>>5139741
Use a solvent or just leave the labels on. It's not like a little bit of paper is going to be an issue at the temperatures they have to use to process glass or metal. Plastic could be an issue but let's face it they're not recycling it. We outsource it they put a ton of it on container ships returning to Asia they start doing it initially. Then they can't keep up with the sheer volume of it or the energy demands. Stop accepting it stop recycling the mountain they have. Dumping most of it. We coerce another Asian country into taking on this impossible job same thing happens. Don't buy shit in plastic.

>>5139748
I get that not all plastics melt or can be chemically dissolved by the same stuff. But how fucking hard is it to just chop it all up, dissolve some, sieve to claim whatever couldn’t melt, wash it, and go to the next solvent/method?

>>5139751
I'm honestly not sure. I imagine there's a lot of hidden cost or scarcity in the supply chain of getting the chemicals required to process when they're probably also in demand for higher paying things elsewhere. Rather than governments mandating x amount be sold to meet the needs of a recycling project.

>>5139751
because its like spending 40 cents to recycle old plastic when its like 4 cents to produce new plastic, same with paper, thats generally the problem, its not glass or metals where its actually more useful to recycle them because theyve already been refined

File: ayo-i-got-the-chris-chan-(...).jpg (33 KB, 640x359)

33 KB JPG

>>5139751
Because the level of infrastructure to do that is way more fucking expensive than just shipping it to Asia to be burned. But then lets say you do get that level of infrastructure up and running not only that it's extremely affordable for a fully developed nation to opperate, you are still going to run into enviromental hazards with all the solvets and fumes produced to melt the plastic down. You know what will then happen with that? Outsourced to Asia again because they don't care if that vents to atmosphere which means they can undercut rates again.

It's fucked no matter what.

>>5139984
>>5139748
is the US government also accepting trash and recycling for money while in addition to giving countries money to take it? I heard that and it confused me.

>>5140135
Yeah. We sell space in our landfills to anyone who wants to buy it, it is a service.

As far as recycling we have a lot of lot of west coast ports that ship primarily to Asia and a lot of ships going there and coming back. So it makes sense to pay the us to take it more than it takes the us to ship it so it subsidizes both your recycling costs in theory from the route optimization. As well as taking materials the us recycles domestically like metals and e-waste.

Even if it doesn't actually get recycled, for the amount that is collected without being dumped I still like the idea of the plastic and recycle waste being consolidated