I've been re-watching the redoubtable Albert Bartlet on You Tube. AB says that it's really important that everyone understand the exponential function – and, of course, it is. But, given that a vast range of people seem to struggle with simple percentages, this looks a hopeless prospect, and we'll all likely keep thinking everything's ok when it isn't.
I was reminded of this when browsing the gushing data from the USA Aluminum (sic) industry which tells us that "nearly 56 billion aluminum cans were recycled in 2010". This is a used can recycling rate of 58.1% – the highest in 11 years, it seems. Impressive, or what?
Well, bearing AB in mind, it's distinctly "what". At this rate of recycling, 89% of the metal used in can production ends up in landfill after only 4 make-collect-remake cycles.
In the UK, meanwhile, according to Alupro, a PR outfit, ...
Aluminium is the metal that goes on and on ... .
... and
All aluminium packaging can be recycled, endlessly, saving natural resources and energy
However, "can be" isn't quite the same as "is", especially as the latest recycling rate for aluminium cans in the UK is even lower than in the USA at 54% (2009) – a recycling rate that means ~92% of the metal used ends up in landfill after 4 cycles. What a triumph.
Thus, aided by ignorance and credulity, youngsters are peddled myths, and people and understanding kept firmly apart.
Meanwhile, in Finland, the recycling rates is 95%. How, we might ask, is this possible? Well, they are Fins, with something of a reputation for being model citizens, but might it also have something to do with the sort of compulsory can deposit schemes that our government has set its face against?
Respond