[…]the widespread use of the symbol on products that are not routinely accepted for recycling is helping stoke “consumer confusion about what is recyclable and/or compostable” and is leading to “deceptive or misleading” claims on packaging, according to the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
At issue is the use of the logo along with the “resin number” of different types of plastics. Resin one and two plastics, such as bottles and jugs, are the most easily recycled products, but those marked with numbers three to seven, categories that include plastic bags, styrofoam and plastic trays, are typically not recycled and are instead sent to landfills or burned.
The placement of the chasing arrows symbol upon these hard-to-recycle single-use plastics “does not accurately represent recyclability as many plastics (especially 3-7) do not have end markets, and are not financially viable to recycle,” the EPA said in its comments.
Even the plastic types that do get recycled aren’t particularly economical.
I think there needs to be a major rethink of what is actually best for the environment. Landfills actually aren’t a bad option, IMO - when they’re properly designed they don’t pollute groundwater and the stuff put into them stays there indefinitely. Maybe someday they’ll even be useful to mine for resources.
This is certainly a good thing.
I feel like people missed the main point when this all started getting pushed back in the 90s. The campaign was “Reduce, reuse, recycle”, but everyone just focused on recycle. The reduce and reuse were mainly ignored, but are the more important aspects than recycle I think.
Reduce and reuse are not very profitable for companies, therefore it is not well-marketed.