Sitting by a trashcan in the Chem/Physics building the other day as a class was dismissed, I couldn't help but notice that every item I saw tossed in the trash happened to be recyclable.
In the three or four minutes I waited for the lecture hall to empty, I witnessed 10 or 12 cans and bottles go into the trash. The worst of the situation, however, is the fact that the Chem/Physics building has the highest concentration of recycling bins I have seen on campus, the nearest sitting about 12 feet from the over-used trashcan. Not only did I observe far too many recyclables trashed, but not a single student exiting the classroom hauled her empty container the extra few yards to the recycling bin. This incident sparked my interest in the attitude of the student body toward recycling: apathetic, lazy or simply oblivious?
The benefits of recycling are endless, including waste prevention, lowered air and water pollution, decreased energy use -- therefore decreasing greenhouse gas emissions -- and reduced consumption of raw materials, to name a few. Recyclable materials span a list nearly as long. Beside the obvious plastic, aluminum and glass, the list extends to paper, textiles, electronics and many other metals.
While we all know (hopefully) that recycling is beneficial, the energy and pollution savings of reprocessing a used item, in contrast with producing a new one, are surprisingly vast. For example, the energy savings of recycling a plastic item are 70 percent, the savings for steel are 60 percent and 40 percent for paper. Aluminum is the most efficient recyclable, with a staggering 95 percent energy savings, coupled with air pollution savings of the same number. According to the Environmental Protection Agency, these numbers add up, reducing the carbon emissions of the United States around 50 million metric tons in the year 2005 alone.
An increase in waste is about as detrimental as an increase in recycling is beneficial. Not only does choosing to trash your recyclables increase pollution and require environmentally damaging extraction of new natural resources, but excessive waste becomes more expensive as well. Finding and filling landfills is expensive, especially for cities that need to transport their waste. In addition, the incineration of waste releases carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, and landfill sites often produce hazardous gases and chemicals that may leak into water supplies.
Leave a comment 1 Comment Write a letter to the editor
All letters to the editor must include a name, e-mail, daytime phone number and affiliation to Virginia Tech. Affiliation includes: year and major for students; position and department for faculty and staff; current city for alumni and parents.
...and the CT editors should make a conscious effort to spell check...Now for something a bit less nitpicky: this is a good lesson in economics principles. There is no incentive for an individual to recycle, save perhaps a feeling of social responsibility. Unfortunately, financial incentives are often more compelling than intrinsic ones. Some states have acknowledged this by giving 5 or 10 cent refunds to people who recycle used cans and bottles. I'm not sure of the success of this idea, especially given most people's indifference toward such a small amount of money, but if you make it apparent that the cost of disposal is being passed on to the non-recycling consumer, it may at least give some better results. Of course, implementing such a program also adds cost, so it is not ideal, but it may at least be a good line of thinking.
Reply to this Top