RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Print

Excerpt: "The Scandinavian nation of Sweden has set a new precedent in the world of recycling its trash, with a near zero waste amount of 99 percent. Sweden was already ahead of the game back in 2012, when they were recycling 96 percent of their trash, but the three percent jump in just two years is quite impressive."

(photo: sweden.media)
(photo: sweden.media)


Sweden Is Now Recycling 99 Percent of Its Trash. Here's How.

By Live Free Live Natural

08 October 14

 

It would serve Americans greatly to take a page out of Sweden’s book about recycling their waste.

he Scandinavian nation of Sweden has set a new precedent in the world of recycling its trash, with a near zero waste amount of 99 percent. Sweden was already ahead of the game back in 2012, when they were recycling 96 percent of their trash, but the three percent jump in just two years is quite impressive.

How does Sweden do it? They have an aggressive recycling policy, which goes in an order of importance: prevention, reuse, recycling, recycling alternatives, and as a last resort, disposal in landfill. As of 2014, only 1 percent of their waste ends up in a landfill.

Swedes understand that producing less waste to begin with is key to reducing the amount of trash that ends up being thrown away. Something as simple as using reusable containers for water and drinks can greatly reduce the amount of trash each person produces per year.

They have a very advanced system of trash separation which makes it easy to recycle nearly everything that’s thrown away.

Much of the left over waste is taken care of by using “recycling alternatives”, such as the Waste-to-Energy program, which is explained in this video:

Importing garbage for energy is good business for Sweden from Sweden on Vimeo.

While the “recycling alternative” remains controversial, it’s cleaner than drilling for oil or natural gas to burn in traditional power plants.

Sweden is so good at recycling its trash in fact, that it now has plans to import 800,000 tons of garbage from other countries in Europe in order to create heat for its citizens through its Waste-to-Energy program.

America should take note of this process considering we only recycle approximately 34 percent of the garbage we throw away.

h/t inhabitat.com

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 

Comments   

A note of caution regarding our comment sections:

For months a stream of media reports have warned of coordinated propaganda efforts targeting political websites based in the U.S., particularly in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election.

We too were alarmed at the patterns we were, and still are, seeing. It is clear that the provocateurs are far more savvy, disciplined, and purposeful than anything we have ever experienced before.

It is also clear that we still have elements of the same activity in our article discussion forums at this time.

We have hosted and encouraged reader expression since the turn of the century. The comments of our readers are the most vibrant, best-used interactive feature at Reader Supported News. Accordingly, we are strongly resistant to interrupting those services.

It is, however, important to note that in all likelihood hardened operatives are attempting to shape the dialog our community seeks to engage in.

Adapt and overcome.

Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News

 
+12 # Farafalla 2014-10-08 22:05
Incineration remains controversial in parts of the USA with historic bad air quality. Some waste to energy burns trash at 2,000 degrees F. But others "cook" the trash at 400 degrees F. There are big differences between the two Trash has to be very well sorted to prevent the burning of toxic substances. I would not want to live downwind of an incinerator. Best thing is to make less trash.
 
 
+6 # jwb110 2014-10-09 09:52
Quoting Agricanto:
Incineration remains controversial in parts of the USA with historic bad air quality. Some waste to energy burns trash at 2,000 degrees F. But others "cook" the trash at 400 degrees F. There are big differences between the two Trash has to be very well sorted to prevent the burning of toxic substances. I would not want to live downwind of an incinerator. Best thing is to make less trash.


If anybody would considered this the Swedes would.
 
 
+3 # btokar 2014-10-09 06:39
There may be some improvements in technology since then, but the last time waste-to-energy incinerators were promoted in the US was in the 1980s, with projects proposed in every corner of the US. Opponents exposed the reality that even with the best pollution controls available, extremely toxic dioxins (same as the contaminants in Agent Orange) were being synthesized right in the smokestacks from the combination of paper and plastic waste residues. Fortunately numerous such projects were defeated on health-related grounds. Curious what the Swedes are (or aren't) doing to prevent this.
 
 
+2 # bmiluski 2014-10-09 13:49
It's been 30 years. I'm sure there's been some new technical developments.
 
 
0 # The Voice of Reason 2014-10-09 18:07
We should start with the politicians, then the Oil Criminals, then the military leaders. That's a lot of trash to dump.
 

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN