David Siddiqui Plastic Recycling May 9 , 2005 1 Plastic Recycling and Public Perception

While the triangle-shaped “chasing arrows” logo is widely believed to mean “recyclable,” it is actually part of the public domain and a product does not have to be recyclable in order to wear the logo. The vast majority of plastic packaging displays the logo while the recyclability of plastic is a complex and debatable issue. This study looks at how residents of Berkeley and Oakland perceive the recyclability of plastics, hypothesizing that most people rely primarily on the logo to ascertain recyclability and that more Oakland than Berkeley residents think all plastics are recyclable. Participants were given a survey regarding their recycling knowledge and habits and were asked to determine the recyclability of four plastic containers with different characteristics. Two trends dominated the results: 1) A very high proportion of people answered in accordance with the presence or absence of the logo, confirming the logo as a primary source of information on recyclability. 2) A very high proportion of people answered that all plastics are recyclable. This was indeed exhibited more in the Oakland residents, though not by a conclusive amount. Only 0.3 % of the participants were able to identify all four containers correctly, highlighting the need for education. Residents play a key role in the waste system and are faced with many choices regarding purchasing and disposal. These decisions need to be based upon a clear understanding of local and global production and disposal processes rather than a murky understanding based upon an unclear marketing tool. David Siddiqui Plastic Recycling May 9, 2005 2 Introduction The “chasing arrows” logo, shaped like a triangular Mobius loop, has become a universal symbol for recycling. It was created in 1970 by University of Southern California student Gary Anderson for a design contest held by the Container Corporation of America (CCA), a large producer of recycled paperboard. At the time, there was a burgeoning awareness of environmental issues and the Chicago-based company offered free tuition to a college of choice for whatever student could best graphically represent the recycling process. CCA promoted the use of the logo before attempting to trademark it and then met trouble in the application process due to its popularity. The logo fell into the public domain and its usage increased at an even faster rate (Jones 1999). The Society of the Plastics Industry (SPI) instituted a voluntary labeling system in 1988 that consists of a code number placed inside the symbol to specify the primary resin used in the product (SPI 1988). Seeing the value in differentiating the types of plastics, 39 states have required the use of the SPI codes on rigid plastic containers distributed in the state, solidifying the logo’s presence even further (Wigotsky 1995). Other countries followed suit and started using the logo or developing their own iterations, and now many people across the globe associate the logo with recycling while the products on which they appear actually do not have to be recyclable. There are a number of issues that contribute to the complexity of plastic recycling. The most basic of these is the definition of recycling. For example, in its Guides for the Use of Environmental Marketing Claims, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) asserts that recycling includes the reuse, reconditioning, and remanufacturing of products or parts in another product. This rather broad definition includes both primary and secondary recycling. Primary recycling refers to a process in which a used product is converted into a product similar to the original product. Secondary recycling refers to a process in which a used product is converted into a product with less demanding physical and chemical characteristics than the original product. Primary recycling is generally more desirable because it reduces the need for virgin material and eliminates the need to create new market niches for secondary products (Hegberg et al. 1992). Plastics are most easily applied in the secondary recycling market, yielding products like plastic lumber, farm animal pens, boat docks and traffic barriers (Mustafa 1993). Some people may not include secondary recycling in their conception of recycling, so it is important to be clear and specific about definitions to avoid confusion. David Siddiqui Plastic Recycling May 9, 2005 3 Plastic recycling is subject to other complications. There are many different types of plastics. The most common plastics can be grouped into two main categories and have varying characteristics with regard to recyclability. Thermoplastics, the most widely used type of plastics, include polyethylene (PE), polyethylene terephthalate (PET or PETE), low-density polyethylene (LDPE), high-density polyethylene (HDPE), polyvinyl chloride (PVC), polypropylene (PP), polystyrene (PS), polycarbonates (PC), and polyamide (PA). The heating and cooling processes are reversible because they do not change the chemical characteristics, making thermoplastics generally suitable for recycling. The molecular chain does progressively degrade, however, so the potential for recycling is finite. Thermosetting plastics such as polyurethane (PUR), polyesters, and epoxy resins are not as suitable for recycling as thermoplastics because their chemical features change when heated (Smits 1996). The types of plastic acceptable for recycling depend on location. The FTC recommends that if recycling facilities are not available to a substantial majority of consumers or communities for a particular container, recyclability claims “should be qualified to disclose the limited availability of recycling programs for the container. ” However a logo embedded on the bottom of a container is considered inconspicuous and does not constitute a recyclability claim according to the FTC. Regardless, these guidelines are not legislative rules and are not enforceable by law (FTC). The viability of markets for recycled plastic depends on location and the type of plastic. The markets for recycled plastic are generally small because they are relatively new and they are at a disadvantage because governments provide hidden subsidies to the producers of virgin materials in the form of tax breaks or free services. These subsidies affect the supply curve of virgin output, increasing the amount of virgin output and lowering the price of virgin materials. This lower price “lowers the price paid for the closely substitutable recyclable materials and discourages their collection and recycling” (Porter 2002). There are markets for mixed plastic waste, however a resin stream must be homogeneous if it is to be recycled into products in competition with products produced from virgin resins (EPA et al. 1991). Separation by resin type is typically necessary to ensure a feedstock of suitable quality and also to avoid problems related to contamination. For example, if PVC is melted with PET, hydrochloric acid can form and corrode the metal parts of the extrusion machines (ECE 1992). Since the postconsumer plastic collected from households is usually heterogeneous and David Siddiqui Plastic Recycling May 9, 2005 4 contaminated, sorting poses a costly problem to collection agencies. Also, plastics are often mixed with additives like pigments, fillers, plasticizers, fire decelerators, antioxidants, and antistatica. These additives improve technical performance or marketability but complicate prospects for recovery (Smits 1996). Despite these complications, the industry has put a great amount of energy into creating a positive image for plastic. Much of this has been in the form of websites and television advertisements that brag, “plastics make it possible” and ask consumers to “take another look at plastics” (Environmental Defense Fund 1994). Efforts made in 3 states to modify the use of the chasing arrows logo were defeated through the lobbying efforts of the American Plastics Council (APC) and industry allies (Ecology Center 1996). More recently, APC has undertaken a campaign to support and promote “all plastic bottle collection. ” They developed a website to encourage recycling coordinators to adopt programs that accept all plastic bottles, reasoning that “since 95 percent of all plastic bottles produced are PET and HDPE, it is reasonable to assume that the more bottles you collect overall, the larger the percentage collected will be PET and HDPE” (APC). While this may indeed cause the public to recycle more plastic bottles, it does little to help the public understand plastic bottle recycling. Previous research has shown a crucial link between behavior-specific knowledge and environmental behavior. Sia et al. (1985) studied environmental behavior in Illinois. They found that knowledge of specific environmental behaviors was a significant predictor of their behavioral index, though to a lesser extent than perceived skill and environmental sensitivity. In another Illinois study, Vining and Ebreo (1990) observed some important traits relevant to the relationship between knowledge and recycling behavior. Of the recyclers and nonrecyclers they studied, they found that recyclers were better informed, knew more about local recycling programs, and gave more accurate information about the recyclability of certain materials. A study conducted in 1994 by the Saint Paul Neighborhood Energy Consortium (NEC) found that 70 % of the 804 people surveyed believed the chasing arrows logo means “recyclable” and many believed it means the product is made from recycled material (Saint Paul Neighborhood Energy Consortium 1994). In a study on household waste in Exeter, UK, Barr (2002) found that knowledge of recyclables was better for “classic” recyclables like glass, aluminum cans, and newspaper than for “marginal” recyclables like plastic bottles. Interestingly, he also found that David Siddiqui Plastic Recycling May 9, 2005 5 75 % of residents with curbside recycling thought other plastics