!
!
!"#$#%&'()*"%"#+",-!"./01#".!
Recycling – Lesson Plan
"#$%&'()!*&+,-!./01!2'!32456!7$2+'7$8!98$7!2'!&:,6,8:!,';942:&3)<!!"#$%&'()$"*+,,-*=>$7#$33:2)!
?@A!">B!>:5+$!CC")!DEEFG)!
(((-+7H'&;$2+'7(::I-,';J32'&6J3#'(0&2+,8:-K#2;8L$&2+,8:MNOPQQRESPTT-!
.*8:,2&'7+,!($32:U7:(!5:V:8'9;:723)<!.,/'0*1,234*5"6)%$"&,"('0*1,230,((,%!=W'32'7)!>0A!
Student Objectives
X'8:6!Y!C$&57:&!CCB)!09&+8!DEEFG)!
#229AJJ(((-H'8:6-,';J94%8+,$2+'73J94%Z5:2$+83-$39[L94%+5ORE\S-!
•
Develop.*4&'9:$7!]7+'7!('&85!8:$5:&!+7!9$9:&!&:,6,8+7^)!2#$7I3!2'!V'8472$&6!,';;+2;:72!'H!9$9:&!
a deeper understanding of the extended manufacturer responsibility principle.
•
Appreciate the tension between the long-term environmental benefits of recycling and the
X&$7I8+7)!B$2-!.*[2:75:5!9&'54,:&!&:39'73+%+8+26A!0!9&+;:&)<!9'-,*!(*>':-?*@AAB*=%$C7:,%*
immediate
costs of recycling to manufacturers and/or consumers.
D,38$"3)E)0)(F*G$%7&*=08:[$75&+$)!`0A!a$6;'75!"';;47+,$2+'73!M7,-)!PTTFG)!
•
.X&:c4:7286!$3I:5!c4:32+'73!$%'42!&:,6,8+7^!$75!($32:!;$7$^:;:72<!=d$3#+7^2'7)!N-"-A!]-e-!
Consider
the
different ways that recycling policies affect various stakeholders, including
*7V+&'7;:72$8!B&'2:,2+'7!0^:7,6)!DEEQG)!#229AJJ(((-:9$-^'VJ:9$'3(:&J7'7b
governmental
authorities, manufacturers, retailers, distributors, and consumers.
#(J;47,98JH$c-#2;-*
9&'H:33+'7$83)<!57%$8,'"*9,:;"$0$/),3*<:()$"*=0'"*1,230,((,%*=W&433:83)!W:8^+4;A!*4&'9:$7!
"';;+33+'7)!_$74$&6!DEEFG)!
#229AJJ:,-:4&'9$-:4J:7V+&'7;:72J:2$9J95H3JK$7EFZ:4Z9$9:&Z&:,6,8+7^-95H-!
#229AJJ(((-;+75H4886-'&^JB8$32+,J*[2:75:5bB&'54,:&ba:39'73+%+8+26-#2;-!
/&'33;$7)!*8+f$%:2#-!H)/;*(,:;*(%'3;4*I)/)('0*C,6):,3J*;)CC,"*($K):3J*'"C*;7&'"*;,'0(;*
•
=d$3#+7^2'7)!N-"-A!M38$75!B&:33)!DEEQG-!
Examine how
democracies that share common principles and face similar problems can
g+8:;$7)!W:22:-!.e2$2:3!32&+V:!2'!3'8V:!%4&^:'7+7^!5+39'3$8!9&'%8:;!$3!;'&:!($32:!:753!49!+7!
still develop
very different solutions.
5:V:8'9+7^!,'472&+:3)<!L;,&):'0*M*5"/)",,%)"/*1,23*=e$7!_'3:)!"0A!e+8+,'7!`$88:6!h'[+,3!
"'$8+2+'7)!DEEQG)!#229AJJ3V2,-:2'[+,3-'&^J3+2:JB$^:e:&V:&L9$^:7$;:O3V2,Z,#:;7:(3-!
•
AnalyzeM732+242:!H'&!C',$8!e:8Hba:8+$7,:-!.0;:&+,$i3!:[9:&+:7,:!(+2#!&:H+88$%8:!%:V:&$^:!,'72$+7:&3<!
the
reasons supporting and opposing the government’s requirement
=d$3#+7^2'7)!N-"-)!DEEDG)!#229AJJ(((-^&&7-'&^J%:V:&$^:J&:H+88$%8:3J]3&:H+88-#2;8-!
of
manufacturers
to recycle their products.
_'&5$7)!"#&+3-!.B8$32+,!%$^3)<!D7"")"/*(;,*17&E,%34*<"*<&,%):'"*N,0#O=$%(%')(*=DEEFG)!
#229AJJ(((-,#&+3K'&5$7-,';-!
•
Identify>47^:&)!>+,#$:8-!.h#+7I!^8'%$886)!$,2!+&&$2+'7$886A!a:,6,8+7^<!=M75+$7$9'8+3)!M?A!C+%:&26!X475)!
areas
of agreement and disagreement with other students.
M7,-)!DEEFG)!#229AJJ(((-:,'78+%-'&^J8+%&$&6J"'84;73J6DEEFJ>47^:&&:,6,8+7^-#2;8-!
•
/:&;$76A!M732+242:!H'&!*7V+&'7;:72$8!e2&$2:^+:3)!DEEFG)!
Decide, individually
and as a group, whether the government should require
#229AJJ:,-:4&'9$-:4J:7V+&'7;:72J($32:J(:::J95HJH+7$8Z&:9Z'I'9'8-95H-!
manufacturers to recycle their products.
e$75:&)!j742)!:2!$8-!.h#:!9&'54,:&!&:39'73+%+8+26!9&+7,+98:!'H!2#:!d***!5+&:,2+V:<!=1I'9'8)!
d:+33)!j:77:2#!a-!.B8$^4:!'H!98$32+,!,#'I:3!2#:!3:$3)<!.$3*<"/,0,3*9)&,3*=04^432!D)!DEEQG)!
#229AJJ(((-8$2+;:3-,';J7:(3J8',$8J',:$73J8$b;:b',:$7D$4^ED)E)SPSETPR-32'&6-!
•
Reflect .d#$2!+3!$!%'228:!%+88L<!=/8$32'7%4&6)!"hA!"'72$+7:&!a:,6,8+7^!M732+242:)!DEEFG)!
on the value of deliberation when deciding issues in a democracy.
#229AJJ(((-%'228:%+88-'&^J$%'42Z%%J(#$2+3-#2;-!
Question for Deliberation
!"#$$%"&'()*+*,*+'(-."/+01*)"2',(3-*+'("&1+4-0'5"6.."&'()*+*,*+'(-."/+01*)"2',(3-*+'("&1+4-0'"7-*89+-.)"-(3":,;.+4-*+'()"-98"
:9'*84*83";<"4':<9+01*5"='>8?89@">8"1898;<"09-(*"*'"-.."984+:+8(*)"-".+48()8"*'"98:9'3,48"-.."7-*89+-."4'(*-+(83"1898+("A'9"3+)*9+;,*+'("*'"
)*,38(*)@"'*189")41''.")+*8":89)'((8.@"-(3"3+)*9+4*"-37+(+)*9-*'9)5!
Should our democracy require manufacturers to recycle their products?
Materials
•
•
•
•
•
•
Lesson Procedures
Handout 1 – Deliberation Guide
Handout 2 – Deliberation Activities
Reading
Selected Resources
Deliberation Question with Arguments
(optional – use if students have difficulty extracting the arguments or time is limited)
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
© 2008 Constitutional Rights Foundation Chicago. All Constitutional Rights Foundation Chicago materials and
publications are protected by copyright. However, we hereby grant to all recipients a license to reproduce all
material contained herein for distribution to students, other school site personnel, and district administrators.
Updated 2013 by Classroom Law Project.
!
!
!"#$#%&'()*"%"#+",-!"./01#".!
"#$%&'()!*&+,-!./01!2'!32456!7$2+'7$8!98$7!2'!&:,6,8:!,';942:&3)<!!"#$%&'()$"*+,,-*=>$7#$33:2)!
?@A!">B!>:5+$!CC")!DEEFG)!
Recycling – Reading
(((-+7H'&;$2+'7(::I-,';J32'&6J3#'(0&2+,8:-K#2;8L$&2+,8:MNOPQQRESPTT-!
.*8:,2&'7+,!($32:U7:(!5:V:8'9;:723)<!.,/'0*1,234*5"6)%$"&,"('0*1,230,((,%!=W'32'7)!>0A!
X'8:6!Y!C$&57:&!CCB)!09&+8!DEEFG)!
1
The amount of trash that human societies create is alarming. So much of our waste has
#229AJJ(((-H'8:6-,';J94%8+,$2+'73J94%Z5:2$+83-$39[L94%+5ORE\S-!
2 .*4&'9:$7!]7+'7!('&85!8:$5:&!+7!9$9:&!&:,6,8+7^)!2#$7I3!2'!V'8472$&6!,';;+2;:72!'H!9$9:&!
ended up in the ocean that a giant garbage patch exists just 1,000 miles from the U.S. West Coast
9&'H:33+'7$83)<!57%$8,'"*9,:;"$0$/),3*<:()$"*=0'"*1,230,((,%*=W&433:83)!W:8^+4;A!*4&'9:$7!
in
the North Pacific Gyre, a swirling ocean current that traps discarded waste (See Convergence
"';;+33+'7)!_$74$&6!DEEFG)!
#229AJJ:,-:4&'9$-:4J:7V+&'7;:72J:2$9J95H3JK$7EFZ:4Z9$9:&Z&:,6,8+7^-95H-!
4 Zone in Figure 1: NOAA, 2013). Some researchers estimate the size of the garbage patch to be
X&$7I8+7)!B$2-!.*[2:75:5!9&'54,:&!&:39'73+%+8+26A!0!9&+;:&)<!9'-,*!(*>':-?*@AAB*=%$C7:,%*
D,38$"3)E)0)(F*G$%7&*=08:[$75&+$)!`0A!a$6;'75!"';;47+,$2+'73!M7,-)!PTTFG)!
5 roughly
that of Texas, while others estimate the garbage patch to be twice the size of the United
#229AJJ(((-;+75H4886-'&^JB8$32+,J*[2:75:5bB&'54,:&ba:39'73+%+8+26-#2;-!
6 .X&:c4:7286!$3I:5!c4:32+'73!$%'42!&:,6,8+7^!$75!($32:!;$7$^:;:72<!=d$3#+7^2'7)!N-"-A!]-e-!
States (Weiss, 2006; NOAA, 2013). The differing estimates result primarily from shifts in
*7V+&'7;:72$8!B&'2:,2+'7!0^:7,6)!DEEQG)!#229AJJ(((-:9$-^'VJ:9$'3(:&J7'7b
7 prevailing
ocean currents, as well as the measured concentrations of non-biodegradable plastics
#(J;47,98JH$c-#2;-*
3
8 /&'33;$7)!*8+f$%:2#-!H)/;*(,:;*(%'3;4*I)/)('0*C,6):,3J*;)CC,"*($K):3J*'"C*;7&'"*;,'0(;*
and other waste that researchers use in their samples. The patch does not disappear because so
=d$3#+7^2'7)!N-"-A!M38$75!B&:33)!DEEQG-!
9 g+8:;$7)!W:22:-!.e2$2:3!32&+V:!2'!3'8V:!%4&^:'7+7^!5+39'3$8!9&'%8:;!$3!;'&:!($32:!:753!49!+7!
much of our trash contains non-biodegradable plastics. For example, scientists estimate that the
5:V:8'9+7^!,'472&+:3)<!L;,&):'0*M*5"/)",,%)"/*1,23*=e$7!_'3:)!"0A!e+8+,'7!`$88:6!h'[+,3!
10 polyethylene
used to make the 60,000 plastic bags that the U.S. uses every five seconds takes at
"'$8+2+'7)!DEEQG)!#229AJJ3V2,-:2'[+,3-'&^J3+2:JB$^:e:&V:&L9$^:7$;:O3V2,Z,#:;7:(3-!
11
M732+242:!H'&!C',$8!e:8Hba:8+$7,:-!.0;:&+,$i3!:[9:&+:7,:!(+2#!&:H+88$%8:!%:V:&$^:!,'72$+7:&3<!
least 500 years to dissolve. Each year, our plastic waste kills an estimated 2 million seabirds and
=d$3#+7^2'7)!N-"-)!DEEDG)!#229AJJ(((-^&&7-'&^J%:V:&$^:J&:H+88$%8:3J]3&:H+88-#2;8-!
12 _'&5$7)!"#&+3-!.B8$32+,!%$^3)<!D7"")"/*(;,*17&E,%34*<"*<&,%):'"*N,0#O=$%(%')(*=DEEFG)!
100,000 sea turtles, seals, whales, and other marine mammals (Weiss, 2006).
#229AJJ(((-,#&+3K'&5$7-,';-!
13 >47^:&)!>+,#$:8-!.h#+7I!^8'%$886)!$,2!+&&$2+'7$886A!a:,6,8+7^<!=M75+$7$9'8+3)!M?A!C+%:&26!X475)!
Our garbage also includes hazardous chemical compounds – like lead and mercury – that
M7,-)!DEEFG)!#229AJJ(((-:,'78+%-'&^J8+%&$&6J"'84;73J6DEEFJ>47^:&&:,6,8+7^-#2;8-!
can pollute air, soil, and groundwater. This contamination ultimately harms plants and animals,
e$75:&)!j742)!:2!$8-!.h#:!9&'54,:&!&:39'73+%+8+26!9&+7,+98:!'H!2#:!d***!5+&:,2+V:<!=1I'9'8)!
/:&;$76A!M732+242:!H'&!*7V+&'7;:72$8!e2&$2:^+:3)!DEEFG)!
15 including
human beings. Some governments are trying to reduce the waste created by human
#229AJJ:,-:4&'9$-:4J:7V+&'7;:72J($32:J(:::J95HJH+7$8Z&:9Z'I'9'8-95H-!
16 d:+33)!j:77:2#!a-!.B8$^4:!'H!98$32+,!,#'I:3!2#:!3:$3)<!.$3*<"/,0,3*9)&,3*=04^432!D)!DEEQG)!
activities. Reusing materials when manufacturing products is one way to do so.
#229AJJ(((-8$2+;:3-,';J7:(3J8',$8J',:$73J8$b;:b',:$7D$4^ED)E)SPSETPR-32'&6-!
14
.d#$2!+3!$!%'228:!%+88L<!=/8$32'7%4&6)!"hA!"'72$+7:&!a:,6,8+7^!M732+242:)!DEEFG)!
#229AJJ(((-%'228:%+88-'&^J$%'42Z%%J(#$2+3-#2;-!1
17
Extending Manufacturer Responsibility for Recycling:
18
Certain manufacturers have participated in recycling for a long time. In 1947, for
19
example, the U.S. beverage industry put 100% of soft drinks in glass bottles. Consumers paid a
20
deposit for these bottles, and received a refund upon returning them to the store. Bottling plants
21
then washed, refilled, and resold the bottles. However, the widespread availability of non-
22
reusable aluminum cans and plastic bottles in the 1960s-70s transformed the industry.
23
Consumers liked not having to return their beverage containers to the site of purchase, and
24
distributors saved money by not having to pick up or store empty bottles. Additionally, bottlers
25
no longer had to wash and inspect returned bottles. Thus the discarding of beverage containers
26
became more common (Institute for Local Self-Reliance, 2002).
27
The explosion of can and bottle litter concerned environmentalists who saw more and
28
more non-biodegradable beverage containers ending up in landfills or along waterways and
29
roads. They also worried about the pollutants released into the environment during the
30
production phases of manufacturing metal cans and plastic bottles. Governments, too, began
31
worrying about the wastefulness of beverage manufacturing. In 1971, for instance, Oregon
32
became the first U.S. state to impose a “bottle bill” – a statute that requires deposit payments for
33
both purchase and return of recyclable cans and bottles (Or. Rev. Stat. § 459A.700-740 (2011)).
34
Additionally, when an aluminum can manufacturer built a plant in Sweden in the 1980s, the
35
Swedish government threatened to ban the use of aluminum beverage containers unless the
36
industry managed to reclaim 75% of its products. The industry met and surpassed this goal by
37
using a deposit/refund system that resembled the original refillable bottle model previously
38
described, reaching a recycling rate of 95% in 1995 (Franklin, 1997).
2
39
Sweden’s policy shows how governments can hold manufacturers accountable for the
40
waste they create, not only during the production process – which includes the mining of bauxite,
41
the rock from which aluminum comes – but also after the product is thrown away. The goal of
42
such policies is to give manufacturers an incentive to think about the well being of the
43
environment when they design and select materials for their products. The central idea is that if
44
manufacturers have to pay for the by-products resulting from those processes, they will make
45
less waste and pollution.
46
Alternatives and Opposition to Extended Manufacturer Responsibility:
47
Some manufacturers, like the beverage industry, have volunteered to use recovered
48
materials when making goods because they can save money by doing so. Other manufacturers
49
have made a voluntary commitment to recycling because they want to prevent waste and/or use
50
waste as a resource. For example, European paper companies teamed up with paper recyclers to
51
create the European Declaration on Paper Recycling (EPDR) in 2000. By 2005, the EPDR had
52
successfully recovered and reused 56% of the paper and board used in Europe. To maintain
53
momentum, the EPDR subsequently formed a council to monitor this voluntary initiative and set
54
a goal of raising the recycling rate to 66% by 2010. The EPDR surpassed the goal by 3
55
percentage points, and strives toward the new 2015 mark of 70% (EPDR Report, 2011).
56
Other industries worry that the cost of using recycled goods will put them out of business.
57
Computer companies, for example, must hire workers to take apart used machines. This is a
58
time-consuming task; to remove a single lithium battery from some older computer models can
59
require taking out 30 different screws (Chabrow, 2005)! For these producers, to recover and
60
reuse materials is inefficient and expensive. Therefore, some argue that it is unfair to require that
61
manufacturers reclaim their materials without providing them financial incentives to do so.
3
62
Some opponents to increasing manufacturer responsibility for electronic waste, or “e-
63
waste,” suggest shifting the recycling burden to consumers instead. One way it could be
64
accomplished is through an “advanced recovery fee system.” In California, for example,
65
whenever consumers buy televisions, laptops, or computer monitors, they pay a $3 - $5 fee
66
depending primarily on the size of the monitor. When they want to dispose of the products after
67
use, consumers take these electronics products to the recycling centers which process them using
68
the funds generated by the advanced recovery fees. Such policies, however, cost retailers that
69
sell the products a lot of money. Not only do these retailers have to program their cash registers
70
to charge the advanced recovery fee when a customer buys an electronic product; they also have
71
to send the collected fees to the appropriate government agency (California Board of
72
Equalization, 2013; CalRecycle, 2013).
73
Those who believe that consumers should not bear the cost of recycling products oppose
74
advanced recovery fee systems. Indeed, some argue that when recycling waste costs more
75
energy than using new or “virgin” resources, recycling policies actually do more environmental
76
harm than good. Recycling green-colored glass, for example costs more money and can be more
77
dangerous to the environment (due to contaminants released during the melting of the glass) than
78
making glass from sand. According to political scientist Michael Munger, “Given the resource
79
costs of recycling, treating green glass as garbage is the environmentally responsible thing to do
80
(Munger, 2007).”
81
Supporters of Mandatory Extended Manufacturer Responsibility:
82
In 2002, the European Union (EU) passed the Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment
83
(WEEE) Law, which requires manufacturers to take back electronic products at the end of their
84
useful life. Although plenty of people oppose this policy, its supporters insist that making the
4
85
polluter pay is the best way to influence how products are created in the first place. Some
86
supporters argue that computer manufacturers may be able to make a profit by reclaiming their
87
products, which contain valuable metals like gold, silver, and copper. Additionally, all countries
88
do not insist that manufacturers comply with WEEE in a single way. Instead, they allow
89
manufacturers to determine the best way to meet WEEE’s requirements. In some member states
90
of the European Union, so long as manufacturers collect and recycle the annual quota of e-waste
91
set by their respective governments, they follow the law (European Union, 2012).
92
In 2003, the EU passed another law called the Reduction of the Use of Hazardous
93
Substances (RoHS). This law sets limit on the amount of toxic materials that can be used in the
94
making of new electronic equipment. RoHS supporters argue that eliminating materials like
95
lead, mercury, and cadmium from the manufacturing process is better for the environment. It
96
also makes the future recycling of products safer and, therefore, more likely. What is more, the
97
RoHS promises to reduce e-waste on a global scale. If Chinese, Japanese, and U.S. high-tech
98
companies want to continue selling their products to European countries, they too must comply
99
with RoHS. Because it is not practicable or profitable for these manufacturers to make some
100
electronics that meet RoHS and others that do not, “EU design requirements will become global
101
requirements” (Isaacs in Grossman, 2006). Additional legislation in 2008 known as the Waste
102
Framework Directive (WFD - Directive 2008/98/EC) set forth clearer divisions between waste
103
and secondary raw materials, and introduced further expands “the extended producer
104
responsibility” (European Union, 2012).
105
In the U.S., various cities and states have begun implementing recycling laws similar to
106
those in Europe, largely because no federal policy exists. Those supporting a national recycling
107
policy argue that local laws often conflict with each other, making it difficult for manufacturers
5
108
to comply with all of them. “A manufacturer in one state, for example, may have an advance
109
recovery fee placed on it products, whereas in another state, the same manufacturer may have to
110
take back its products and pay for recycling” (Stevenson in Chabrow, 2005). Not having a
111
standardized approach to recycling means the U.S. has a hard time monitoring what happens to
112
e-waste after it is collected.
113
Indeed, the U.S. Government Accountability Offices (GAO) estimates that “50 - 80% of
114
the devices collected for recycling in the U.S. end up in Asia or Africa.” (Hileman, 2006) Once
115
there, e-waste may be scattered along rivers and roads or openly burned in large piles, as it is in
116
Nigeria. Given that the inappropriate disposal or taking apart of electronic waste is dangerous to
117
workers and the environment, this unmonitored exporting of electronic waste is unacceptable. In
118
response to the GAO’s report, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has spearheaded the
119
United States government's National Strategy for Electronics Stewardship, which details the
120
federal government’s plan to enhance the management of electronics throughout the product
121
lifecycle (EPA, 2013).
122
The U.S. is not alone in sending e-waste to China, India, Pakistan, Senegal, Kenya, and
123
Tanzania. Although it is illegal or European companies to ship unusable electronic devices to
124
developing countries, governmental authorities often do not test products to see if they can be
125
recycled before they are shipped off. Some people argue that the only practical solution to this
126
problem is to require manufacturers to reduce or eliminate toxic materials from electronic
127
products, which RoHS aims to do.
128
129
Regardless of whether or not people support or oppose laws requiring manufacturers to
take responsibility for the waste they create, “there is an almost universal belief among
6
130
producers, government officials, consumers, and NGOs (non-governmental organizations) that e-
131
waste should not end up in landfills or on ships bound for Asia or Africa” (Hileman, 2006).
(Convergence Zone, Figure 1 - NOAA)
7
!
!
!"#$#%&'()*"%"#+",-!"./01#".!
Recycling – Selected Resources
"#$%&'()!*&+,-!./01!2'!32456!7$2+'7$8!98$7!2'!&:,6,8:!,';942:&3)<!!"#$%&'()$"*+,,-*=>$7#$33:2)!
Chabrow,
Eric. “GAO to study national plan to recycle computers,” Information Week
?@A!">B!>:5+$!CC")!DEEFG)!
(Manhasset,
NY: CMP Media, LLC, 2007), www.informationweek.com/story/show
(((-+7H'&;$2+'7(::I-,';J32'&6J3#'(0&2+,8:-K#2;8L$&2+,8:MNOPQQRESPTT-!
Article.jhtml?articleID=166403199 (Last visited on June 19, 2013).
.*8:,2&'7+,!($32:U7:(!5:V:8'9;:723)<!.,/'0*1,234*5"6)%$"&,"('0*1,230,((,%!=W'32'7)!>0A!
X'8:6!Y!C$&57:&!CCB)!09&+8!DEEFG)!
“De-Mystifying the ‘Great Pacific Garbage Patch,’” (Washington, D.C.: U.S. National Oceanic
#229AJJ(((-H'8:6-,';J94%8+,$2+'73J94%Z5:2$+83-$39[L94%+5ORE\S-!
and Atmospheric Administration, 2012) http://marinedebris.noaa.gov/info/patch.html (Last
.*4&'9:$7!]7+'7!('&85!8:$5:&!+7!9$9:&!&:,6,8+7^)!2#$7I3!2'!V'8472$&6!,';;+2;:72!'H!9$9:&!
visited on June 19, 2013).
9&'H:33+'7$83)<!57%$8,'"*9,:;"$0$/),3*<:()$"*=0'"*1,230,((,%*=W&433:83)!W:8^+4;A!*4&'9:$7!
"';;+33+'7)!_$74$&6!DEEFG)!
“Electronic
product management,” (Sacramento, CA: California Department of Resource
Recycling and Recovery Program (CalRecycle), 2013), http://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/
#229AJJ:,-:4&'9$-:4J:7V+&'7;:72J:2$9J95H3JK$7EFZ:4Z9$9:&Z&:,6,8+7^-95H-!
Electronics/ (Last visited on June 19, 2013).
X&$7I8+7)!B$2-!.*[2:75:5!9&'54,:&!&:39'73+%+8+26A!0!9&+;:&)<!9'-,*!(*>':-?*@AAB*=%$C7:,%*
D,38$"3)E)0)(F*G$%7&*=08:[$75&+$)!`0A!a$6;'75!"';;47+,$2+'73!M7,-)!PTTFG)!
“EU
Waste Legislation,” (Brussels, Belgium: European Union Commission on the Environment,
#229AJJ(((-;+75H4886-'&^JB8$32+,J*[2:75:5bB&'54,:&ba:39'73+%+8+26-#2;-!
Waste Department, 2013), http://ec.europa.eu/environment/waste/legislation/index.htm (Last
.X&:c4:7286!$3I:5!c4:32+'73!$%'42!&:,6,8+7^!$75!($32:!;$7$^:;:72<!=d$3#+7^2'7)!N-"-A!]-e-!
visited on June 19, 2013).
*7V+&'7;:72$8!B&'2:,2+'7!0^:7,6)!DEEQG)!#229AJJ(((-:9$-^'VJ:9$'3(:&J7'7b
#(J;47,98JH$c-#2;-*
Franklin,
Pat. “Extended producer responsibility: A primer,” Take It Back! 1997 Producer
Responsibility Forum (Alexandria, VA: Raymond Communications Inc., 1997),
/&'33;$7)!*8+f$%:2#-!H)/;*(,:;*(%'3;4*I)/)('0*C,6):,3J*;)CC,"*($K):3J*'"C*;7&'"*;,'0(;*
http://www.mindfully.org/Plastic/Extended-Producer-Responsibility.htm (Last visited on
=d$3#+7^2'7)!N-"-A!M38$75!B&:33)!DEEQG-!
June 19, 2013).
g+8:;$7)!W:22:-!.e2$2:3!32&+V:!2'!3'8V:!%4&^:'7+7^!5+39'3$8!9&'%8:;!$3!;'&:!($32:!:753!49!+7!
5:V:8'9+7^!,'472&+:3)<!L;,&):'0*M*5"/)",,%)"/*1,23*=e$7!_'3:)!"0A!e+8+,'7!`$88:6!h'[+,3!
Grossman,
Elizabeth. High tech trash: Digital devices, hidden toxics, and human health
"'$8+2+'7)!DEEQG)!#229AJJ3V2,-:2'[+,3-'&^J3+2:JB$^:e:&V:&L9$^:7$;:O3V2,Z,#:;7:(3-!
(Washington, D.C.: Island Press, 2006)
M732+242:!H'&!C',$8!e:8Hba:8+$7,:-!.0;:&+,$i3!:[9:&+:7,:!(+2#!&:H+88$%8:!%:V:&$^:!,'72$+7:&3<!
Hileman,
Bette. “States strive to solve burgeoning disposal problem as more waste ends up in
=d$3#+7^2'7)!N-"-)!DEEDG)!#229AJJ(((-^&&7-'&^J%:V:&$^:J&:H+88$%8:3J]3&:H+88-#2;8-!
developing countries,” Chemical & Engineering News (San Jose, CA: Silicon Valley Toxics
_'&5$7)!"#&+3-!.B8$32+,!%$^3)<!D7"")"/*(;,*17&E,%34*<"*<&,%):'"*N,0#O=$%(%')(*=DEEFG)!
Coalition, 2006), http://svtc.etoxics.org/site/PageServer?pagename=svtc_chemnews (Last
#229AJJ(((-,#&+3K'&5$7-,';-!
visited on June 19, 2013).
>47^:&)!>+,#$:8-!.h#+7I!^8'%$886)!$,2!+&&$2+'7$886A!a:,6,8+7^<!=M75+$7$9'8+3)!M?A!C+%:&26!X475)!
“Important
Notice: Electronic Waste Recycling Fee Rate Decrease,” (Sacramento, CA:
M7,-)!DEEFG)!#229AJJ(((-:,'78+%-'&^J8+%&$&6J"'84;73J6DEEFJ>47^:&&:,6,8+7^-#2;8-!
California State Board of Equalization, 2013), http://www.boe.ca.gov/sptaxprog/ e$75:&)!j742)!:2!$8-!.h#:!9&'54,:&!&:39'73+%+8+26!9&+7,+98:!'H!2#:!d***!5+&:,2+V:<!=1I'9'8)!
page=page-1&page1=page-5 (Last visited on June 19, 2013).
/:&;$76A!M732+242:!H'&!*7V+&'7;:72$8!e2&$2:^+:3)!DEEFG)!
#229AJJ:,-:4&'9$-:4J:7V+&'7;:72J($32:J(:::J95HJH+7$8Z&:9Z'I'9'8-95H-!
Institute for Local Self-Reliance. “America’s experience with refillable beverage containers,”
d:+33)!j:77:2#!a-!.B8$^4:!'H!98$32+,!,#'I:3!2#:!3:$3)<!.$3*<"/,0,3*9)&,3*=04^432!D)!DEEQG)!
(Washington, D.C., 2002), http://refillables.grrn.org/content/americas-experience-refillable#229AJJ(((-8$2+;:3-,';J7:(3J8',$8J',:$73J8$b;:b',:$7D$4^ED)E)SPSETPR-32'&6-!
beverage-containers (Last visited on June 19, 2013).
.d#$2!+3!$!%'228:!%+88L<!=/8$32'7%4&6)!"hA!"'72$+7:&!a:,6,8+7^!M732+242:)!DEEFG)!
#229AJJ(((-%'228:%+88-'&^J$%'42Z%%J(#$2+3-#2;-!8
Munger, Michael. “Think globally, act irrationally: Recycling,” (Indianapolis, IN: Liberty Fund,
Inc., 2007), http://www.econlib.org/library/Columns/y2007/Mungerrecycling.html (Last
visited on June 19, 2013).
Oregon Revised Statutes § 459A.700-740 (2011), “Reuse and Recycling”:
http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/459A.html (Last visited June 24, 2013)
“Paper Recycling: 2011-2015 Report,” (Brussels, Belgium; European Union: European
Declaration on Paper Recycling (EPDR), 2011), http://www.paperforrecycling.eu/uploads/
Modules/Publications/Declaration-digital_CORR.pdf (Last visited on June 19, 2013).
“Wastes,” (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2013),
http://www.epa.gov/epawaste/index.htm (Last visited on June 19, 2013).
Weiss, Kenneth R. “Plague of plastic chokes the seas,” Los Angeles Times (August 2, 2006),
http://www.latimes.com/news/la-me-ocean2aug02,0,4917201.story (Last visited on June 19,
2013).
9
!
!
!"#$#%&'()*"%"#+",-!"./01#".!
Recycling – Deliberation Questions with Arguments
"#$%&'()!*&+,-!./01!2'!32456!7$2+'7$8!98$7!2'!&:,6,8:!,';942:&3)<!!"#$%&'()$"*+,,-*=>$7#$33:2)!
?@A!">B!>:5+$!CC")!DEEFG)!
(((-+7H'&;$2+'7(::I-,';J32'&6J3#'(0&2+,8:-K#2;8L$&2+,8:MNOPQQRESPTT-!
Deliberation Question
Should our
.*8:,2&'7+,!($32:U7:(!5:V:8'9;:723)<!.,/'0*1,234*5"6)%$"&,"('0*1,230,((,%!=W'32'7)!>0A!
X'8:6!Y!C$&57:&!CCB)!09&+8!DEEFG)!
democracy
require manufacturers to recycle their products?
#229AJJ(((-H'8:6-,';J94%8+,$2+'73J94%Z5:2$+83-$39[L94%+5ORE\S-!
.*4&'9:$7!]7+'7!('&85!8:$5:&!+7!9$9:&!&:,6,8+7^)!2#$7I3!2'!V'8472$&6!,';;+2;:72!'H!9$9:&!
9&'H:33+'7$83)<!57%$8,'"*9,:;"$0$/),3*<:()$"*=0'"*1,230,((,%*=W&433:83)!W:8^+4;A!*4&'9:$7!
YES – Arguments
to support the Deliberation Question
"';;+33+'7)!_$74$&6!DEEFG)!
#229AJJ:,-:4&'9$-:4J:7V+&'7;:72J:2$9J95H3JK$7EFZ:4Z9$9:&Z&:,6,8+7^-95H-!
1.
An effectiveX&$7I8+7)!B$2-!.*[2:75:5!9&'54,:&!&:39'73+%+8+26A!0!9&+;:&)<!9'-,*!(*>':-?*@AAB*=%$C7:,%*
way
to reduce waste is to make the polluter pay. If manufacturers have to be
D,38$"3)E)0)(F*G$%7&*=08:[$75&+$)!`0A!a$6;'75!"';;47+,$2+'73!M7,-)!PTTFG)!
responsible for#229AJJ(((-;+75H4886-'&^JB8$32+,J*[2:75:5bB&'54,:&ba:39'73+%+8+26-#2;-!
their products after they are thrown away, they will be more likely to include
.X&:c4:7286!$3I:5!c4:32+'73!$%'42!&:,6,8+7^!$75!($32:!;$7$^:;:72<!=d$3#+7^2'7)!N-"-A!]-e-!
environmental
concerns in their production plans.
*7V+&'7;:72$8!B&'2:,2+'7!0^:7,6)!DEEQG)!#229AJJ(((-:9$-^'VJ:9$'3(:&J7'7b
#(J;47,98JH$c-#2;-*
/&'33;$7)!*8+f$%:2#-!H)/;*(,:;*(%'3;4*I)/)('0*C,6):,3J*;)CC,"*($K):3J*'"C*;7&'"*;,'0(;*
2. To reduce waste
and pollution we should prevent its production in the first place. Advanced
=d$3#+7^2'7)!N-"-A!M38$75!B&:33)!DEEQG-!
recovery fee systems, which require consumers to pay for recycling costs, and other
alternativesg+8:;$7)!W:22:-!.e2$2:3!32&+V:!2'!3'8V:!%4&^:'7+7^!5+39'3$8!9&'%8:;!$3!;'&:!($32:!:753!49!+7!
to5:V:8'9+7^!,'472&+:3)<!L;,&):'0*M*5"/)",,%)"/*1,23*=e$7!_'3:)!"0A!e+8+,'7!`$88:6!h'[+,3!
extended manufacturer responsibility policies will not force manufacturers to
"'$8+2+'7)!DEEQG)!#229AJJ3V2,-:2'[+,3-'&^J3+2:JB$^:e:&V:&L9$^:7$;:O3V2,Z,#:;7:(3-!
change their product designs or the raw materials they use to create products.
M732+242:!H'&!C',$8!e:8Hba:8+$7,:-!.0;:&+,$i3!:[9:&+:7,:!(+2#!&:H+88$%8:!%:V:&$^:!,'72$+7:&3<!
=d$3#+7^2'7)!N-"-)!DEEDG)!#229AJJ(((-^&&7-'&^J%:V:&$^:J&:H+88$%8:3J]3&:H+88-#2;8-!
3. Electronic waste
is becoming a serious problem. Not only is there a lot of it, but it also
_'&5$7)!"#&+3-!.B8$32+,!%$^3)<!D7"")"/*(;,*17&E,%34*<"*<&,%):'"*N,0#O=$%(%')(*=DEEFG)!
#229AJJ(((-,#&+3K'&5$7-,';-!
contains hazardous waste. Moreover, several countries are sending their e-waste to
developing >47^:&)!>+,#$:8-!.h#+7I!^8'%$886)!$,2!+&&$2+'7$886A!a:,6,8+7^<!=M75+$7$9'8+3)!M?A!C+%:&26!X475)!
countries,
which do not have the resources to recycle it safely. Requiring
M7,-)!DEEFG)!#229AJJ(((-:,'78+%-'&^J8+%&$&6J"'84;73J6DEEFJ>47^:&&:,6,8+7^-#2;8-!
manufacturers
to
reclaim
their products and make them less hazardous is the best way to deal
e$75:&)!j742)!:2!$8-!.h#:!9&'54,:&!&:39'73+%+8+26!9&+7,+98:!'H!2#:!d***!5+&:,2+V:<!=1I'9'8)!
with e-waste. /:&;$76A!M732+242:!H'&!*7V+&'7;:72$8!e2&$2:^+:3)!DEEFG)!
#229AJJ:,-:4&'9$-:4J:7V+&'7;:72J($32:J(:::J95HJH+7$8Z&:9Z'I'9'8-95H-!
4.
d:+33)!j:77:2#!a-!.B8$^4:!'H!98$32+,!,#'I:3!2#:!3:$3)<!.$3*<"/,0,3*9)&,3*=04^432!D)!DEEQG)!
Manufacturers#229AJJ(((-8$2+;:3-,';J7:(3J8',$8J',:$73J8$b;:b',:$7D$4^ED)E)SPSETPR-32'&6-!
can save money and even profit from recycling their products.
Many
.d#$2!+3!$!%'228:!%+88L<!=/8$32'7%4&6)!"hA!"'72$+7:&!a:,6,8+7^!M732+242:)!DEEFG)!
computers that
are currently sitting in landfills contain precious metals, like gold, silver, and
#229AJJ(((-%'228:%+88-'&^J$%'42Z%%J(#$2+3-#2;-!
copper. Computer
manufacturers could recover these materials when recycling their
products.
!"#$$%"&'()*+*,*+'(-."/+01*)"2',(3-*+'("&1+4-0'5"6.."&'()*+*,*+'(-."/+01*)"2',(3-*+'("&1+4-0'"7-*89+-.)"-(3":,;.+4-*+'()"-98"
:9'*84*83";<"4':<9+01*5"='>8?89@">8"1898;<"09-(*"*'"-.."984+:+8(*)"-".+48()8"*'"98:9'3,48"-.."7-*89+-."4'(*-+(83"1898+("A'9"3+)*9+;,*+'("*'"
)*,38(*)@"'*189")41''.")+*8":89)'((8.@"-(3"3+)*9+4*"-37+(+)*9-*'9)5!
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
© 2008 Constitutional Rights Foundation Chicago. All Constitutional Rights Foundation Chicago materials and
publications are protected by copyright. However, we hereby grant to all recipients a license to reproduce all
material contained herein for distribution to students, other school site personnel, and district administrators.
Updated 2013 by Classroom Law Project.
!
!
!"#$#%&'()*"%"#+",-!"./01#".!
Recycling – Deliberation Questions with Arguments
"#$%&'()!*&+,-!./01!2'!32456!7$2+'7$8!98$7!2'!&:,6,8:!,';942:&3)<!!"#$%&'()$"*+,,-*=>$7#$33:2)!
?@A!">B!>:5+$!CC")!DEEFG)!
(((-+7H'&;$2+'7(::I-,';J32'&6J3#'(0&2+,8:-K#2;8L$&2+,8:MNOPQQRESPTT-!
Deliberation Question
Should our
.*8:,2&'7+,!($32:U7:(!5:V:8'9;:723)<!.,/'0*1,234*5"6)%$"&,"('0*1,230,((,%!=W'32'7)!>0A!
X'8:6!Y!C$&57:&!CCB)!09&+8!DEEFG)!
democracy
require manufacturers to recycle their products?
#229AJJ(((-H'8:6-,';J94%8+,$2+'73J94%Z5:2$+83-$39[L94%+5ORE\S-!
.*4&'9:$7!]7+'7!('&85!8:$5:&!+7!9$9:&!&:,6,8+7^)!2#$7I3!2'!V'8472$&6!,';;+2;:72!'H!9$9:&!
9&'H:33+'7$83)<!57%$8,'"*9,:;"$0$/),3*<:()$"*=0'"*1,230,((,%*=W&433:83)!W:8^+4;A!*4&'9:$7!
NO – Arguments
to Oppose the Deliberation Question
"';;+33+'7)!_$74$&6!DEEFG)!
#229AJJ:,-:4&'9$-:4J:7V+&'7;:72J:2$9J95H3JK$7EFZ:4Z9$9:&Z&:,6,8+7^-95H-!
1.
X&$7I8+7)!B$2-!.*[2:75:5!9&'54,:&!&:39'73+%+8+26A!0!9&+;:&)<!9'-,*!(*>':-?*@AAB*=%$C7:,%*
No one likes
trash.
If recycling their products provides more benefits than costs, businesses
D,38$"3)E)0)(F*G$%7&*=08:[$75&+$)!`0A!a$6;'75!"';;47+,$2+'73!M7,-)!PTTFG)!
will do so voluntarily,
as the European paper industry has done. Forcing companies to
#229AJJ(((-;+75H4886-'&^JB8$32+,J*[2:75:5bB&'54,:&ba:39'73+%+8+26-#2;-!
.X&:c4:7286!$3I:5!c4:32+'73!$%'42!&:,6,8+7^!$75!($32:!;$7$^:;:72<!=d$3#+7^2'7)!N-"-A!]-e-!
recycle when
it is not cost-effective to do so does not make any sense. It just puts some
manufacturers*7V+&'7;:72$8!B&'2:,2+'7!0^:7,6)!DEEQG)!#229AJJ(((-:9$-^'VJ:9$'3(:&J7'7b
out of business.
#(J;47,98JH$c-#2;-*
/&'33;$7)!*8+f$%:2#-!H)/;*(,:;*(%'3;4*I)/)('0*C,6):,3J*;)CC,"*($K):3J*'"C*;7&'"*;,'0(;*
=d$3#+7^2'7)!N-"-A!M38$75!B&:33)!DEEQG-!
2. If governments want to reduce waste, they should give manufacturers financial incentives to
recycle theirg+8:;$7)!W:22:-!.e2$2:3!32&+V:!2'!3'8V:!%4&^:'7+7^!5+39'3$8!9&'%8:;!$3!;'&:!($32:!:753!49!+7!
products,
not force them to do so. When recycling products is inefficient and
5:V:8'9+7^!,'472&+:3)<!L;,&):'0*M*5"/)",,%)"/*1,23*=e$7!_'3:)!"0A!e+8+,'7!`$88:6!h'[+,3!
"'$8+2+'7)!DEEQG)!#229AJJ3V2,-:2'[+,3-'&^J3+2:JB$^:e:&V:&L9$^:7$;:O3V2,Z,#:;7:(3-!
expensive, as is the case in the computer industry, manufacturers need extra resources to
M732+242:!H'&!C',$8!e:8Hba:8+$7,:-!.0;:&+,$i3!:[9:&+:7,:!(+2#!&:H+88$%8:!%:V:&$^:!,'72$+7:&3<!
redesign their
products and pay for new equipment.
=d$3#+7^2'7)!N-"-)!DEEDG)!#229AJJ(((-^&&7-'&^J%:V:&$^:J&:H+88$%8:3J]3&:H+88-#2;8-!
_'&5$7)!"#&+3-!.B8$32+,!%$^3)<!D7"")"/*(;,*17&E,%34*<"*<&,%):'"*N,0#O=$%(%')(*=DEEFG)!
#229AJJ(((-,#&+3K'&5$7-,';-!
burden for
recycling should not fall solely on the manufacturers’
3. The
shoulders. If people
want to use>47^:&)!>+,#$:8-!.h#+7I!^8'%$886)!$,2!+&&$2+'7$886A!a:,6,8+7^<!=M75+$7$9'8+3)!M?A!C+%:&26!X475)!
products
that
create
waste
and
pollution,
they
should
pay
for
at least part of these
M7,-)!DEEFG)!#229AJJ(((-:,'78+%-'&^J8+%&$&6J"'84;73J6DEEFJ>47^:&&:,6,8+7^-#2;8-!
by-products.
Advanced
recovery
fee
systems,
which
require
consumers
to
pay a cash fee
e$75:&)!j742)!:2!$8-!.h#:!9&'54,:&!&:39'73+%+8+26!9&+7,+98:!'H!2#:!d***!5+&:,2+V:<!=1I'9'8)!
when they buy/:&;$76A!M732+242:!H'&!*7V+&'7;:72$8!e2&$2:^+:3)!DEEFG)!
a product, force consumers to bear some responsibility for human-created
#229AJJ:,-:4&'9$-:4J:7V+&'7;:72J($32:J(:::J95HJH+7$8Z&:9Z'I'9'8-95H-!
waste.
d:+33)!j:77:2#!a-!.B8$^4:!'H!98$32+,!,#'I:3!2#:!3:$3)<!.$3*<"/,0,3*9)&,3*=04^432!D)!DEEQG)!
#229AJJ(((-8$2+;:3-,';J7:(3J8',$8J',:$73J8$b;:b',:$7D$4^ED)E)SPSETPR-32'&6-!
4. Sometimes .d#$2!+3!$!%'228:!%+88L<!=/8$32'7%4&6)!"hA!"'72$+7:&!a:,6,8+7^!M732+242:)!DEEFG)!
recycling causes more environmental harm than good. When recycling a product
#229AJJ(((-%'228:%+88-'&^J$%'42Z%%J(#$2+3-#2;-!
costs more money
or emits more pollution than making the product from raw materials,
requiring manufacturers to recycle it is not economically or environmentally sound.
!"#$$%"&'()*+*,*+'(-."/+01*)"2',(3-*+'("&1+4-0'5"6.."&'()*+*,*+'(-."/+01*)"2',(3-*+'("&1+4-0'"7-*89+-.)"-(3":,;.+4-*+'()"-98"
:9'*84*83";<"4':<9+01*5"='>8?89@">8"1898;<"09-(*"*'"-.."984+:+8(*)"-".+48()8"*'"98:9'3,48"-.."7-*89+-."4'(*-+(83"1898+("A'9"3+)*9+;,*+'("*'"
)*,38(*)@"'*189")41''.")+*8":89)'((8.@"-(3"3+)*9+4*"-37+(+)*9-*'9)5!
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
© 2008 Constitutional Rights Foundation Chicago. All Constitutional Rights Foundation Chicago materials and
publications are protected by copyright. However, we hereby grant to all recipients a license to reproduce all
material contained herein for distribution to students, other school site personnel, and district administrators.
Updated 2013 by Classroom Law Project.