Tom Szaky, TerraCycle and Loop03.12.23
Eighty-five percent of Americans “strongly believe” in recycling, yet the recycling rate in the US is only 32%. That means 68% of our recyclable items still don’t get recycled. We can all do more to ensure that recyclable items make it into our recycling bins, but what about the trash that’s not recyclable in the first place?
In 2018, hundreds of corporations signed on to the Ellen MacArthur Foundation’s Global Commitment, pledging in part to ensure that 100% of their packaging was recyclable (or reusable, or compostable) by 2025. It’s apparent now that the vast majority of companies who made this pledge will fail.
Why aren’t corporations making more progress? I believe it’s because we are not addressing the white elephant in the room: the economics of recycling.
Almost everything is technically recyclable, but there’s a reason hand soap pumps, juice pouches, mascara wands, etc., can’t go in the curbside recycling: It’s typically not economically viable for recyclers to bother recycling them.
Recyclers focus on collecting materials that are profitable for them to recycle—materials that, once recycled, are worth more than the cost of processing (like aluminum, glass jars, plastics #1 and #2, and cardboard). But there is still a large number of materials and products that are considered “hard-to-recycle,” meaning municipal recyclers don’t accept them.
There are several reasons why an item may be hard-to-recycle. It may have multiple components, like a hand soap bottle. These are often made of a mixture of different plastics, with a pump mechanism potentially incorporating metals and several types of plastic. The materials need to be separated, which is costly, to be recycled. Similarly, flexible films are hard to recycle because they are often made of layers of material. For example, a typical juice pouch has layers of plastic and aluminum.
Products that are small in size, like beauty products, can get caught or fall into machinery. And dark-colored items are also hard-to-recycle because optical sorting systems can’t recognize dark pigments.
All of these characteristics—multi-component, multi-layer, small, dark-colored—drive value out of the recycling process. The resulting material value from these products is often unable to cover the costs of collecting and processing them.
Yes, we as consumers have a role to play in boosting recycling rates by participating in recycling, but ultimately, manufacturers, the waste management industry and the government must work together to solve the economics of recycling hard-to-recycle materials and create the missing money flows.
Policies such as extended producer responsibility (EPR), which are beginning to pop up across the US (starting with Maine in 2021), are a step in the right direction. As you can glean from the name, EPR puts the responsibility for the lifecycle of waste on the producer. Companies pay a fee for the packaging they put on the market, and that money is funneled back into domestic recycling infrastructure, which can increase the amount we collectively recycle.
However, it’s likely that EPR investment will go into driving capacity for easy-to-recycle items. And while consistent collections will help ensure more is recycled, it won’t help with ensuring that hard-to-recycle (expensive-to-recycle) items are recycled. Plus, any fees corporations pay will ultimately be passed along to the consumer.
There are more concrete steps that can be taken to combat the waste crisis and increase recycling rates. Those include manufacturers shifting away from complex product and packaging design and exploring reuse options to transition away from disposability. There’s also voluntary producer responsibility (VPR), which is TerraCycle’s free recycling program model. Brands fund the recycling process for their hard-to-recycle products directly.
However, at the end of the day, recycling won’t solve the waste crisis. The true solution is to stop waste at the source. We all need to vote for a better future by buying less.
About the Author
Tom Szaky, CEO and founder of TerraCycle and Loop, explains why government, manufacturers, the waste management industry, and consumers must work together to tackle the economics of “hard-to-recycle” waste.
In 2018, hundreds of corporations signed on to the Ellen MacArthur Foundation’s Global Commitment, pledging in part to ensure that 100% of their packaging was recyclable (or reusable, or compostable) by 2025. It’s apparent now that the vast majority of companies who made this pledge will fail.
Why aren’t corporations making more progress? I believe it’s because we are not addressing the white elephant in the room: the economics of recycling.
Why Many Things are “Hard-to-Recycle”
Almost everything is technically recyclable, but there’s a reason hand soap pumps, juice pouches, mascara wands, etc., can’t go in the curbside recycling: It’s typically not economically viable for recyclers to bother recycling them.
Recyclers focus on collecting materials that are profitable for them to recycle—materials that, once recycled, are worth more than the cost of processing (like aluminum, glass jars, plastics #1 and #2, and cardboard). But there is still a large number of materials and products that are considered “hard-to-recycle,” meaning municipal recyclers don’t accept them.
There are several reasons why an item may be hard-to-recycle. It may have multiple components, like a hand soap bottle. These are often made of a mixture of different plastics, with a pump mechanism potentially incorporating metals and several types of plastic. The materials need to be separated, which is costly, to be recycled. Similarly, flexible films are hard to recycle because they are often made of layers of material. For example, a typical juice pouch has layers of plastic and aluminum.
Products that are small in size, like beauty products, can get caught or fall into machinery. And dark-colored items are also hard-to-recycle because optical sorting systems can’t recognize dark pigments.
All of these characteristics—multi-component, multi-layer, small, dark-colored—drive value out of the recycling process. The resulting material value from these products is often unable to cover the costs of collecting and processing them.
What’s the Solution to the Packaging Crisis?
Yes, we as consumers have a role to play in boosting recycling rates by participating in recycling, but ultimately, manufacturers, the waste management industry and the government must work together to solve the economics of recycling hard-to-recycle materials and create the missing money flows.
Policies such as extended producer responsibility (EPR), which are beginning to pop up across the US (starting with Maine in 2021), are a step in the right direction. As you can glean from the name, EPR puts the responsibility for the lifecycle of waste on the producer. Companies pay a fee for the packaging they put on the market, and that money is funneled back into domestic recycling infrastructure, which can increase the amount we collectively recycle.
However, it’s likely that EPR investment will go into driving capacity for easy-to-recycle items. And while consistent collections will help ensure more is recycled, it won’t help with ensuring that hard-to-recycle (expensive-to-recycle) items are recycled. Plus, any fees corporations pay will ultimately be passed along to the consumer.
There are more concrete steps that can be taken to combat the waste crisis and increase recycling rates. Those include manufacturers shifting away from complex product and packaging design and exploring reuse options to transition away from disposability. There’s also voluntary producer responsibility (VPR), which is TerraCycle’s free recycling program model. Brands fund the recycling process for their hard-to-recycle products directly.
However, at the end of the day, recycling won’t solve the waste crisis. The true solution is to stop waste at the source. We all need to vote for a better future by buying less.
About the Author
Tom Szaky, CEO and founder of TerraCycle and Loop, explains why government, manufacturers, the waste management industry, and consumers must work together to tackle the economics of “hard-to-recycle” waste.