I'm sure that a lot of you will have either read or heard about the recent article by the Daily Mail which branded recycling as a "Sham", going on to describe it as "a waste of time" and that it would be easier "if most of our unsorted rubbish were burnt locally" (Link). The article was written following comments made by Peter Jones, representative on the London Waste and Recycling Board & previously a Director of Biffa Waste on the BBC News at Ten on January 27th.
I was relieved to see that this blatant misrepresentation of Peter's comments has been lambasted by Peter himself in an interview with letsrecycle.com (Link). On the comments above Peter had the following to say:
On the viability of recycling;
"I did not ever suggest that recycling is a waste of time - that is a nonsensical position to take and those who know me would find such an assertion laughable"
On the topic of incineration;
"Throughout the discussion I emphasised that I was talking with regard to carbon conversion to energy, which could be in the form of electricity, gas, steam, heat, hydrogen or synthetic diesel. Conversion to electricity only without combined heat and power is nonsensical and inefficient."
It is an absolute digrace that in this instance some elements of the media have yet again distorted the facts of the real story and given the the beleaguered recycling industry a kick when it is facing difficult times, not unlike the majority of the economy right now. Is it perhaps the case that some people will find the smallest excuse not to take responsibility for their own consumption & behaviour? You don't need to be a scientist nor a mathematician to work out that substituting used material in production in place of virgin material has got to save enormous amounts of energy in the case of most processes/materials.