So, what does the future hold for recycling? In the sort term, increased investment in recycling infrastructure and over all improvements in recycling rates should continue to increase. More and more cities are going to semi-automated sorting and co-mingled collection, even when self-sorting had been a long-established norm.

However, over the long term, the goal of increasing the number of products that can be recycled (most notably, many types of otherwise immortal plastics) is the most important. Increases in recycling efficiency and the ability to create an even more pure recycled product is also in the cards.

Over the next few decades, it is likely that the price of energy will continue an overall upward trend. As such, the energetics of recycling will continue to make it a more and more attractive option. Increases in energy efficiency in the recycling process will also be major areas of interest for researchers and investors.

Since recycling is a market-based solution to a public problem, improvements to it are similarly market-based whenever possible. That’s why recycling programs are most likely to be profitable and have the capital to improve when demand for recycled products is high.

This can be legislated to a certain extent. For instance, there are many states and provinces that have passes laws requiring a minimum of post-consumer recycled paper fibers in newspapers sold there. However, the most powerful force remains the purchasing power of consumers.

You can purchase products that are made from recycled products. This is most helpful to the overall recycling economy when you purchase goods from emerging markets such as the plastic “wood” that can be made from recycled carpets and plastic bags. You can also purchase services from companies that recycle, such as “green” auto repair shops. One may also choose to purchase items that come in containers and packaging that either is made from recycled products or can themselves be easily recycled.

Recycling isn’t the most environmentally friendly game in town, but it’s a good start. If you really want to make your contribution to the environment go a lot further, you can simply get in the habit of reusing items instead of throwing them in the bins after a single use.

There are many ways to reuse products, often limited only by your own imagination and certain health concerns. For instance, it is never safe to reuse a pesticide container to hold drinking water for you or your pets. Other than that, reusing containers or sharing them with other people who can use them (as in the case of cooperative groceries) is a far more environmentally friendly option.

Of course, one can always turn old materials into very different items. For instance, DIY jewelery makers routinely find new ways to infuse old objects with new art and up-cycle them into much higher value commodities.

you might be surprised to learn how much more closely many farms resemble a materials hauler rather than the home of Old MacDonald that many still imagine. While organic farms are able to compost much of what they use, since a large portion of it will be generated on-farm, the vast majority of acreage in North America is still “conventionally” tended, meaning that a great deal of solid waste is also associated with the process.

Plastic bags and sheeting are a very commonly produced product that can be difficult to recycle. In the ‘aughts, several West Coast firms have sprung up to collect agricultural plastic by the ton. Another common waste item found on farms are the barrels and buckets with pesticides and toxic concentrations of fertilizers. These containers are classified as hazardous waste even when they’re empty, and are usually incinerated at special facilities.

There are a growing number of cities that are using municipal composting programs to reduce the amount of yard debris and other organic matter that is sent to the landfill. While you may be aware of the new bins that may have been delivered to you, it may not be apparent what they do with all that material.

From a composting site, the materials is usually fed into a large machine that shreds all the material into a reasonably uniform grind that will decompose quickly. From there it will go to facilities where the piles will be mechanically turned until they’re “done.” The resulting product is a fluffy, organic compound that smells like dirt because it is the organic compound of a good quality soil.

From here, this can be used as a soil amendment and fertilizer. Many cities use the compost from their programs to keep parks and city buildings fertilized and mulched. Some cities make the compost freely available to anyone who can haul it. Still others bag it and sell it in an effort to generate revenue to pay for the whole process.

The short answer is, “yes.” No, they will not cause the sun to fall out of the sky, but when it comes to making recycling difficult and causing a massive amount of litter, plastic bags are an environmental disaster.

For starters, the 100 billion or so plastic bags that were consumed in North America in 2006 alone required the equivalent of 12 million barrels of oil to produce. Most of these are eventually sent to the few remaining landfills, but because they so readily take flight, plastic bags are one of the most common forms of litter in both urban and rural areas.

Plastic bags are a bane to recyclers, most of whom do not take them in their sorting facilities that would seem to take nearly everything else. Instead, those that do end up there are a threat to the proper function of most sorting machines. On the rare occasion they are recycled, these bags are turned into “plastic lumber” or other inherently non-recyclable materials.

Even when you want to an think you’re doing the right thing by tossing something into the recycling bin, you may actually be doing more harm than good. Recyclers are quick to point out that they appreciate that people want to recycle, but there are several common materials that are not usually taken at the curbside because they contaminate recycled products, resulting in a less useful end-product.

Though all systems are a bit different (and that’s part of the problem), some of the most commonly problematic materials include bio-plastics, such a spoons, packing peanuts and other containers. Plastic bags are among the worst offenders, clogging up an entire packing line when they sneak in. Other problem materials include plastic lined aluminum and steel cans, aluminum foil and plastic bottle caps that are usually made of a different material than the recyclable bottle.

No doubt you’ve seen them on the bottom or top of plastic containers – the little numbers contained in a triangular, three-arrowed recycling symbol. These “plastic numbers” are a simple code that tells you what sort of plastic you’re dealing with, just in case you don’t have a degree in organic chemistry. They were adopted in the late 1980s by the plastic industry to improve their public image and assist with recycling efforts.

There are six generalized categories that do (or are expected to) respond to the same type of recycling procedures. It is important to note that not all of these are actually recyclable at the present time.

1. Polyethelene or PET – polyester fibers, pop and water bottles and the plastic straps that hold bundles together
2. High-density polyethelene or HDPE – the hard plastic found in bins, equipment and other rigid plastics
3. PVC – water and electrical pipes
4. Low density polyethelene or LDPE – plastic bags, tubing and some bottles
5. Polypropelene – ducting, auto parts, food containers
6. Polystyrene – styrofoam, rigid knick-knacks, video cases

There is a seventh category that includes everything else such as poly-carbonate, acrylic, fiberglass, nylon and many others you may not have even heard of. As such, the #7 designation is more of a “none of the above” that tells you what you can’t put in the bin, rather than giving an indication of what you can do with it.

The use of taxation to influence behavior in the “free marketplace” has a very long track record. They are sort of like using economic sanctions at the international level to force the compliance of “rogue” nations. When a consumer wantonly tosses water bottles, aluminum cans and paper into the regular waste stream, they are impacting the well-being and bottom line of their neighbors and acting as a community rogue.

Taxation is more often applied to businesses to get them in compliance with recycling initiatives, after being asked nicely and then usually somehow bribed. Consumers are also subject to taxation, usually in the form of higher rubbish disposal rates or even with a small fee or imposed on certain items, such as plastic bags, cans or bottles.

Does it work? It works far better than most people would like to believe. Doing the “right thing” for the community or one’s self is rarely as powerful a motivator as a nagging, little fee. Recycling rates for plastic bags in one recent taxation scheme climbed from less than 10% to well over 90% in he span of a few months.

As was evidenced toward the end of 2008, free markets don’t always work s they’re supposed to without a bit if intervention. The same is true in the case of recycling. There would be no such thing as municipal recycling programs if it were not for public monies to help these industries get started.

The same is true whenever a new recycling technology is introduced. To offset the cost of innovation, the “free market” is manipulated by the injection of large sums of public cash to make it affordable more quickly.

Like many other services that are invested in for the public good, recycling is something that has tangible benefits beyond the basic balance sheet. It is an investment in future savings by encouraging a behavior and establishing a market for recycled products.