Should Recycling be Mandatory?

Question

Why should it be mandatory and why shouldnt it be..? give me some reasons..? i think it will be better for the environment if it was mandatory...but its hard to force people to do what they may think is time consuming..so what do u people think of recycling?

Answer 1

The town I live in has a recycling program.  It is set up as a separation service,  that is, on trash day you put out  the 'Recyclables" in a bin different from the "Trash".  In the beginning almost no one did it.  It is now mandatory and you can be fined for not separating.  "Recycle:  It's the Law". Well...it works!

Answer 2

I think it should be mandatory, because it is in the public's interest (in terms of health and environment) that we reduce the waste stream.  We only have so much room to bury stuff!  Why waste it on re-usables (not to mention running out of the raw resources to make the stuff in the first place).  I agree forcing people to do it will be difficult, without having "trash police"; making it an economic decision may be more effective: for example, charge exhorbitant solid waste disposal rates per trash can, so people have a financial incentive to cut down their waste.

Answer 3

They the government should offer incentives likes reduced council tax for people who recycle simple. and SHOW people how to seperate different kinds of rubbish and to build compost heaps etc  its no good fining people because of over complicated/buracratic bylaws very easy to mis-understand or is that done on purpose?

Answer 4

yes, simple.

Answer 5

recycling is not mandatory. It is our moral responsibility to be lived in pure environment. with out selfishness we are spoiling our environment. environment is not only ones. We thing that the environment is mine only and using it as we like and bring danger to this world. If we continue like this our children children has to face dangerous situation. Environment is only borrowed one not our property. We have to handover it to the future generation purely and with out spoiling it. We keep our own property for example a house very clean and tidy. We repair our own house if necessary. We paint out house and clean our house frequently. But we are treating our environment not like our property, it our property only. we have to repair it if necessary. We have to clean if need arises. So it our moral responsibility to keep the environment pure so we have to do some necessary things like recycling , water harvesting, saving water, power etc. If u wont feel responsible the Government has to make it mandatary. For example, we should not do prostitution it is our moral responsiblity as a humanbeing. No other pereson has to teach u and me. IF u and me wont feel responsible then the Government to protect other human or the environment implement rules and regulations. Other God enter in the field to protect by introuduing new deceises like HIV?AIDs. China earth quack is God caution us to protect the environment. In India in summer all comment as - the temparature is too high and say temparature is increasing year by year. But he wont think that he is only reason for that reason by poluting the enviroment. So, if we wont feel responsible it becomes mandatory. In our house also if we arive to house in proper time , the father of the house implement mandatary rules by telling to be in the house at 6 pm in the evening  and study. like that only. One thing we are doing all these for our good only.  No person has to teach us to do that thing and this thing. we have to think. so, for our future children it good to follow.

Answer 6

Of course!

Answer 7

No it should not. Aren't you already sick of everything we are forced to do under Government duress? Eg. If you don't pay your car tax they nick your car and crush it up. Anyone else did this it would be a criminal act. Why are government the only ones allowed to get away with crime? Justifying something by making it legal does not alter this fact.

I agree with the idea of recycling but it should be done as a self determined action, based on accurate information about its benefits.

Answer 8

God no!  Imagine your father or brother sitting in jail because he put a soda bottle in the trash instead of a recycle bin.

Answer 9

my guess is yours, buddy

Answer 10

There is no way that people would/could be sanctioned into recycling, and anyway, how would it be policed?  The police, courts and prisons are already at full limit.  It's a steep hill we're all climbing, but look how far we've climbed already.  I've got neighbours who recycle zip all, and there will always be NIMBY people like that "I pay my council tax to get my rubbish collected".  People like this would call it their 'human right' to make the conscious choice NOT to recycle, and I suppose there could be an arguement there.  They just don't see it as their responsibility to make the initiative...that belongs to 'someone else' as always.

Also, there are people who cannot recycle.  There are people with dementia who have carers to do their shopping/cooking, and it's not feasible to expect overstretched carers to take responsibility for that too, and there are many other people who simply can't do it.

We just need to persevere.

Answer 11

It's very difficult to make it mandatory.  How are you going to enforce it?  I think a much better option is to make it financially attractive.  Rather than charging a 5 cent deposit per bottle, make it 50 cents, and then see how many people recycle.

Answer 12

yes.

Answer 13

I would prefer it not to be for the possibility of two situations: the first is that the government would have to subsidize the recycling process which will undoubtedly increase too rapidly for the market's current capacity, thus the recycling business would be losing more money by entering a a stage of negative profits called "diseconomies of scale".

What would then happen is capacity would increase thanks to the government incentives (subsidization, although most of the business is controlled by local municipalities already). As production levels expand, the costs of recycling declines and recyclable goods become cheaper thanks to a less expensive process. As they decline in price, people begin to purchase more.

Purchasing more is the environmental problem here. There are many cases, such as bottled water, where recycling the product is almost as harmful as producing it. The main difference is the impact of going out and finding more materials, but this is only marginal. Point is we would be emitting more because of the increase in frequency of recycling.

This is not to say that recycling is bad. It is better to avoid the environmental (and economical) cost of finding and making new bottles, even if the cost is marginal. But the only real solution is to reduce both production and recycling by 1) decreasing consumption of 16 floz. water bottles and 2) reuse and the bottles as frequently as possible while cleaning them whenever necessary. Our goal should be to eliminate production of the bottles and then gradually reduce recycling.

Possibility #2 was already mentioned above as a charge per bottle, although this charge could also come out via a tax.