often prohibitive(3), and some cannot find landfills to dump
their garbage. It can cost up to $158 to pick a ton of garbage and dispose
it.(Consumer Reports 1994). Beside, these landfills pollute their surroundings
area with lots of hazardous materials and contaminate underground water. To
discover the contamination of the underground water it would be 12 yeas after
the poisons-benzene; formaldehyde; mercury; and BCEE- have actually contaminated
the land, and had sunk 24 feet into the ground contaminating about 50 million
gallons of underground water.(Dahir 94). Besides these lands could be used in
more useful ways such as building schools, hospitals, or simply turning them
into large green areas to purify the air. This problem is practically acute in
Egypt, since we do find even in central areas of the city, piles of garbage
disposal very near to residential areas. Recycling would therefore eliminate
this problem and protect the environment. If we consider burning as an
alternative, well it is not very advantageous, so often burning is done in
incinerators. According to Plenum, incineration is the process of disposing of
the "Combustible portion of the community wastes"(81). This burning pollutes the
air in the area around it. It is not the way to solve the problem of recycling
because it solving one problem by creating another which is air pollution. In
this process a number of pollutants are emitted which poisons the air. Carbon
dioxide and lead are by products of burning that most health organisations
consider highly toxicating. These by products affect children mentally and
physically. In addition, carbon dioxide is considered one of the main reasons of
global warming because the molecule itself captures heat an stores it in it thus
creating the green house effect. Besides plastics are rather toxicating when
burnt according to Plenum, Acrylic type plastics emit HCN gas, Bromine
components that are added to plastics results in the emissionof HBr , which are
all dangerous pollutants (157). Obviously burning cannot be considered an
alternative and as stated in Consumer Reports, "Recycling does help to keep
garbage out of landfills and incinerators, both of which pose environmental
problems."(Feb 1994). Although burning lessens the physical amount of the waste
materials, it is considered one of the easiest way to pollute the air. Though
these are great advantages to us and the environment, but recycling costs more
than you could imagine. A study found that when the cost of garbage is
calculated by volume, landfilling and recycling costs are roughly the same.
Recycling does not appear to save any money, this applies to most of the
European countries and the United States and studies have lately proven so.
"Recycling is a good thing, but it costs money."(Boerner and Chilton 7). This
view has been confirmed by John E. Jacobson, who is the president of AUS, a
consulting firm in Philadelphia who stated that it is often more expensive to
recycle than to manufacture from raw material. The process goes through lots of
phases. First collecting and sorting garbage and second is manufacturing and
marketing. Collection is a phase by itself. In developed countries such as the
States, Europe, and the Far East, the people have a great deal of awareness of
the situation. People know that recycling is important and would save us lots
and lots of things. So the country itself provided facilities to help the people
recycle such as machines that recycle cans on the spot and gives 2.5 cents/can
and recycables-collecting programs and others. These collecting programs are
costly, besides they do not work in apartment buildings. Beside, vehicles that
transport these materials are not so cheap, besides most of these trucks'
capacities are wasted by bulky objects. Especially when trash contains a lot of
plastic containers. More tractors more rounds are required to collect recycables.
This adds to the cost. "We took plastics out of recycling programs because we
could not afford to drive around with trucks with 45% of their collection
capacity taken up by air."(Consumer Reports 1994). As for the sorting process
it entails lots of man power and tools, both of which are very expensive. The
material cannot simply be all fed into one big machine and then "boom" we have
recycled material. No, every kind of material must be put alone then fed into
big recycling machines. This process of separation or sorting costs money.
Manufacturers have to hire labourers to sort out glass from aluminium from
cardboard from tin and so on. According to Consumer Reports, the sorting
equipment and the man power involved in the process is a big investment (1994).
It is important to know that this process of collecting and sorting is
particularly expensive in developed countries where sophisticated tools are used
where man power is rather limited and expensive. However, in developing
countries like Egypt, the process of collecting and sorting are rather primitive
and is carried out by the "Zabaleen " or a second-hand car. This makes it less
expensive than developed countries. Manufacturing and marketing is the second
phase in this process. In order to build the factories that do the recycling
operation, the most important thing we must have is the capital. Building these
factories is quite expensive plus it takes time because the latest technology
must be applied in there. According to The Consumers Report, when garbage is
sorted it is sent to factories to be put in industry. These factories usually
designed for producing from raw material, need "retooling" so as to use recycled
material; which is very expensive. For example Union Carbide Inc., one of the
nations major supplies of plastic, had to spend 10 million dollars on building a
factory that would recycle plastic bottles it had produced (1994). Therefore to
retool a factory to make it compatible with the demands of recycling means
machines in an old factory must be replaced with new ones and this is costly.
For some reason all the machinery in a recycling firm tend to ware out so fast,
it is due to the interaction of these materials. So what has to be done now is
buy new machines for these firms ever time they ware out, well that's cheap.
Another disadvantage of recycling which makes it unattractive is that for
manufacturers economically the recycled material is not highly demanded, it is
not that pure as the virgin material. In a grocery store in Los Angeles-where I
was staying-most of the food is kept in cardboard containers or boxes that are
made out of recycled multimaterial . While books and furniture that are made
out of artificial wood and paper do not prefer the usage of recycled material.
According to Recycling is it worth the effort obstacles that are faced due to
the recycling of paper is that the recycled paper is of lower quality than
virgin paper for some uses.(94). This is a very good reason to look for an
alternative because recycled material cannot be used in projects that are worth
while, such as books and furniture. " In many cases, manufacturers would be
forced to switch from multimaterial packages, which are difficult to recycle, to
homogeneous, single-layered packaging."(Boener and Chilton 13). So if marketing
of recycled products is not economically worthwhile, then the whole process of
recycling cannot be economically efficient. Manufacturers cannot be motivated to
recycle if their recycled products are not demanded. "We have got to be
realistic about some things" said Mitchell Alison, "we set goals with certain
economies in mind, we no longer have those economies, so we have got to revisit
these goals." What led most of the economists to look for a substitute for
recycling is the inconsistent quality of the products. The products of recycling
are not as good as the original ones, thus leading consumers to look for a
substitute. This inconsistency is due to improper sorting of material. People
are expected to have a separate container for each thing that is recycled. When
people mess around and misplace things this is due to either untrained employees
who do not differentiate between the recycables or careless dumping. Careless
dumping a result of unconcern of the people themselves. Also the recycled
products are contaminated. Different kinds of paper or differently used
aluminium cans when mixed together to be recycled they do not produce a quality
of the same kind. Recycled paper faces four main obstacles, weak marketing for
mixed paper, recycled paper is of lower quality than virgin paper in some uses,
con not be used indefinitely , and finally photocopy, laser-printed paper hard
to de-ink.(Consumer Reports 94). It is not as good as using the virgin material
thus having low quality and less durability. Recycling programs cost money, and
where do you think this money comes from, taxpayers' pockets. Taxpayers are the
ones who are stuck paying for these programs, they are forced to do so. A
grocery store that uses recycled paper bags, plastic containers, and tin cans
must be able to pay for them, or increase the price of the product and the
consumer will pay of course because it is something humane and for the
environment. To prove that recycling expenses are a burden on consumers, a
margarine producer switched from plastic tubes to aluminium containers this led
to an increase in the expenses of the product thus increasing by 25% to reach
50%. Obviously this increase in price will be passed on to the consumer
increasing the price of the commodity.(Boener and Chilton 14). Most of the
recycling organisations are non-profit organisations. Still it is expensive to
use recycled material that is because the recycled material costs much. The
government must have a role in all this, its role is to overcome such problems.
These programs must be financed by the government, but not in a way that the
taxpayers have to suffer. Also some materials are better dumped than recycled,
the government should look for the material that would cost the least to recycle
and use it in most things. Such researches should be conducted and financed by
the government. The packaging industry consumes a lot of paper and plastic, if
this industry would consider using recycled material and less packaging they
would save a lot of energy, time and resources. "Manufacturers of polycoated
paper packages claim that recycling their products is both a boon to source
reduction efforts and an energy-efficient process."(Kimball 64). That is what we
all want a program that is cost efficient and saves energy. Also the taxpayers
should pay according to the amount of recycables each household recycles. It
should not be the same amount paid for each household because some people
recycle less than others therefore they should pay less. This way the government
will create the suitable conditions to encourage recycling programs and maybe
help preserving the environment. This rapid leap in our lives have led us to
create recycling and hopefully it will lead us to look for a way to better plan
it. Better planing for recycling will help prevent the problems faced now by
recycling. If it could be made that it satisfies the needed conditions
previously mentioned, to be cost-efficient, not time consuming, and a better
quality of products, this would be like a dream come true. Recycling should be
cost-efficient because what all nations are facing are massive economical
problems. Financing these programs is one hell of a job and if it has to be done
anyway, then we should at least look for ways to make it cost efficient. People
should learn to use and reuse, rather than use and dispose. If we can use things
more than once and could save energy then why not do so. "Reuse means getting
more use out of a product to reduce the waste stream. Many so-called disposable
items, such as plastic cups, knives, and forks, can actually be washed and used
several times." (Scott 25). As we cansee the benefits are over-estimated, and
the costs are under-estimated. What we should do is not only look for an
alternative but also look for other ways to improve recycling. The natural
resources will not last for ever, eventually everything comes to an end and the
end is very near to our natural resources. What is of greater importance is to
find alternatives to such resources if they actually become extinct. Recycling
is backed by most of the general public, for its ideas of saving the
environment, energy, and virgin material. But it is not that good or that
efficient it still costs money and is not that safe. "Recycling does not
necessarily provide for safer or more environmentally sound disposal than
landfilling or incinerators. The recycling process itself generates enormous
amounts of hazardous wastes."(Schaumburg 32). In addition it will decrease and
maybe solve the problem of the ever increasing pollution. Imagine that every
time someone throws a piece of paper in the garbage is similar to a person
cutting a leaf off a tree. This is what happens when one does so, so recycling
was the way to solve such a problem.