- LeslieG 06/01/2023
Symbols aren't nearly as important as everyone having access to high throughput recycling no matter where they live.
Only 35% is recycled in the US. While that is a 5X increase since 1960 when it was 7% there is still a lot more to go.
Our state is slightly above the national average at 39% while our county is at 60% and our building is one of the top contributors though we don't know the stats on that.
There are 2,000 recycling facilities nationwide but 3,134 counties so not every county has a recycling center.
- Andy 06/01/2023
Fix it turd followers. Yep all 3 of my dumbass Reps., cornyn, crenshaw and cruz! 🖕!
Do you think the recycling logo is misleading?
It is long past time to clear up the mess that the current logo has created.
Personally, I prefer to see text, but a graphic is fine. We will need to repeatedly see the new graphic with texts, then, likely, after a few years, we'll know the meaning of each graphic.
- J 06/14/2023
It may be most helpful to support businesses that recycle all of the different plastics. If there is a will there is a way. Possibly a fee on the plastic makers and users that could be used to help start businesses that recycle plastic might be the incentive needed.
- MrGeer 06/01/2023
yes, its unclear what is recylclable sometimes.
more importantly, it should not be up to us as individuals. we are the consumers of the products produced. manufacturers need to be held to account. stop excessive plastic packaging.
Yes, it is misleading on items that can't really be recycled. So, mark items accurately, in order for consumer to properly recycle items.
- Dawn 06/01/2023
There really should be several symbols, one for each level of recycling, and then a HUGE X to mark things that aren't recyclable at all.
- Adam 06/01/2023
Well, yes, it's obviously misleading if they're putting it on things that can't be recycled.
- Kevin 06/02/2023
I know that not everything put in with recyclables makes it to a recycling center. Perhaps that is why interest in recycling has wained.
- Dona 06/01/2023
Recycling logo is not misleading. Please don't waste time or money messing with it.
- Lois 06/01/2023
People who take the time to research information about recyclable materials do not rely on the marks on materials that they buy. We also do NOT buy things in plastic, if we can avoid plastic. But recycling in order to combat global climate change is really like trying to cure cancer with a band-aid. Truthfully, we need major changes in manufacturing and product transport. This will happen only when there are laws requiring these changes. Sadly it looks like this may not happen until it is too late. We already have microplastic in our drinking water!
- Paul 06/01/2023
Recycling numbers should be clearer, and all recyclable materials need to be mandated to be acceptable at all recycling stations.
- Donna 06/01/2023
Yes it's misleading because even if you see one on an item that doesn't necessarily mean it will end up getting recycled. Many items still wind up in landfills
- PLZ 06/01/2023
My garbage company allows recyclable 1-7. If the 3-7 aren't recyclable then why should we be sorting them?! Why isn't there more of a focus on replacements or process to properly dispose?
Instead of forgiving student loans, perhaps we should reward more research and developments to address varies forms of pollution.
Them comes the next big recycling of solar panels! SMH
- Tim 06/01/2023
If an item is not recyclable then it should not have the recycle symbol. Those that do should receive a warning and then a fine if not corrected.
- Bret 06/01/2023
"Recycling Logo Misleading?", these morons have apparently have nothing better to do. Tell me, how did changing the logo for the Post Office in 1993 benefited anyone?