World News

22056 readers

45 users here now

Breaking news from around the world.

News that is American but has an international facet may also be posted here.

Guidelines for submissions:

Where possible, post the original source of information.
- If there is a paywall, you can use alternative sources or provide an archive.today, 12ft.io, etc. link in the body.
Do not editorialize titles. Preserve the original title when possible; edits for clarity are fine.
Do not post ragebait or shock stories. These will be removed.
Do not post tabloid or blogspam stories. These will be removed.
Social media should be a source of last resort.

These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.

For US News, see the US News community.

This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

Universal ‘chasing arrows’ recycling symbol could be dumped in US (theguardian.com)

submitted 1 year ago by alyaza@beehaw.org to c/news@beehaw.org

15 comments fedilink hide all child comments

[...]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.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] SmugBedBug@lemmy.iswhereits.at 15 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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.

[–] Rentlar@beehaw.org 11 points 1 year ago

Reduce and reuse are not very profitable for companies, therefore it is not well-marketed.