Stay in the Know - Subscribe to Our Newsletters
Join a network of more than 90,000 waste and recycling industry professionals. Get the latest news and insights straight to your inbox. Free.
Recycled Content: We Need More Than Commitments and Legislation
Many companies that pledged to increase recycled content in their packaging are now scaling back, citing outdated recycling infrastructure and limited supply. Without realistic assessments of recycling technology and material availability, ambitious goals are proving difficult to meet.
3 Min Read
Peter Cade/Getty Images
Recycled content is hot again. Over the last few years, numerous companies committed to use more recycled content in their packages. Whether they were for beverage, detergent, candy, or whatever, they set ambitious goals. This year, we have seen many of those companies retreating from their goals. They are blaming a “lagging recycling infrastructure” that is creating an undersupply of recycled materials.
It's easy enough to blame the recycling infrastructure. As long as processing technology improves, MRFs will always be out of date. The last MRF I visited before COVID was in Winnipeg, Manitoba, in December 2019. Yes, it was cold. Winnipeg never got above zero Fahrenheit while I was there and MRFs are hard to heat. Nonetheless the MRF was impressive, replete with all of the latest, best sorting technology. As he was pointing out the new equipment, the MRF’s manager made a prescient observation. He predicted that five years later, the MRF would have a great deal of new, more technologically advanced processing equipment.
I don’t know if that happened in Winnipeg. But since then, MRF technology has made stunning gains in the use of advanced optical sorting, artificial intelligence, robotics and other technologies. New technology, for instance, has the ability to make a much cleaner OCC bale and better recycled plastic bales. As any MRF manager can point out, new technology doesn’t jump into a MRF overnight. That takes time and money. I suspect that few of those goals were made with any serious look at MRF technology and where it would be in 2025 or 2030.
Nor were they made with a realistic assessment of potential supply. In that case, I suspect they just thought people would recycle more and better because, well, we just would. Yet we know that about one quarter of Americans don’t recycle because they have other priorities in life. A larger percentage needs to be nagged a lot to recycle right. Any recycling program manager could have told the companies that.
Even if we are able to collect all recyclables, I bet those goals were made with no consideration to product loss during recycling. Product loss is unavoidable. It occurs during collection (breakage, moisture, contamination, etc.) and processing (shredding with fiber loss and more breakage, loss of small pieces of plastic and paper, etc.). During remanufacturing, entropy kicks in. The more heat that is needed to make the new product means more product loss. Total loss varies by material type and is generally less than 15 percent. Understanding this loss rate is crucial to setting content standards.
These comments apply equally well to recent state recycled content legislation. Did the legislators give any serious thought to these realities, or did they simply think, pass a law and it will happen.
As a result, the commitments and laws are aspirational, they are all divisible by five, and are mostly set for five-year increments, usually starting in 2025. States and consumer brands are establishing goals with little thought as to whether they can be achieved.
How much are these companies willing to pay for recycled content? If they are serious, they will pay, even if it could hurt the bottom line. Including recycled content goals in the CEO’s and CFO’s bonus compensation packages will show real commitment.
Finally, we need to realize that recycled content laws can be manipulated to benefit one user over another. This happens when a company or industry gets priority access or their competitors receive less benefit from the use of recycled content. Favored buyers have less pressure to pay recyclers the highest, most competitive price. Recycling becomes less economically sustainable.
Recycled content commitments and laws can be beneficial. I’ve testified on behalf of these laws federally and at the state level. But I’ve stressed that legislators – and companies – must set realistic, data-driven goals. If they aren’t, they are creating more failed aspirational goals. Let’s not recycle our mistakes.
About the Author
You May Also Like
