Sorting out the Recyclables

(This article was originally published in the September '10 issues of Merchant Magazine and Building Products Digest.)

Nothing says “green” like recycling, or so many people assume. Since the pioneering programs in the 1970s, it seems that now the habit has become ingrained, collection infrastructure ubiquitous, and recycling is among the greenest of virtues we Americans can claim. However, all is not what it seems. Like most issues in the realm of sustainable business and green building, there are various shades of gray, not to mention green.

In today’s green building and green consumer markets, “recycled” and “recyclable” have become the low-hanging fruit for marketers eager to pin green credentials on their products. But these attributes alone don’t necessarily signify sustainable or green in any meaningful sense. Context is everything. What kind of material? What percentage is recycled, and is it post-consumer or post-industrial waste? How relevant is “recyclable” if in fact the material is not recycled? In addition, LEED guidelines vary by application and product type, so a building material with some recycled content may or may not earn LEED credits depending on how and where it’s used. It behooves the merchandiser to dig a little deeper to determine whether these terms indicate real value or are simply a “greenwash.”

In the LBM and home improvement supply chain, aluminum, steel, glass, plastics, paper and wood are the predominant materials potentially recycled or recyclable. Aluminum, glass and steel can be used again to manufacture the same kinds of products indefinitely and can therefore be truly RE-cycled. For example, products like Maze Nails (www.mazenails.com) typically contain a high percentage of recycled steel, as do most steel products made in the USA. Generally, plastics and paper can be used again to manufacture things of lesser material integrity in a limited number of cycles, and are therefore DOWN-cycled. A great example here is Green Fiber (www.greenfiber.com) cellulose insulation, which is made from over 50% post-consumer recycled paper.

Whether a material is recycled, downcycled, or even upcycled, it’s a good thing, since manufacturing from recycled feedstock is often orders of magnitude less energy intensive than manufacturing from virgin feedstock. So, buying and stocking products with recycled content is a good thing, too, creating a market for such products and keeping the demand cycle going, so to speak.

But when evaluating products, all “recycled” and “recyclable” claims are not created equal. Post-consumer recycled content trumps post-industrial every time. Claims that don’t make this distinction should be assumed, if true, to be post-industrial. Is this still good? Yes. Is it the mark of truly sustainable product? Not always. Post-industrial recycled content is usually scraps and cuttings that may or may not be easily put through the production process again. In some cases, such as “re-grind” in the world of plastics, it’s easily reprocessed and is normal operating procedure. Generally speaking, it’s also harder to earn LEED credits with post-industrial recycled content.

The term “recyclable” is next down the list. In fact, it’s very often misused by over eager marketers and can be deceptive. If the material is recyclable in theory, but not in practice, then the claim is probably not worth the virgin paper it’s printed on. In fact, deceptive claims of this sort violate the FTC’s Guides for the Use of Environmental Claims. Where there is no recycling infrastructure, per se, a manufacturer may have a “take back” program, which accomplishes the same thing.

In sorting out products claims concerning recycled content and recyclability, manufacturer transparency and third-party certifications can help separate the green from the greenwash. It can also help to determine whether the product will meet your customer’s LEED project requirements.