Excellent post. The food industry (where I used to work) has grappled with local and state government recycling mandates (see: California) for decades. The recycling industry has clearly failed, and no one seems to have devised a plan or strategy to fix it without gouging consumers.
This article is a prime example of why it's always sensible to look at both sides, or in many cases, multiple sides, of an issue. If the legacy media, universities, schools, and even the workplace (see ESG/DEI) try to force-feed something down our throats, always go and seek out alternatives to what they're trying to preach. Chances are, you may find that what they're force-feeding isn't exactly the correct answer. It's one reason why I love seeking out those alternative viewpoints, especially when they're the ones that bother providing actual evidence to support their takes, as opposed to what I'd seen when I was in school and in the workplace.
Definitely all true. Recycling is filled with bullshit, despite having some validity in specific cases. Its economics are not obvious and need to studied in great detail, and lifecycle analysis is a must. Like other policy areas including immigration, recycling is not simply an unalloyed good.
Excellent post. Look at municipal finance for a lot of the problems. NJ mandated each County to develop and finance refuse to energy plants, replete with County taxpayer guarantees on the bonds. Along came Carbone and all the agreements that purported to force local refuse companies to haul to the County recycling center were in violation of ICC. I know there were subsequent changes to Carbone but I think taxpayers paid off or are paying off the bonds under the guarantees. There is one investment grade refuse to energy plant in Hempstead, Long Island that works purely on the basis of geography and economics. Haulers would have to drive into NYC to offload at those very efficient landfills in PA.
Excellent post. The food industry (where I used to work) has grappled with local and state government recycling mandates (see: California) for decades. The recycling industry has clearly failed, and no one seems to have devised a plan or strategy to fix it without gouging consumers.
Correct. Can't fix anything until you admit the problem.
This article is a prime example of why it's always sensible to look at both sides, or in many cases, multiple sides, of an issue. If the legacy media, universities, schools, and even the workplace (see ESG/DEI) try to force-feed something down our throats, always go and seek out alternatives to what they're trying to preach. Chances are, you may find that what they're force-feeding isn't exactly the correct answer. It's one reason why I love seeking out those alternative viewpoints, especially when they're the ones that bother providing actual evidence to support their takes, as opposed to what I'd seen when I was in school and in the workplace.
Definitely all true. Recycling is filled with bullshit, despite having some validity in specific cases. Its economics are not obvious and need to studied in great detail, and lifecycle analysis is a must. Like other policy areas including immigration, recycling is not simply an unalloyed good.
Excellent post. Look at municipal finance for a lot of the problems. NJ mandated each County to develop and finance refuse to energy plants, replete with County taxpayer guarantees on the bonds. Along came Carbone and all the agreements that purported to force local refuse companies to haul to the County recycling center were in violation of ICC. I know there were subsequent changes to Carbone but I think taxpayers paid off or are paying off the bonds under the guarantees. There is one investment grade refuse to energy plant in Hempstead, Long Island that works purely on the basis of geography and economics. Haulers would have to drive into NYC to offload at those very efficient landfills in PA.