How about the known (but not very well known) fact that post-consumer waste paper recycling is actually worse for the environment than new paper? The reason is that huge amounts of very powerful chemicals have to be used to get the ink off, by the way. And such chemicals will get into the water supply. The process also requires huge amounts of energy.

I can see a benefit to recycling waste paper that’s never been used, which means mostly trimmings from production of standardised paper sizes. I don’t believe in recycling newspaper. Perhaps one could use paper with ink on it, recycled, for such things as tissues and toilet paper – but what would it look like, and would anyone buy it?

It ought not to be beyond the wit of engineers to arrange for all dry waste to be incinerated – probably at a high temperature to get rid of the chlorinated plastics in it – and produce useful power that way. Metallic waste could be shredded and separated by such high-tech means as a big magnet. Of course, that doesn’t allow bureaucrats to muck ordinary people about, so that isn’t going to happen.

There was a story in the national Press in the UK yesterday, about a woman who has been ordered by the local council to convert her small front garden (which she has spent 20 years getting the way she wants it) into hard standing on which to place three wheelie-bins imposed on her by the council. Said woman lives on her own, and produces maybe one bin-liner full of rubbish per week. If she doesn’t do what she is told she could be heavily fined and, if the fine is not paid, go to jail.

I believe in some environmental causes; but domestic recycling, the way it’s being done in the UK, is a particularly nasty joke.