News from the Heartland

Recycling for Recycling's Sake

Dr. Harvey Alter's cover article for this issue of Intellectual Ammunition corrects some common myths about garbage, the environmental impact of different products, and recycling. Despite his fine efforts, however, I fear that we are losing the public debate.

I recently watched a children's video titled "The Magic School Bus" with two of my nephews, ages 3 and 5. The plot involves a magic ray gun that transforms the world into the way it would be if no one recycled, and then back again. Some of the video's images are positive and genuinely informative, such as those showing plastics and aluminum cans being recycled into playground equipment. But many more are inaccurate and misleading.

For example, in the world without recycling, all the trees in the town's park have been cut down to make paper. But paper in the U.S. comes almost entirely not from parks, but from tree plantations planted for this purpose and from the "slash" left over from logging for dimensional lumber. (No logging is allowed in the national parks.) Paper recycling, by lessening the demand for wood fiber, is more likely to reduce than increase the size and health of our forests.

In the video's world without recycling, a school is buried under an enormous, uncovered, ugly mountain of garbage. This image ignores the reality that solid waste today, as Dr. Alter points out, goes to large sanitary landfills equipped with state-of-the-art systems to control emissions into the air or water. The image also illustrates the myth that we are "running out of room" to put our waste: In fact, even without recycling, all of the municipal waste generated in the U.S. during the next 500 years would fit in a single landfill 20 miles to a side.

Perhaps it is asking too much that a children's video reveal these more sophisticated ideas. But what excuses do spokespersons for government and environmental organizations have when they, too, fail to mention the limits of recycling or push for unrealistic and costly goals or mandates? By oversimplifying the costs and benefits of recycling, these leaders are encouraging action that results in unnecessary energy consumption, fewer choices for consumers, higher local taxes, and one more infringement on our civil liberties.

What a pity that something as innocent and popular as recycling should be hijacked by those who have an agenda.