Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAttacks on Recycling . National ~I' Recycling \.¡ Coalition, . Inc. National Recycling Coalition 1325 G Street NW Suite 1025 Washington. DC 20005 Tel: (202) 347-0450 Fax: (202) 347 -0449 www.nrc-recycle.org This guide is part of NRC's Media Advocacy Toolkit for Recycling. Also See: "20 Press Release Ideas to Promote Recycling" The "Recycling in the Media" Bulletin Board in the Members-Only Section of NRC's website at www.nrc-recycle.org. The National Recycling Coalition is a notjor-profit organization dedicated to the advancement and improve- ment of recycling, and also source reduction. composting and reuse, by providing technical information, educa- tion, training, outreach and advocacy services to its members in order to conserve resources and benefit the environment. How to Respond to Attacks on Recycling in the Media Whether it's by national news- papers, network TV, or conserv- ative think tanks, attacking recycling is a popular way to make head- lines. But as recycling professionals know, the overwhelming majority of these at- tacks are based either on oversimplifica- tions of complex environmental issues or on political philosophies out of step with mainstream America. The sound bites are hard to beat: Recycling is a waste. There is no landfill crisis. Recycling doesn't save trees. These statements are both short and provoca- tive-in other words, perfect for the news media. The idea of bashing recycling is so compelling that "the evils of recycling mania" was even used as an example of how to get publicity by being contrarian in Jay Levenson's popular "Guerilla Market- ing" series. As tempting as it is to draft a long letter with statistics and anecdotes to counter every negative point made about recycling, the reality is that long letters to the editor rarely get printed. So how can a recycling advocate respond? With this guide, the NRC recommends a five-part strategy to respond nationally and locally to attacks on recycling. Since most decisions about recycling programs are made at the local level, we suggest that you spend most of your energy responding locally, even to national attacks. We also offer some sound bites of our own in response to ten of the most fre- quent attacks on recycling. Use them in your letters to the editor, talking points for interviews with reporters, speech notes for local leaders, and handouts for the general public. Help recycling advocates in your community help you protect your program by arming them with the facts. A Five-Step Approach to Defend Recycling 1. Respond to the source. Send letters to the editor for print pieces and to the producers for radio and TV spots. If you want your letter to be printed, it must be short and to the point. While letter lengths vary among publica- tions, most are between 50 and 100 words. That's not much space, so stick to one or two key points. A well-crafted and focused letter is more likely to be printed than one that addresses too many points in too little space. If you don't expect your letter to be printed and are writing to educate the editor or producer instead, suggest some positive story angles in addition to correct- ing inaccuracies in previous stories (see NRC's "20 Press Release Ideas to Promote Recycling"). Remember, anti-recycling messages make the news because they are contrarian or counterintuitive. Try to use this motivation to your advantage by com- ing up with a surprising twist or unique angle. Also think of ways that recycling could be related to other hot news stories (e.g., global warming, the economy, elec- tions, etc.). 2. Give rebuttals to local opinion leaders. Don't wait for the people who make decisions about your local recycling pro- gram to ask about the points made in an anti-recycling article. Supply them with brief responses to the main points in the article. Share anecdotes and statistics from your community program that show the benefits of recycling to your community. The longer you wait to provide positive information, the longer your decisionmakers have to wonder about the legitimacy of the negative articles. Prepare this material now so you can respond immediately after the next negative story appears. 3. Respond to copycat local critics. Stories in major national newspapers (e.g., the New York Times, Los Angeles Times, Chicago Tribune, and Wall Street Journal) are often reprinted in regional newspapers a day or two later. Local columnists often pick up national stories and write their own articles. Respond to the copycats by following steps #1 and #2. 4. Generate positive publicity for recycling. To generate positive publicity, you have to get writers and editors interested in the story. Sending press releases to local writers and editors on a regular schedule is a common approach. New statistics, contests, freebies, events, awards, and links to national stories are all good ways to get media attention. Send your press releases to specific people. When environmental articles or upbeat features on community activities appear in your paper, take note of the writers' names and add them to your mailing list. Staff writers can be reached at the publication. Freelance writers are often identified by the words "Special to (name of newspaper)" under their names. Newspapers will often provide contact information for their freelance writers. 5. Share what works. If your letter to the editor gets printed or you convince a reporter to write a positive story, share your success with your peers through the NRC network. NRC has set up a "Recycling in the Media" bulletin board in the members- only section of our website where you can post your suc- cesses. To access the area, login to the members-only section, then click on "Bulletin Board" under "Where Would You Like to Start?" and then on the forums under "Recycling in the Media." Responses to the 10 Most Common Anti-Recycling Arguments When you write a letter to the editor or talk to a reporter, you rarely have the luxury of eloquently elaborating your points. Instead, you are required to fight sound bites with more sound bites. Many of the responses below will seem simplistic, but so are the anti- recycling messages they are meant to combat. The goal is to get your letter published, your sound bite on the air, and your points across. Shorter, pithy answers have a much better chance of being used than long, detailed ones. Myth 1: There are no markets for recyclables. How to Respond: Demand for recycled materials has never been greater and, in many cases, exceeds the supply currently provided by the American public. Rapid industrial development, particularly in China and other Asian nations, has created a huge surge in demand for recyclables. Domestic and international markets exist for all materials collected in curbside recycling programs, as long as they meet basic quality standards. In fact, there is intense competition among users for many recycled materials. The recycling industry is comparable in size to the auto and truck manufacturing industry. It's a large industry that demands lots of raw materialsB More than 2,000 companies are involved in plastics recycling aloneH A recycled aluminum beverage can returns to the grocer's shelf as a new, filled can in as few as 60 days after collection, which tell us that the markets are functioning efficientlyJ The steel industry recycles nearly 19 billion cans into new products each year, or about 600 cans per second.D Myth 2: We are already recycling as much as we can. How to Respond: Many communities have achieved recycling rates of 50 % or more. Despite the challenges of steep hills and little storage space, San Francisco residents and busi- nesses are recycling 60 % of their waste stream and are working hard toward a goal of zero waste. Many easily recycled materials are still thrown away. For example, 78 % of glass containers, 60 % of aluminum cans, 41 % of steel cans, 45 % of paper and paperboard containers and packaging are not currently recycledC Many Americans focus on recycling in the kitchen, but forget about products and packaging consumed elsewhere, like in bathrooms, laundry rooms, and garages. Americans are increasingly on the go, and we can do much more to make recycling convenient in National Recycling Coalition 2 U.s. E Without recycling, this material would come from trees. Every ton of newsprint or mixed paper recycled is the equivalent of 12 trees. Every ton of office paper recycled is the equivalent of 24 trees.A When one ton of steel is recycled, 2,500 pounds of iron ore, 1,400 pounds of coal and 120 pounds of limestone are conserved.D Brutal wars over natural resources, including timber and minerals, have killed or displaced more than 20 million people and are raising at least $12 billion a year for rebels, warlords, and repressive governments. Recycling eases the demand for the resources. K Mining is the world's most deadly occupation. On average, 40 mine workers are kiJled on the job each day, and many more are injured. Recycling reduces the need for mining.K Tree farms and reclaimed mines are not ecologi- cally equivalent to natural forests and ecosystems. Recycling prevents habitat destruction, loss of biodiversity, and soil erosion associated with logging and mining. Myth 7: There is plenty of landfill space, so why bother? How to Respond: Recycling's true value comes from preventing pollution and saving natural resources and energy, not landfill space. Recycling is largely responsible for averting the landfill crisis. The number of landfills in the United States is steadily decreasing-from 8,000 in 1988 to 1,858 in 2001. The capacity, however, has remained relatively constant. New landfills are much larger than in the pastC Who wants to live next to a mega- landfill? Myth 8: Landfills and incinerators are safe. How to Respond: Landfills can be major sources of groundwater pollution. For example, leachate from solid waste landfills is similar in composition to that of hazard- ous waste landfills. Municipal solid waste landfills are the largest source of human-related methane emissions in the United States, accounting for about 34 percent of these emissions, which are a potent cause of global warming. Paper decomposing in landfills, which could be recycled instead, is a major source of this methane. C About 20 % of the sites on the Superfund list (the nation's most hazardous sites) are solid waste landfillsc Incinerators are significant sources of toxic air poJlution, including mercury. Myth 9: If recycling makes sense, the free market will make it happen. How to Respond: Scrap steel has become the steel industry's single largest source of raw material because it is eco- nomically advantageous to recycle old steel into new steel. 0 For glass manufacturers, recycling makes economic sense because it extends the life of furnaces and reduces energy costs. Energy costs drop by 0.5 % for every 1 % of cullet used.l More than 80 % of U.S. papermakers use some recovered fiber to make their productsE Unlike most public services, recycling does function within the market economy, and quite successfully. Government supports lots of services that the free market wouldn't provide, such as the delivery of running water and electricity. If the market were truly free, long-standing subsi- dies that favor virgin materials and landfills would not exist, and recycling could compete on a level playing field. Myth 10: Recycling is a burden on families. How to Respond: Recycling is so popular because the American public wants to do it. More people recycle than voteG Nearly 140 million Americans have access to curbside recycling programsF Even more Ameri- cans have access to drop-off centers. Statistical Sources: (A) N RC's Environmental Benefits Calculator (B) NRC's Recycling Economic Information Study (C) U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (D) Steel Recycling Institute (E) American Forest & Paper Association (F) BioCycle Magazine (G) Resource Recycling Magazine (H) American Plastics Council (I) Glass Packaging Institute 0) Aluminum Association (K) World Watch Institute © 2005, National Recycling Coalition. All Rights Reserved. This guide is an updated version of a tip sheetfirst published by NRC in 1999. Printed on paper containing at least 30 % post-consumer recycled content. 4 public places, from downtown streets to shopping malls and sports stadiums. The national recycling rate is about 30 %. U.S. EPA has set a goal of 35 % c We are nowhere near our potentia!, especially if manufacturers make products easier to recycle. Myth 3: Recycling costs too much. How to Respond: Well-run recycling programs cost less to operate than waste collection, landfilling, and incineration. The more people recycle, the cheaper it gets. Two years after calling recycling a $40 million drain on the city, New York City leaders realized that a redesigned, efficient recycling system could actually save the city $20 million and they have now signed a 20-year recycling contract. Recycling helps families save money, especially in communities with pay-as-you-throw programs. Well-designed programs save money. Communities have many options available to make their pro- grams more cost-effective, including maximizing their recycling rates, implementing pay-as-you- throw programs, and including incentives in waste management contracts that encourage disposal companies to recycle more and dispose of less. Myth 4: Recycling should pay for itself. How to Respond: Recycling pays for itself in many ways, from the direct financial benefits of selling the materials to the many economic and environmental benefits. Recycling creates 1.1 million U.S. jobs, $236 billion in gross annual sales and $37 billion in annual payrol1s. B Public sector investment in local recycling programs pays great dividends by creating private sector jobs. For every job collecting recyclables, there are 26 jobs in processing the materials and manufacturing them into new productsB Landfills and incinerators don't pay for themselves; in fact they cost more than recycling programs. Recycling creates four jobs for everyone job cre- ated in the waste management and disposal industries. B Thousands of U.S. companies have saved millions of dollars through their voluntary recycling pro- grams. They wouldn't recycle if it didn't make sense. -----~--_.,~-~-_._---_.._---,-,-_..._,.._~-,-_...._-..---'--.----. Myth 5: Recycling causes more pollution than it prevents. How to Respond: Recycling is one of the best environmental success stories of the late 20th century. Recycling and composting diverted nearly 70 million tons of material away from landfills and incinerators in 2000, up from 34 million tons in 1 990-doubling in just 10 years. C Recycling results in a net reduction in ten major categories of air pollutants and eight major catego- ries of water pollutantsC In the U.S., processing minerals contributes almost half of all reported toxic emissions from industry, sending 1.5 million tons of pollution into the air and water each year. Recycling can significantly reduce these emissions. K It is important to reduce our reliance on foreign oil. Recycling helps us do that by saving energy. Manufacturing with recycled materials, with very few exceptions, saves energy and water and pro- duces less air and water pollution than manufactur- ing with virgin materialsc It takes 95 % less energy to recycle aluminum than it does to make it from raw materials. Making recycled steel saves 60 %, recycled newspaper 40 % , recycled plastics 70 %, and recycled glass 40 % c These saving far outweigh the energy created as by- products of incineration and landfilling. In 2000, recycling resulted in an annual energy savings equal to the amount of energy used in 6 million homes (over 660 trillion ßTUs). In 2005, recycling is conservatively projected to save the amount of energy used in 9 million homes (900 trillion ßTUs).c A national recycling rate of 30 % reduces green- house gas emissions as much as removing nearly 25 million cars from the roadc Myth 6: Recycling doesn't save trees or other natural resources. How to Respond: Recycling conserves natural resources, such as timber, water, and minerals. Every bit of recycling makes a difference. For example, one year of recycling on just one college campus, Stanford University, saved the equivalent of 33,913 trees and the need for 636 tons of iron ore, coal, and limestoneA Recycled paper supplies more than 37 % of the raw materials used to make new paper products in the 3 How to Respond to Attacks on Recycling in the Media