In case you didn't pick up on this from the this message I sent earlier, the
idea of Total Recycling -- or Zero Waste -- is already coming under attack
from segments of the recycling community. The author of a message sent
out over recycle@envirolink, Roger Guttenberg,
clainms that John Tierney was justified in bashing evangelical Recyclers
touting Total Recycling, then goes on to trash everything else about
Tierney's article in the NY Times. I had an interesting conversation yesterday
with Joel Hirschorn, an originator of the pollution prevention movement.
He sees (incremental) recycling as the enemy: a smokescreen for businesses
that want to mask the fact that consumption -- and wasting -- continues to
rise.
[From Guttenburg:]
(3) Unfortunately, the article gains some of its plausibility both from the
fact that there is a segment of the recycling advocacy community who does
fit the profile of evangelical Recyclers who believe (sincerely) only in
Total Recycling as public policy and that recycling has often added to the
cost of overall municipal solid waste management in the short run. However,
the article again ignores the reality that not everyone active in recycling
is an advocate of Total Recycling and that costs do go down in response to
program experience and innovation.