Recycling Benefits to the Economy

http://www.all-recycling-facts.com/recycling-benefits.html

There are many recycling benefits to the economy. As you will learn in a while, it definitely makes perfect business or economic sense to recycle products that can be recycled. Recycling saves money There are many economic benefits of recycling, one of which includes saving money. It is cheaper to make products using recycled materials. For example, using fresh aluminum costs twice as much as using recycled aluminum. This is because a lot more energy (ie. 90% more) is needed to extract aluminum from its raw forms (see more about recycling statistics). Subsequently, products that are made from recycled materials can also be purchased at a cheaper price. Isnt this one marvelous recycling benefits! Recycling benefits the economy by also reducing expenditure in other ways. As more items are reduced, the amount of waste that needs to go to the landfill or incinerator is also reduced. Through recycling, communities can save on their waste disposal costs (eg. landfill costs), which can be very expensive. In addition, through the sale of the recycled materials, communities can also offset the cost of their waste disposal, thereby further reducing their expenditure. Subsequently, acres and acres of landfill space can be saved, and be diverted for other uses. In countries where land is scarce, saving on landfill space could mean savings by the million, and in fact earnings, if the land can be used for other revenue-generating functions. With recycling, everything can be used to its maximum potential. Nothing is wasted. Such cost-effective practices not only saves money, but the environment and our resources too. Evidently, recycling benefits the economy and beyond! Recycling creates jobs and generates revenue In addition to the above recycling benefits, recycling brings other benefits to the economy. Recycling creates new businesses such as for transporting, processing and selling recovered materials as well as companies that manufacture and distribute products made with recycled materials. And in turn, jobs are created. When you recycle, more jobs are created than when you merely discharge your waste. Dumping 10,000 tons of waste in a landfill creates six jobs while recycling 10,000 tons of waste creates 36 jobs.

Unlike jobs in waste disposal, jobs in the recycling industry add value to the materials, as such contribute to a growing labour force of skilled workers, such as material sorters, dispatchers, truck drivers, sales representatives, process engineers and even chemists. Many of these jobs pay above the average national wage and many are in urban areas where jobs are desperately needed. In California, waste recycling and management rank higher on the economic and job creation scale comparable to the states entertainment industry. Through recycling, a mainstream industry comprising 5,300 business operations and employing more than 85,000 workers has been created in California. Overall, $4 billion in salaries, along with $10 billion worth of goods and services, is generated each year. And in the United States, according to the U.S. Recycling Economic Information Study, there are more than 56,000 recycling and reuse establishments in US and they employ approximately 1.1 million people. This number of workers is comparable to the automobile and truck manufacturing industry in the region, and is significantly larger than the mining and waste management and disposal industries there. In addition, wages for workers in the recycling industry are notably higher than the national average for all industries. Overall, annual revenues of about $236 billions are generated. Other than creating new businesses and jobs, recycling benefits the economy and generates revenue through material sales as well. There is definitely a market for recyclable materials and the returns on investments in the recycling industry can be quite high. Communities can make money by selling some of their recyclable materials. There are countries that do not have their own natural resources and forests, but import waste material, such as paper, as raw material for their manufacturing industries. For example, countries like China, South Korea and Japan import recycled paper or waste paper, and are able to depend upon the low-cost, economically viable options of recycling to cope with the storage of natural resources in some regions. And as the market for recyclable materials increases, the revenue generated within the industry increases as well. So recycling is not only good to the environment, but also to our pockets as well! Since there are so many recycling benefits to be derived, why not recycle now? Recycling as a promising industry Indeed, the recycling business sector is growing and developing into an extremely promising industry. As a sunrise industry, it certainly has a lot of potential for flourishing and generating jobs and revenues worth millions. If every household, community, city, state, and nation thought along the same lines, and invested a little time and effort into sorting out waste at home, office and community, imagine

how much recyclables would be available to the recycling industry! And it would mean that almost every single item used and thrown can be recycled! The recycling industry is now limited, mainly to paper, glass, plastic, aluminum, and other metals. But if more research can go into discovering creative and productive ways of recycling more products (and even alternative sources of energy), it would certainly save this planet more resources, and from pollution. As well as save our countries money, and help us earn money! The recycling benefits to the economy cannot be doubted!

Recycle To Save EnergyThe Sooner The Better

Recycling rates in the U.S. are low and getting lower. The U.S., by far the worlds biggest consumer of aluminum cans, lags behind other industrialized nations in the percentage of these cans that we recycle. This is despite the fact that the number of cans sold is fairly constant. If we could recover and recycle 75% of the aluminum cans being currently tossed into landfills600,000 metric tons of aluminumwe could save 1286 megawatts of generated electricity. Thats the amount produced by two coal fired power plants, and consumed by two aluminum plants. Replacing this production with recycling would keep 11.8 million metric tons of carbon dioxide from being generated and released into the atmosphere. All by just recycling, instead of throwing away, one of the most successful packaging solutions ever devised the aluminum beverage can. Recycling aluminum has always been a sustainable practice because it saves landfill space. Even more important in todays environment, recycling also saves energy. In fact, because of the way aluminum is made and the ease with which you can recycle it, recycling saves a lot of energywhich makes recycling an important component of climate change action and a sound economic practice as well. Infinite recyclability Since the modern process for producing aluminum was developed by Alcoa founder Charles Martin Hall in 1886, over 70% of all the virgin aluminum ever made remains in use. Thats because aluminum can be infinitely recycled a piece of aluminum scrap can often be turned back into the same product, or a very similar product, to that from which it originated, with virtually no material loss in the process. Aluminum truly can be a model for sustainability in heavy industry. 95% energy savings Scrap usage is also driven by economics. Recycling aluminum scrap saves enormous quantities of energy, otherwise required to make virgin aluminum. Recycling a ton of aluminum uses just 5% of the energy required to make virgin metal. Every ton of recycled aluminum that Alcoa uses saves about 14,000 kilowatt hours of electricity. The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) estimates that the average American household consumes 920 kilowatts of electricity per month. Consequently, using 1 ton of recycled aluminum as opposed to 1 ton of virgin aluminum would power an American household for over 15 months.

This comparison is one that the average American can relate to. The timing also couldnt be better for pointing it out. There isnt anyone in this country who has not felt the effect of the massive increase in energy costs in the past year. Industries like Alcoa feel it too. It stands to reason that IF we can reduce energy consumption by recycling more, we can remove some of the demand pull that is causing energy prices to rise. And with much of the energy in the U.S. still coming from fossil fuel generation, we can move toward a reduced national carbon footprint as well. So why arent we doing it more? Despite the compelling energy savings that accrue from recycling aluminum, we Americans are not realizing our recycling potential. Currently, just over 50% of the aluminum beverage cans consumed in this country are being recycled. This is well below world standards:

Brazil 94.4% Japan 90.9 % Germany 89 % Global Average 63% Western Europe 57.7%

The reasons for the malaise in our recycling rates are complex: bad behavior (we would rather dispose than recycle or reuse); a lack of convenient recycling options at home, office or other public venues; local governments lacking funding to provide recycling infrastructure; and, at least until recently, some apathy about the green movement. Alcoa began the can recycling industry in the 1970s shortly after the aluminum can was introduced, and has been able to recycle 30 billion cans, equaling nearly half a million tons of aluminum, since then. That sounds like a lot and it is but its just 30% of the total number of new cans shipped by the industry each year. Certainly, for everyone involved, theres plenty of room for improvement. The target: 75% by 2015 In a recent call to action, I issued a challenge for Alcoa, to raise recycling rates from the current 52% to 75% by 2015. Thats a big challengeequating to capturing another 400,000 tons/year of aluminum cans. However, its a goal that we can and must achieve if we want more sustainability in our industry. Its also a vital contribution that the aluminum industry can make towards comprehensive energy conservation. Beyond aluminum While Alcoa is an aluminum company, we recognize that there are other valuable materials that can be recycled, affording even more substantial energy savings. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency does annual solid waste characterization studies that are revealing about our wasteful habits as Americans.

In 2006, we disposed of over 250 million tons of solid waste. In that massive pile, we had: Clearly, besides aluminumthere are a lot of kilowatts and barrels of oil waiting to be saved through a comprehensive approach to recycling. Whether its aluminum beverage cans, telephone books and newspapers, or plastic shopping bags, recycling has a common and vital benefit: energy conservation. And its one that can resonate with the average American.

History of Recycling
http://www.all-recycling-facts.com/history-of-recycling.html

Despite common beliefs, the history of recycling goes a long way back. Recycling is not a new concept. The practice of recycling has been around for thousands of years. However, it has been affected predominantly by supply and demand, much as it is today. Historic Times Recycling has a history that dates back to the historic times. As early as 400 BC (and even earlier), people have been recycling. For example, archaeological evidence indicates that glass from the imperial Byzantine times were being recycled in the ancient city of Sagalassos, located in current day Turkey. There is also evidence that early Romans recycled bronze coins into statues that could be sold at a higher monetary value than the original coins. In hard times (eg. wartime), metals from everything like jewelry and coins were being melted for weapons or other necessary goods. Pottery recycling operations have been uncovered as well. Archaeologist also deduced from waste remnants about the history of recycling that recycling was a popular practice during times of distress. For example, less waste remains were found where there were also other indicators of distress such as famine, war and widespread illness. During these times of distress, new materials might have been scarce, making the recycling of waste necessary. Pre-industrial Times As for the history of recycling prior to the industrial revolution, recycling and general household re-using was actually a commonplace practice. Before mass production flooded the market with loads of materials and products, it was generally cheaper to reuse items as opposed to buying new ones. And when materials did become worn beyond further use, recyclable ones (eg. glass, aluminum) were recycled into new items. For example, evidence shows that scrap bronze and other metals were collected in Europe and melted down for perpetual reuse. In Britain, dust and ash from wood and coal fires were being downcycled as a base material in brick making.

In other words, during these times in the history of recycling, recycling was mainly motivated by the economic benefits of using recycled feedstock instead of virgin material. Industrial Times The history of recycling took a turn during the times of industrialization. As it became easier and cheaper to produce goods (through technological innovation and mass production), it also became easier and sometimes cheaper to throw used items away. Nonetheless, anytime there was a massive economic slump, people would look for ways to make the most of what they had. For example, during the Great Depression, people reused and recycled materials because they could not afford to buy news items or acquire virgin materials. World War II (WWII) A highlight in the history of recycling was during World War II. During the war, financial constraints and massive material shortage due to war efforts made it necessary for our ancestors to reuse goods and recycle materials. The war efforts demanded much of the resources, leaving little for the homefront. Some items (eg. metal, rubber and even certain food items) had to be rationed as they were needed overseas at the warfront. It became necessary for most homes to recycle their waste, as recycling offered an extra source of materials. There was also a general patriotism in recycling then. There were massive campaigns in many countries, urging people to donate metals and conserve fiber, in contribution to war efforts and as an expression of patriotism. Recycling materials to be used at home also meant more resources could be sent overseas at the warfront. This in turn meant a greater chance of victory at war. Post-WWII Recycling As with the other times, after the WWII period, the history of recycling was greatly influenced by economic reasons. When the war ended, resource conservation programs established during the war were continued in some countries without an abundance of natural resources, such as Japan. However, for other countries such as the USA, recycling efforts were largely forgotten. In the 1940s and 1950s, when landfilling became a cheap way to dispose trash, recycling was less popular. Nevertheless, in the 1970s, recycling became more popular again and drop-off recycling centers were established. The environmental movement had started since 1960s, and there was greater public awareness and rising environmental consciousness.

A milestone in the history of recycling was the introduction of the universal symbol for recycling. In the form of a Mobius strip, the symbol was designed by Gary Anderson in the late 1960s, after a Chicago-based recycled-container company sponsored an art contest to raise environmental awareness. Since then, the triangle has been used to represent the recycling hierarchy of reduce, reuse and recycle. The increased interest in recycling in the 1970s was also a result of rising energy costs. Significant savings were achieved through recycling. For example, recycling aluminum used only 5% of the energy required with virgin production. There were also significant energy savings when recycling glass, paper and metals as compared to extracting the raw materials. In the early 1970s, Rose Rowan started with the idea of towing a recycling trailer behind a waste management vehicle to collect trash and recyclable items at the same time. This innovation allowed for the introduction of curbside collection in the late 1980s and 1990s, which made it even easier for people to recycle. In the history of recycling for the United States, the first city to mandate recycling was Woodbury, New Jersey. Other towns and cities soon followed suit, and today many cities in the U.S. make recycling a requirement (read more about the recycling practices today in the various countries). The ultimate recycler All that said, throughout the history of recycling (and since the birth of the world), the ultimate recycler is none other than Mother Nature! If not for her wonderful magic in the composting process, we would all be covered in leaves and other dead organic matter!

History of Portland's Garbage and Recycling System

Early efforts Until recycling was adopted as state policy in the 1980s, Portlands system for collecting garbage was essentially unregulated by the City. It was a free-market system, where privatelyowned garbage companies competed for customers on the basis of price and service. There was no need for governmental regulation to ensure good service or prevent overpricing. Most customers could choose and change garbage companies at will. Today, Portland businesses remain extremely protective of their right to choose their garbage and recycling company and negotiate a price. As of the mid-1950s, there were around 250 companies operating in Portland. By 1980, attrition had lowered the count to 143, and by 1989, to 112. Businesses who generated sufficient quantities of clean cardboard and/or metals could find collection services who would take those materials away for recycling at no charge, or sometimes even pay for them. Those materials had enough intrinsic market value to justify the collectors time and resources to pick them up. Recycling policy emerges By the late 1980s, there was growing support for recycling as a public policy to reduce waste. The 1983 Oregon legislature mandated that every community set up a system to provide its residents the opportunity to recycle. Each local community was required to design and implement a system that was appropriate for its particular geography, population distribution and density. A state requirement for curbside collection applied only to urban communities and only to the residential sector housing of one to four units at one location not to multifamily or to businesses and not to rural communities. (Only about one-third of urban Oregonians live in multifamily housing, the majority live in one- to four-unit buildings.) The state Opportunity to Recycle Act did not apply to the commercial sector, which includes all multifamily of five or more units, and all businesses. The state requirement also provided that specific materials be collected, and the list of materials varied by community, again reflecting community characteristics such as distance to recycling markets for various materials.

The legislature provided a theoretical basis for placing each material on a communitys list of required recyclables basically that the local cost of collecting that material for recycling must not exceed the local cost of its collection as waste. Portland establishes its first recycling system After some politically problematic proposals failed, Portland adopted a system effective June 1, 1987. This system still relied totally on garbage and recycling companies operating in a free market but added a requirement that all garbage and recycling companiesmust now explicitly offer recycling service to their customers. For residential customers, the requirements included weekly collection of newspapers. For every type of customer, garbage and recycling companies were obligated to offer monthly collection of newspapers, metals, glass jars, corrugated cardboard, hi-grade office paper and used motor oil. For their commercial customers, Portland garbage and recycling companies were required to recycle the above materials from any business customer who was interested, and state law further prohibited garbage and recycling companies from charging extra for recycling collection. At the time, the business community was not particularly interested in recycling, so not many businesses and apartments took advantage of the garbage and recycling companies recycling services. The exceptions were cardboard and metals, large quantities of clean office paper, and businesses where managers or employees were enthusiastic about the idea of recycling. Residential franchise system implemented In 1991, the Oregon legislature increased the requirements for local communities recycling programs. Urban communities were required to increase their residential collection frequency, were encouraged to add more materials, and were encouraged to offer better recycling opportunities and incentives for the commercial sector: multifamily residents and businesses. In 1992, Portland adopted a franchise system as a means to carry out the changes in its residential sector. Because the franchise system did not include any of the commercial sector, Portlands business owners did not block it, as they had done with previous proposals for franchising. From February 1992 to today, Portland garbage and recycling companies serve residential customers in specific city-assigned territories, but they may serve commercial customers anywhere in Portland. Commercial recycling changes In 1993, after the residential franchise system had begun to show excellent results, City solid waste and recycling staff recognized that about 75% of Portlands remaining garbage was generated by the commercial sector. To address that garbage, staff worked extensively with Portlands business and multifamily owners in 1993-95 to find practical and effective ways to increase recycling in the commercial sector. The end result of this process was City Council adoption of a requirement that every business and multifamily property have and use a recycling system for at least 50% of their waste.

There are now about 52 garbage and recycling companies serving Portlands commercial customers: about 20,000 businesses and 2500 multifamily complexes. Public process shapes the commercial waste system: 50% recycling requirement During this three year process (1993-95), staff contacted many other US cities to gather information on their commercial recycling methods and success. Staff attended meetings of most of Portlands many neighborhood business organizations to make presentations and discuss the issue. Staff also convened two advisory committees of business and multifamily representatives. The first committee worked in 1994 to review a variety of options and their relative cost impacts, then recommend one to the City Council. Among the options considered were:

city-set rates several variations of a commercial franchise increased education and promotion prohibiting disposal of specific recyclables, and mandating that businesses and multifamily properties recycle

That committee and the neighborhood business associations agreed that to be successful, any new program must offer businesses a financial incentive for recycling. They also agreed that increased education and promotion were a necessary part of any changes, to ensure that commercial customers would understand why the changes were being made, and exactly what would be expected of them. In February 1995, the committee recommended to the City Council that the Council require all businesses and multifamily complexes to recycle, and that Council direct city staff continue to work with business representatives to develop the specific details of that requirement. During 1995, staff therefore convened a second business advisory group which developed those details. The mandate became effective in January 1996. In 1997 the Council set a goal of recycling 60% in 2005. Mechanics of the 1996 commercial waste mandate Under the mandate, all garbage and recycling companies continued to be required to offer recycling for a wide variety of materials. Customers, on the other hand, began to be required to set up recycling systems and to ensure that at least 50% of their material was recycled, as of January 1, 1996. The financial incentive for all was the possibility of a penalty payable to the City. Through the garbage and recycling companies, the City provided every business customer with printed information about the mandate, and required that every customer sign a commitment to recycle at least 50%, specifying which materials they would recycle. The City funds the commercial recycling program primarily using a fee collected from garrbage and recycling companies based on the amount of garbage they collect from Portland business customers. This fee revenue totaled about $1,250,000 in 2005-06.

The City uses these funds:

to purchase recycling containers which garbage and recycling companies then must provide to their customers at no cost. to provide garbage and recycling companies with printed educational materials for their customers to provide personal assistance and printed information to interested businesses for enforcement staff to measure program results

The financial penalty for noncompliance is set at a maximum of $500 per incident, increasing for each subsequent incident. However, since the Citys intent is to encourage compliance, not to raise money, city regulations provide for an assistance period of 30 days, instead of allowing an immediate penalty for noncompliance. Effectiveness of the current system Because better measurement methods became possible only in 1996 under the new system, it is not possible to compare the effect of the new system with the pre-1996 results. However, during the first year of the mandate, 1996, staff calculated that the commercial sector recycled about 46% of its garbage. By 1998 the percentage had risen to 52%, and it stayed between 52% and 55% from 1999 through 2003. In mid-2005, program analysis revealed that Portlands commercial recycling rate for 2004 was just under 53%. The current system did not reach the 60% goal in 2005, achieving an overall estimated rate of 52% in 2005. A new process begins In early 2005, the City Council directed staff to again review the citys regulatory system for commercial garbage and recycling. At that time, the Council intended to pursue not just improving recycling percentages and decreasing garbage, but also decreasing pollution, fuel consumption, noise and other environmental impacts resulting from commercial garbage and recycling trucks duplicating routes throughout the city. The occasion on which this discussion took place was a report to Council on nighttime noise issues, and neighborhood representatives urged Council to adopt a franchise system as a way to reduce nighttime noise. The Council expressed an interest in reconsidering the idea of a commercial franchise. During 2005, staff worked to develop and evaluate regulatory options. These include a couple of variations on franchising, city-set rates, and additional mandates on business customers to recycle more. Staff convened focus groups representing businesses, neighborhood and environmental groups, and garbage and recycling companies. There is no consensus yet on the best solution for all sides on all the issues. Most garbage and recycling companiesstrongly support a franchise, most businesses strongly oppose it. There was some support for a franchise system among the neighborhood and environmental group representatives. In late 2005 staff received results of a 2004 study comparing current prices paid for

commercial hauling services in Portland and surrounding jurisdictions. Those other jurisdictions all use franchise systems for all commercial service, and they set rates that customers pay for various service levels. Some of the study results were unexpected. Most large Portland customers appear to pay less than their counterparts in those other jurisdictions, which reflects the conventional wisdom. However, many small customers pay more in Portland than they would pay for the same service in outlying franchised areas. This finding may change the perceptions of some Portland businesspeople about whether franchising would save or cost them more money. Portland Recycles! Plan On June 28, 2006, the City Council adopted a resolution directing OSD staff to prepare and submit to the Council a solid waste management plan and conduct a planning process to solicit input from the public and stakeholders in developing proposed solutions. The Plan included recommendations for both the residential and commercial sectors as well as City government operations.