Editing Recycling (section)

== Criticisms and responses ==

Much of the difficulty inherent in recycling comes from the fact that most products are not designed with recycling in mind. In the USA around 6 to 7 percent of plastic is recycled.<ref name="k115">{{cite web | last=Tracy | first=Ben | title=Critics call out plastics industry over "fraud of plastic recycling" | website=CBS News | date=14 April 2024 | url=https://www.cbsnews.com/news/critics-call-out-plastics-industry-over-fraud-of-plastic-recycling/ | access-date=29 January 2025}}</ref> The concept of [[sustainable design]] aims to solve this problem, and was laid out in the 2002 book ''[[Cradle to Cradle: Remaking the Way We Make Things]]'' by architect [[William McDonough]] and chemist [[Michael Braungart]].<ref>Afterlife: An Essential Guide To Design For Disassembly, by Alex Diener</ref> They suggest that every product (and all packaging it requires) should have a complete "closed-loop" cycle mapped out for each component—a way in which every component either returns to the natural ecosystem through [[biodegradation]] or is recycled indefinitely.<ref name="economisttruth"/><ref name="Decon_EPA">{{cite web |title=Fact Sheets on Designing for the Disassembly and Deconstruction of Buildings |url=https://www.epa.gov/smm/fact-sheets-designing-disassembly-and-deconstruction-buildings |website=epa.gov |publisher=EPA |access-date=12 March 2019 |language=en |date=14 March 2016 |archive-date=6 March 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190306044328/https://www.epa.gov/smm/fact-sheets-designing-disassembly-and-deconstruction-buildings |url-status=live }}</ref>

{{blockquote| quote = Complete recycling is impossible from a practical standpoint. In summary, substitution and recycling strategies only delay the depletion of non-renewable stocks and therefore may buy time in the transition to true or strong [[sustainability]], which ultimately is only guaranteed in an economy based on renewable resources.<ref name="Huesemann03">{{cite journal |last1=Huesemann |first1=Michael H. |title=The limits of technological solutions to sustainable development |journal=Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy |date=2003 |volume=5 |issue=1 |pages=21–34 |doi=10.1007/s10098-002-0173-8 |bibcode=2003CTEP....5...21H |s2cid=55193459 }}</ref>{{rp|21}}|source=M.{{nbsp}}H. Huesemann, 2003}}

While recycling diverts waste from entering directly into landfill sites, current recycling misses the dispersive components. Critics believe that complete recycling is impracticable as highly dispersed wastes become so diluted that the energy needed for their recovery becomes increasingly excessive.

As with [[environmental economics]], care must be taken to ensure a complete view of the costs and benefits involved. For example, [[paperboard]] packaging for food products is more easily recycled than most plastic, but is heavier to ship and may result in more waste from spoilage.<ref name="Tierney">{{cite news |first = John |last = Tierney |title = Recycling Is Garbage |url = https://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=990CE1DF1339F933A05755C0A960958260&pagewanted=all |work = The New York Times |page = 3 |date = 30 June 1996 |access-date = 28 February 2008 |url-status = dead |archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20081206160552/http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=990CE1DF1339F933A05755C0A960958260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=1 |archive-date = 6 December 2008 }}</ref> Economic expenses can incentivize fraud.<ref name="w051">{{cite web | last=Rosenberg | first=Mike | title=Largest e-recycling fraud in U.S. history sends owners of Kent firm to prison | website=The Seattle Times | date=23 April 2019 | url=https://www.seattletimes.com/business/largest-e-recycling-fraud-in-u-s-history-sends-owners-of-kent-firm-to-prison/ | access-date=29 January 2025}}</ref>

=== Net environmental benefits ===
[[File:Steel recycling bales.jpg|thumb|Bales of crushed steel ready for transport to the smelter]]

Critics dispute the net economic and environmental benefits of recycling over its costs, and suggest that proponents of recycling often make matters worse and suffer from [[confirmation bias]]. Specifically, critics argue that the costs and energy used in collection and transportation detract from (and outweigh) the costs and energy saved in the production process; also that the jobs produced by the recycling industry can be a poor trade for the jobs lost in logging, mining, and other industries associated with production; and that materials such as paper pulp can only be recycled a few times before material degradation prevents further recycling.<ref>{{cite book |editor1 = [[Lynn R. Kahle]] |editor2 = Eda Gurel-Atay |title = Communicating Sustainability for the Green Economy |year = 2014 |location = New York |publisher = M.E. Sharpe |isbn = 978-0-7656-3680-5 }}</ref>

The amount of energy saved through recycling depends upon the material being recycled and the type of energy accounting that is used. Correct accounting for this saved energy can be accomplished with [[life-cycle analysis]] using real energy values, and in addition, [[exergy]], which is a measure of how much useful energy can be used. In general, it takes far less energy to produce a unit mass of recycled materials than it does to make the same mass of virgin materials.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Morris |first1=Jeffrey |title=Comparative LCAs for Curbside Recycling Versus Either Landfilling or Incineration with Energy Recovery (12 pp) |journal=The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment |date=1 July 2005 |volume=10 |issue=4 |pages=273–284 |doi=10.1065/lca2004.09.180.10 |bibcode=2005IJLCA..10..273M |s2cid=110948339 }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Oskamp |first1=Stuart |title=Resource Conservation and Recycling: Behavior and Policy |journal=Journal of Social Issues |date=1995 |volume=51 |issue=4 |pages=157–177 |doi=10.1111/j.1540-4560.1995.tb01353.x }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Pimenteira |first1=C.A.P. |last2=Pereira |first2=A.S. |last3=Oliveira |first3=L.B. |last4=Rosa |first4=L.P. |last5=Reis |first5=M.M. |last6=Henriques |first6=R.M. |title=Energy conservation and CO2 emission reductions due to recycling in Brazil |journal=Waste Management |date=2004 |volume=24 |issue=9 |pages=889–897 |doi=10.1016/j.wasman.2004.07.001 |pmid=15504666 |bibcode=2004WaMan..24..889P }}</ref>

Some scholars use [[emergy]] (spelled with an m) analysis, for example, budgets for the amount of energy of one kind (exergy) that is required to make or transform things into another kind of product or service. Emergy calculations take into account economics that can alter pure physics-based results. Using emergy life-cycle analysis researchers have concluded that materials with large refining costs have the greatest potential for high recycle benefits. Moreover, the highest emergy efficiency accrues from systems geared toward material recycling, where materials are engineered to recycle back into their original form and purpose, followed by [[adaptive reuse]] systems where the materials are recycled into a different kind of product, and then by-product reuse systems where parts of the products are used to make an entirely different product.<ref name="Brown03" />

The [[Energy Information Administration]] (EIA) states on its website that "a paper mill uses 40 percent less energy to make paper from recycled paper than it does to make paper from fresh lumber."<ref name="auto">{{Citation |title=Recycling paper and glass |work= Energy Kid's Page | publisher= U.S. Energy Information Administration |url=http://www.eia.doe.gov/kids/energyfacts/saving/recycling/solidwaste/paperandglass.html|archive-date=25 October 2008|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081025173234/http://www.eia.doe.gov/kids/energyfacts/saving/recycling/solidwaste/paperandglass.html|url-status=dead}}</ref> Some critics argue that it takes more energy to produce recycled products than it does to dispose of them in traditional landfill methods, since the curbside collection of recyclables often requires a second waste truck. However, recycling proponents point out that a second timber or logging truck is eliminated when paper is collected for recycling, so the net energy consumption is the same. An emergy life-cycle analysis on recycling revealed that fly ash, aluminum, recycled concrete aggregate, recycled plastic, and steel yield higher efficiency ratios, whereas the recycling of lumber generates the lowest recycle benefit ratio. Hence, the specific nature of the recycling process, the methods used to analyse the process, and the products involved affect the energy savings budgets.<ref name="Brown03">{{cite journal |last1=Brown |first1=M.T. |last2=Buranakarn |first2=Vorasun |title=Emergy indices and ratios for sustainable material cycles and recycle options |journal=Resources, Conservation and Recycling |date=2003 |volume=38 |issue=1 |pages=1–22 |doi=10.1016/S0921-3449(02)00093-9 |bibcode=2003RCR....38....1B }}</ref>

It is difficult to determine the amount of energy consumed or produced in waste disposal processes in broader ecological terms, where causal relations dissipate into complex networks of material and energy flow. 
{{Blockquote|[C]ities do not follow all the strategies of ecosystem development. Biogeochemical paths become fairly straight relative to wild ecosystems, with reduced recycling, resulting in large flows of waste and low total energy efficiencies. By contrast, in wild ecosystems, one population's wastes are another population's resources, and succession results in efficient exploitation of available resources. However, even modernized cities may still be in the earliest stages of a succession that may take centuries or millennia to complete.<ref name="Decker00">{{Cite journal |title = Energy and Material flow through the urban Ecosystem |first1 = Ethan H. |last1 = Decker |first2 = Scott |last2 = Elliott |first3 = Felisa A. |last3 = Smith |first4 = Donald R. |last4 = Blake |first5 = F. Sherwood |last5 = Rowland |author-link5 = Frank Sherwood Rowland |journal = [[Annual Review of Energy and the Environment]] |volume = 25 |issue = 1 |doi = 10.1146/annurev.energy.25.1.685 | doi-access=free |date = November 2000 |pages = 685–740 |oclc = 42674488 |citeseerx = 10.1.1.582.2325}}</ref>{{rp|720}} }}
How much energy is used in recycling also depends on the type of material being recycled and the process used to do so. Aluminium is generally agreed to use far less energy when recycled rather than being produced from scratch. The EPA states that "recycling aluminum cans, for example, saves 95 percent of the energy required to make the same amount of aluminum from its virgin source, [[bauxite]]."<ref>{{ cite web | publisher=Environmental Protection Agency | url= http://www.epa.gov/msw/faq.htm#5 | title= How does recycling save energy? | work=Municipal Solid Waste: Frequently Asked Questions about Recycling and Waste Management | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060927081802/http://www.epa.gov/msw/faq.htm#5 |archive-date=27 September 2006 | url-status= dead}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url = http://www1.eere.energy.gov/industry/aluminum/pdfs/aluminum.pdf |title = Energy and Environmental Profile of the U.S. Aluminum Industry | date= July 1997 |url-status = dead |archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20110811191240/http://www1.eere.energy.gov/industry/aluminum/pdfs/aluminum.pdf |archive-date = 11 August 2011 | last = Margolis | first = Nancy | work = US Department of Energy }}</ref> In 2009, more than half of all aluminium cans produced came from recycled aluminium.<ref>{{cite web |url = http://greenliving.nationalgeographic.com/recycling-aluminum-cans-versus-plastic-2375.html |title = The Recycling of Aluminum Cans Versus Plastic |url-status = dead |archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20111026202731/http://greenliving.nationalgeographic.com/recycling-aluminum-cans-versus-plastic-2375.html |archive-date = 26 October 2011 | first=Jacqueline | last= Lerche | date= 2011 | work = National Geographic Green Living | publisher= Demand Media}}</ref> Similarly, it has been estimated that new steel produced with recycled cans reduces greenhouse gas emissions by 75%.<ref>{{ cite web | url=http://www.cancentral.com/recycling-sustainability/facts | title= By the Numbers | work = Can Manufacturers Institute | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190819191925/http://www.cancentral.com/recycling-sustainability/facts |archive-date=19 August 2019 }}</ref>

{{blockquote | quote = Every year, millions of tons of materials are being exploited from the earth's crust, and processed into consumer and capital goods. After decades to centuries, most of these materials are "lost". With the exception of some pieces of art or religious relics, they are no longer engaged in the consumption process. Where are they? Recycling is only an intermediate solution for such materials, although it does prolong the residence time in the anthroposphere. For thermodynamic reasons, however, recycling cannot prevent the final need for an ultimate sink.<ref name="Brunner99">{{cite journal |last1 = Brunner |first1 = P.&nbsp;H. |year = 1999 |title = In search of the final sink |journal = Environ. Sci. & Pollut. Res. |volume = 6 |issue = 1 |page = 1 |doi = 10.1007/bf02987111 |pmid = 19005854 |bibcode = 1999ESPR....6....1B |s2cid = 46384723 }}</ref>{{rp|1}}|source= P.&nbsp;H. Brunner}}

Economist [[Steven Landsburg]] has suggested that the sole benefit of reducing landfill space is trumped by the energy needed and resulting pollution from the recycling process.<ref name="landsburg">Landsburg, Steven E. ''[[The Armchair Economist]]''. p. 86.</ref> Others, however, have calculated through life-cycle assessment that producing recycled paper uses less energy and water than harvesting, pulping, processing, and transporting virgin trees.<ref>Selke 116{{full citation needed | date= September 2023}}</ref> When less recycled paper is used, additional energy is needed to create and maintain farmed forests until these forests are as self-sustainable as virgin forests.

Other studies have shown that recycling in itself is inefficient to perform the "decoupling" of economic development from the depletion of non-renewable raw materials that is necessary for sustainable development.<ref name="Grosse10">{{cite journal |last1 = Grosse |first1 = François |first2= Gaëll | last2= Mainguy |year = 2010 |title = Is recycling 'part of the solution'? The role of recycling in an expanding society and a world of finite resources |journal = S.A.P.I.EN.S |volume = 3 |issue = 1 |pages = 1–17 |url = http://sapiens.revues.org/index906.html |access-date = 15 October 2010 |archive-date = 5 April 2010 |archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20100405190747/http://sapiens.revues.org/index906.html |url-status = live }}</ref> The international transportation or recycle material flows through "...&nbsp;different trade networks of the three countries result in different flows, decay rates, and potential recycling returns".<ref name="Sahni11">{{Cite book |last1 = Sahni |first1 = S. |last2 = Gutowski |first2 = T. G. |chapter = Your scrap, my scrap! The flow of scrap materials through international trade |title = IEEE International Symposium on Sustainable Systems and Technology (ISSST) |year = 2011 |pages = 1–6 |doi = 10.1109/ISSST.2011.5936853 |chapter-url = http://web.mit.edu/ebm/www/Publications/IEEE_2011_int_trade_sahni.pdf |isbn = 978-1-61284-394-0 |s2cid = 2435609 |access-date = 1 March 2012 |archive-date = 17 December 2020 |archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20201217153943/http://web.mit.edu/ebm/www/Publications/IEEE_2011_int_trade_sahni.pdf |url-status = live }}</ref>{{rp|1}} As global consumption of a natural resources grows, their depletion is inevitable. The best recycling can do is to delay; complete closure of material loops to achieve 100 percent recycling of nonrenewables is impossible as micro-trace materials dissipate into the environment causing severe damage to the planet's ecosystems.<ref name="Steffen10">{{cite journal |last1=Lehmann |first1=Steffen |title=Resource Recovery and Materials Flow in the City: Zero Waste and Sustainable Consumption as Paradigms in Urban Development |journal=Sustainable Development Law & Policy |date=15 March 2011 |volume=11 |issue=1 |url=https://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/sdlp/vol11/iss1/13/ |access-date=8 April 2021 |archive-date=25 June 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210625110346/https://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/sdlp/vol11/iss1/13/ |url-status=live }}</ref><ref name="Zaman11">{{cite journal |last1 = Zaman |first1 = A. U. |last2 = Lehmann |first2 = S. |year = 2011 |title = Challenges and opportunities in transforming a city into a 'Zero Waste City' |journal = Challenges |volume = 2 |pages = 73–93 |doi = 10.3390/challe2040073 |issue = 4 |doi-access = free }}</ref><ref name="Huesemann11">{{cite book |last1 = Huesemann |first1 = M. |last2 = Huesemann |first2 = J. |year = 2011 |title = Techno-fix: Why Technology Won't Save Us or the Environment |publisher = New Society Publishers |page = 464 |isbn = 978-0-86571-704-6 |url = https://books.google.com/books?id=bHOS4sITc3wC |access-date = 7 July 2016 |archive-date = 20 February 2023 |archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20230220183216/https://books.google.com/books?id=bHOS4sITc3wC |url-status = live }}</ref> Historically, this was identified as the metabolic rift by [[Karl Marx]], who identified the unequal exchange rate between energy and nutrients flowing from rural areas to feed urban cities that create effluent wastes degrading the planet's ecological capital, such as loss in soil nutrient production.<ref name="Clark09">{{cite journal |last1=Clark |first1=Brett |last2=Foster |first2=John Bellamy |title=Ecological Imperialism and the Global Metabolic Rift: Unequal Exchange and the Guano/Nitrates Trade |journal=International Journal of Comparative Sociology |date=2009 |volume=50 |issue=3–4 |pages=311–334 |doi=10.1177/0020715209105144 |s2cid=154627746 }}</ref><ref name="Foster11">{{cite book |last1 = Foster |first1 = John Bellamy |last2 = Clark |first2 = Brett |year = 2011 |title = The Ecological Rift: Capitalisms War on the Earth |publisher = Monthly Review Press |page = 544 |isbn = 978-1-58367-218-1 |url = https://books.google.com/books?id=VGzJQgAACAAJ  |archive-date = 20 February 2023 |archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20230220183223/https://books.google.com/books?id=VGzJQgAACAAJ |url-status = live }}</ref> Energy conservation also leads to what is known as [[Jevon's paradox]], where improvements in energy efficiency lowers the cost of production and leads to a rebound effect where rates of consumption and economic growth increases.<ref name="Huesemann11" /><ref name="Alcott05">{{cite journal |last1=Alcott |first1=Blake |title=Jevons' paradox |journal=Ecological Economics |date=2005 |volume=54 |issue=1 |pages=9–21 |doi=10.1016/j.ecolecon.2005.03.020 |bibcode=2005EcoEc..54....9A |hdl=1942/22574 |hdl-access=free }}</ref>

[[File:Demolition Depot W125 St dusk jeh.jpg|thumb|This shop in New York only sells items recycled from demolished buildings.]]

=== Economic costs ===
Journalist [[John Tierney (journalist)|John Tierney]] notes that it is generally more expensive for municipalities to recycle waste from households than to send it to a landfill and that "recycling may be the most wasteful activity in modern America."<ref>{{cite news | url=https://www.nytimes.com/1996/06/30/magazine/recycling-is-garbage.html | title=Recycling is Garbage | work=The New York Times | date=June 30, 1996 | last1=Tierney | first1=John | access-date=30 January 2023 | archive-date=30 January 2023 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230130161255/https://www.nytimes.com/1996/06/30/magazine/recycling-is-garbage.html | url-status=live }}</ref>

The amount of money actually saved through recycling depends on the efficiency of the recycling program used to do it. The [[Institute for Local Self-Reliance]] argues that the cost of recycling depends on various factors, such as [[gate fee|landfill fees]] and the amount of disposal that the community recycles. It states that communities begin to save money when they treat recycling as a replacement for their traditional waste system rather than an add-on to it and by "redesigning their collection schedules and/or trucks".<ref>{{Cite web|work=Institute for Local Self-Reliance|date=1996-09-14|title=The Five Most Dangerous Myths About Recycling|url=https://ilsr.org/the-five-most-dangerous-myths-about-recycling/|access-date=2023-02-08|archive-date=29 May 2009|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090529062928/http://www.ilsr.org/recycling/wrrs/fivemyths.html|url-status=live}}</ref>

In some cases, the cost of recyclable materials also exceeds the cost of raw materials. Virgin plastic resin costs 40 percent less than recycled resin.<ref name="auto"/> Additionally, a [[United States Environmental Protection Agency]] (EPA) study that tracked the price of clear glass from 15 July to 2 August 1991, found that the average cost per ton ranged from $40 to $60<ref>{{Cite web|title=Markets for Recovered Glass | publisher= US Environmental Protection Agency | date = December 1992 | work= National Service Center for Environmental Publications |url=https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyNET.exe/10001B00.txt?ZyActionD=ZyDocument&Client=EPA&Index=1986%20Thru%201990&Docs=&Query=&Time=&EndTime=&SearchMethod=1&TocRestrict=n&Toc=&TocEntry=&QField=&QFieldYear=&QFieldMonth=&QFieldDay=&UseQField=&IntQFieldOp=0&ExtQFieldOp=0&XmlQuery=&File=D%3A%5CZYFILES%5CINDEX%20DATA%5C86THRU90%5CTXT%5C00000004%5C10001B00.txt&User=ANONYMOUS&Password=anonymous&SortMethod=h%7C-&MaximumDocuments=1&FuzzyDegree=0&ImageQuality=r75g8/r75g8/x150y150g16/i425&Display=hpfr&DefSeekPage=x&SearchBack=ZyActionL&Back=ZyActionS&BackDesc=Results%20page&MaximumPages=1&ZyEntry=2|archive-date=8 February 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230208010157/https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyNET.exe/10001B00.txt?ZyActionD=ZyDocument&Client=EPA&Index=1986%2520Thru%25201990&Docs=&Query=&Time=&EndTime=&SearchMethod=1&TocRestrict=n&Toc=&TocEntry=&QField=&QFieldYear=&QFieldMonth=&QFieldDay=&UseQField=&IntQFieldOp=0&ExtQFieldOp=0&XmlQuery=&File=D%3A%255CZYFILES%255CINDEX%2520DATA%255C86THRU90%255CTXT%255C00000004%255C10001B00.txt&User=ANONYMOUS&Password=anonymous&SortMethod=h%257C-&MaximumDocuments=1&FuzzyDegree=0&ImageQuality=r75g8%2Fr75g8%2Fx150y150g16%2Fi425&Display=hpfr&DefSeekPage=x&SearchBack=ZyActionL&Back=ZyActionS&BackDesc=Results%2520page&MaximumPages=1&ZyEntry=2|url-status=live}}</ref> while a [[USGS]] report shows that the cost per ton of raw silica sand from years 1993 to 1997 fell between $17.33 and $18.10.<ref>{{Cite book |series=Silica Statistics and Information |publisher=U.S. Geological Survey |title=Mineral Commodity Summaries |chapter=Sand and Gravel (Industrial) |pages=146–147 |chapter-url=https://d9-wret.s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/assets/palladium/production/mineral-pubs/silica/780398.pdf |editor=((National Minerals Information Center)) |archive-date=29 September 2006 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060929031428/http://minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/commodity/silica/780398.pdf |url-status=live |date=January 1998 |first=Wallace P. |last=Bolen |access-date=7 September 2023 }}</ref>

Comparing the market cost of recyclable material with the cost of new raw materials ignores economic [[externalities]]—the costs that are currently not counted by the market. Creating a new piece of plastic, for instance, may cause more pollution and be less sustainable than recycling a similar piece of plastic, but these factors are not counted in market cost. A [[life cycle assessment]] can be used to determine the levels of externalities and decide whether the recycling may be worthwhile despite unfavorable market costs. Alternatively, legal means (such as a [[carbon tax]]) can be used to bring externalities into the market, so that the market cost of the material becomes close to the true cost.

=== Working conditions and social costs===
[[File:Lixao Catadores 20080220 - Marcello Casal Jr. - Agencia Brasil.jpg|thumb|Some people in [[Brazil]] earn their living by collecting and sorting garbage and selling them for recycling.]]

The recycling of waste electrical and electronic equipment can create a significant amount of pollution. This problem is specifically occurrent in India and China. Informal recycling in an underground economy of these countries has generated an environmental and health disaster. High levels of lead (Pb), [[polybrominated diphenylethers]] (PBDEs), [[polychlorinated dioxins]], and [[Polychlorinated dibenzofurans|furans]], as well as polybrominated dioxins and furans (PCDD/Fs and PBDD/Fs), concentrated in the air, [[bottom ash]], dust, soil, water, and sediments in areas surrounding recycling sites.<ref name="Sepúlveda10">{{cite journal |last1=Sepúlveda |first1=Alejandra |last2=Schluep |first2=Mathias |last3=Renaud |first3=Fabrice G. |last4=Streicher |first4=Martin |last5=Kuehr |first5=Ruediger |last6=Hagelüken |first6=Christian |last7=Gerecke |first7=Andreas C. |title=A review of the environmental fate and effects of hazardous substances released from electrical and electronic equipments during recycling: Examples from China and India |journal=Environmental Impact Assessment Review |date=2010 |volume=30 |issue=1 |pages=28–41 |doi=10.1016/j.eiar.2009.04.001 |bibcode=2010EIARv..30...28S }}</ref> These materials can make work sites harmful to the workers themselves and the surrounding environment.

In some countries, recycling is performed by the entrepreneurial poor such as the [[karung guni]], [[zabbaleen]], the [[rag-and-bone man]], [[waste picker]], and [[junk man]]. With the creation of large recycling organizations that may be profitable, either by law or [[economies of scale]],<ref>{{cite web |url = http://www.nrdc.org/cities/recycling/recyc/appenda.asp |title = Too Good To Throw Away – Appendix A |publisher = NRDC |date = 30 June 1996 |access-date = 6 November 2012 |archive-date = 24 January 2010 |archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20100124024350/http://www.nrdc.org/cities/recycling/recyc/appenda.asp |url-status = live }}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.sfgov.org/site/uploadedfiles/police/stations/ParkStation/2007/07feb08%20park%20newsletter.pdf|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20120513094320/http://www.sfgov.org/site/uploadedfiles/police/stations/ParkStation/2007/07feb08%20park%20newsletter.pdf|url-status=dead|title=Mission Police Station|archivedate=13 May 2012}}</ref> the poor are more likely to be driven out of the recycling and the [[remanufacturing]] job market. To compensate for this loss of income, a society may need to create additional forms of societal programs to help support the poor.<ref name="PBS NewsHour 2010">''PBS NewsHour'', 16 February 2010. Report on the Zabaleen</ref> Like the [[parable of the broken window]], there is a net loss to the poor and possibly the whole of a society to make recycling artificially profitable, e.g. through the law. However, in Brazil and Argentina, waste pickers/informal recyclers work alongside the authorities, in fully or semi-funded cooperatives, allowing informal recycling to be legitimized as a paid public sector job.<ref name="Medina, M. 2000 51–69">{{cite journal |last1=Medina |first1=Martin |title=Scavenger cooperatives in Asia and Latin America |journal=Resources, Conservation and Recycling |date=2000 |volume=31 |issue=1 |pages=51–69 |doi=10.1016/s0921-3449(00)00071-9 |bibcode=2000RCR....31...51M |citeseerx=10.1.1.579.6981 }}</ref>

Because the social support of a country is likely to be less than the loss of income to the poor undertaking recycling, there is a greater chance for the poor to come in conflict with the large recycling organizations.<ref>{{cite web |url = http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=16878461&BRD=1698&PAG=461&dept_id=21849&rfi=6 |title = The News-Herald – Scrap metal a steal |publisher = Zwire.com |access-date = 6 November 2012 }}{{dead link|date=November 2017 |bot=Balon Greyjoy |fix-attempted=yes }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url = https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=92705125 |title = Raids on Recycling Bins Costly To Bay Area |publisher = NPR |date = 19 July 2008 |access-date = 6 November 2012 |archive-date = 11 August 2013 |archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20130811163740/http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=92705125 |url-status = live }}</ref> This means fewer people can decide if certain waste is more economically reusable in its current form rather than being reprocessed. Contrasted to the recycling poor, the efficiency of their recycling may actually be higher for some materials because individuals have greater control over what is considered "waste".<ref name="PBS NewsHour 2010" />

One labor-intensive underused waste is electronic and computer waste. Because this waste may still be functional and wanted mostly by those on lower incomes, who may sell or use it at a greater efficiency than large recyclers.

Some recycling advocates believe that [[laissez-faire]] individual-based recycling does not cover all of society's recycling needs. Thus, it does not negate the need for an organized recycling program.<ref name="PBS NewsHour 2010" /> Local government can consider the activities of the recycling poor as contributing to the ruining of property.