A rather shocking article considering it comes from the New York Times. The question is asked, "What is the goal here?" Recycling is more expensive for municipalities to recycle household waste than to send it to a landfill. Prices for recyclable materials have plummeted because of lower oil prices and reduced demand for them overseas."
Some cities, especially out west, have enacted "no trash allowed" garbage pick up ordinances. You must either recycle hard goods like aluminum and paper and compost your food by products. These rules are named, 'zero waste' in San Fransisco and Seattle with New York City up next.
But according to the article these efforts aren't doing anything to offset anything environmentally. "It makes sense to recycle commercial cardboard and some paper, as well as selected metals and plastics,” he says. “But other materials rarely make sense, including food waste and other compostables. The zero-waste goal makes no sense at all — it’s very expensive with almost no real environmental benefit."
I was on the Clayton Sustainability committee for many years, working often to provide the most recycling types as possible. But there comes a time when these efforts can go so far as to be absurd. You reach a point when you become a ban-ner of things just to do one more thing. Ban styro-foam, ban plastic bags, ban certain foods, etc etc.
So this story is quite amazing in its contrariness to modern thought. I must admit however, that I like the recycling program we have here. It is possible to recycle things you never thought possible and, the compostable things can go right in the yard waste bags. This includes many kitchen scraps except fatty products, dog hair, and the contents of vacuum cleaner bags.