Barrett 1

Bethany Barrett
ENG 311
Persuasive Essay
10/5/16
Plastic, Glass, and Paper: Oh My!
If the federal government does not create and implement new national waste management
and recycling laws, it stands to reason that the United States will not only increase their carbon
footprint, they will be crushed underneath it. For now, the United States falls behind many other
developed countries in respect to how much they recycle. Sweden, Switzerland, South Korea,
Germany these are countries we consider our peers in almost every other respect and yet our
approach to recycling is childs play compared to theirs. When you look at what their recycling
programs have in common, three things are evident: They hold manufacturers accountable for
their part in waste creation, they hold consumers accountable for how they sort and treat their
waste, and they prioritize having proper waste management facilities. Should the United States at
the very least consider adopting some if not all of these commonalities? Absolutely. The benefits
far outweigh the negatives, as I will discuss.
First, let me make it clear that recycling and waste management go hand in hand, and I
will be using these terms interchangeably. In fact, integrating waste and recycling under one
program is necessary. Unified programs are just one trait among several among countries with
the highest rates of recycling. While it is not the primary reason these countries are successful,
there are plenty of reasons why having a single national program would encourage success. To
start, look at any major retailer or business. Their policies, store brand, and expectations of

Barrett 2

employees are the same throughout every store. They do it because they know that by having a
streamlined business they can control every aspect of their store, or come close to it. This allows
them the opportunity to improve any areas that need improving, without fear of losing grip on
quality control. If we treated recycling like a business, which it is, there could be no downsides
to having a single nationwide program.
How then, should we model this national program? Based on successful examples, a
multi-bin system is far superior to our current single-bin system, where Americans throw all of
their recycling regardless of type into a single, typically blue, bin. The contents are collected and
sent to a sorting facility, before finally being sent to a processing plant. However, it is shown that
1 in every 6 items sent to a sorting facility is not recyclable, leading to lowered productivity rates
and an increase in costs.1 Multi-bin systems include bins for plastic, glass, paper, food waste, and
electric waste like batteries, with the consumer responsible for sorting their waste themselves.
How would this make things easier? Taking the sorting facilities out of the equation and
introducing a multi-bin system increases the amount of waste that gets recycled properly. That in
turn would increase productivity and decrease costs. The government needs to implement some
form of system to assure success of a consumer-based sorting system. Whether it be through
fines for sorting improperly like Switzerland, or incentive based programs for reducing waste in
a household, consumers need to be held accountable. Their laziness is no reason to allow
ourselves as a nation to fall behind in addressing our recycling needs.
Now that we have established the benefits of a national recycling program, lets review
the manufacturers role in all of this. Think of a national program like the soil in a garden. It
provides an environment conducive to growing recycling success. Manufacturers would be the
1

http://fortune.com/2015/09/03/waste-management-recycling-business/

Barrett 3

fertilizer. In a garden, fertilizer is not necessary to grow beautiful and healthy plants, but it does
make it easier. Germany has a Green Dot system that makes manufacturers pay a fee for a green
dot on their products. The more packaging a company uses for their product, the more the dot
costs, resulting in a reduction in overall packaging used initially by manufacturers. This simple
program has resulted in approximately 100 tons less in waste in a year, and only helps the
consumer, as it reduces the amount of product needing to be recycled.2
Aside from assisting the consumer by creating less waste to sort through, the fee from the
green dot system goes right back into the recycling program. While we may not adopt the exact
system, having manufacturers pay into the program could aid in building new recycling facilities,
replacing broken equipment, and other similar needs that would arise at some point or another. It
would be important to watch out for giving tax breaks however, because if companies could find
loopholes out of paying their fee, it would make it more difficult to provide appropriate services.
Some larger manufacturers are already doing their best as private investors to assist some cities
with their waste management needs. The Closed Loop Fund, where several companies like Coca
Cola, Goldman Sachs, and others, give out low or zero interest loans to participating cities. These
loans are used to help improve the cities waste management programs, leading to job creation,
lowered waste, lowered greenhouse emissions, and a more stimulated local economy.3 These
giants in business and manufacturing clearly understand the importance of recycling and waste
management and are willing to help. They cannot be the only ones. Involving all businesses
would mean true success for American recycling and waste management programs.
Another hurdle faced by our current recycling system is the lack of proper processing
facilities. Even for areas with proper facilities, they are all run by different companies, allowing
2

http://www.howtogermany.com/pages/recycling.html

http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2015/04/recycling-america

Barrett 4

for a disconnect between states and even counties. If the government contracted these different
companies, it would allow us a chance to streamline their production and increase their
productivity. Investing in new facilities is also important, including facilities for waste-to-energy
plants. There are some plants in America, but most of them are on the East coast, and account for
less than half a percent of American energy.4 This is likely because before the 1990s, the
technology used did not account for air pollution but this has since changed. Sweden relies on
waste-to-energy for reducing the amount of waste sent to landfills and in 2013 waste-to-energy
accounted for 49% of their waste.5 The ash created from burning waste can even be used in
asphalt, resulting in a positive impact on municipalities that would use said ash for roadwork
while simultaneously reducing waste. Investing in proper processing facilities and plants is
important for a successful recycling business.
As I stated earlier, our current recycling program is like a garden. If we implement a
united national program, hold consumers and manufacturers accountable, and prioritize
investments in proper processing plants, we will have the basics of a successful future in
recycling and waste management. Without the involvement of the federal government however,
which is the water needed to grow this garden, we will never know true success. Federal laws
and regulations will ensure that there is a steady stream of support wherever needed, that
standards will be met continuously, and will propel us towards being the world leader in waste
management. At this point, we are almost delaying the inevitable. If you support legislation to
create federally backed programs and standards, you will see a drastic change in America. A

4
5

http://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=25732

http://midwestenergynews.com/2013/10/17/is-burning-garbage-green-in-sweden-thereslittle-debate/

Barrett 5

change rooted in job growth, environmental responsibility, and common sense. I urge you to do
the right thing, and unite our nation by uniting our recycling programs.

Works Cited
American Womens Club of Cologne. All About Recycling in Germany. How to
Germany. http://www.howtogermany.com/pages/recycling.html Recycling. October
5, 2016.
E.B. In the Bin. The Economist. April 22, 2015.
http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2015/04/recycling-america
Democracy in America. October 5, 2016.
Freden, Jonas. The Swedish Recycling Revolution. Sweden. September 24, 2015.
https://sweden.se/nature/the-swedish-recycling-revolution/ Nature. October 5, 2016.
Groden, Claire. The American Recycling Business is a Mess: Can Big Waste Fix It?
Fortune. September 3, 2015. http://fortune.com/2015/09/03/waste-managementrecycling-business/ Leadership, Recycling. October 5, 2016.
Haugen, Dan. Is Burning Garbage Green? In Sweden, Theres Little Debate.
Midwest Energy News. October 17, 2013.
http://midwestenergynews.com/2013/10/17/is-burning-garbage-green-in-swedentheres-little-debate/ News. October 5, 2016.
Waste-to-Energy Electricity Generation Concentrated in Florida and Northeast.
EIA. April 8, 2016. http://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=25732 Today in
Energy. October 5, 2016.