A couple of weeks ago, many greenies felt gut-punched by the New York Times
article, "The Reign of Recycling
," in which writer John Tierney
makes a case against our current, righteous, do-gooder system.
Just one of his assertions:
In New York City, the net cost of recycling a ton of trash is now $300 more than it would cost to bury the trash instead. That adds up to millions of extra dollars per year — about half the budget of the parks department — that New Yorkers are spending for the privilege of recycling. That money could buy far more valuable benefits, including more significant reductions in greenhouse emissions."
A week later, the Closed Loop Fund
posted a rebuttal, "Fact Check: Reign of Recycling
," on Medium, doing a "line-by-line teardown
" of the NYT's piece, showing what they say is "third-party, verifiable" data to counter Tierney's reporting.
Courtesy the Closed Loop Fund
An attempt to pick apart John Tierney's anti-recycling report.
Which leaves us all wondering what to do next, and who's on the right side of this argument.
I checked with one local recycling outfit who opted not to provide comment at this time, and another who called it "an interesting, never-ending debate."
So, stay tuned and sound off as you see fit. At the very least, it sounds like we can agree that making sure your soda can reaches the recycling bin remains a smart move.