[…]the widespread use of the symbol on products that are not routinely accepted for recycling is helping stoke “consumer confusion about what is recyclable and/or compostable” and is leading to “deceptive or misleading” claims on packaging, according to the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
At issue is the use of the logo along with the “resin number” of different types of plastics. Resin one and two plastics, such as bottles and jugs, are the most easily recycled products, but those marked with numbers three to seven, categories that include plastic bags, styrofoam and plastic trays, are typically not recycled and are instead sent to landfills or burned.
The placement of the chasing arrows symbol upon these hard-to-recycle single-use plastics “does not accurately represent recyclability as many plastics (especially 3-7) do not have end markets, and are not financially viable to recycle,” the EPA said in its comments.
Part of the problem with plastic is that it is so damn good at what we use it for. If you are looking for, say, a lightweight, shatterproof, reasonably non-toxic material to affordably mass-produce a toy out of. plastic is there with few equals. If you need a thin, flexible, airtight membrane to wrap or seal something in, plastic is basically your only option. If you need an unbreakable, corrosion-resistant container for some chemical process, chances are your only choice is plastic.
I would love to see reusable, recyclable, and biodegradable alternatives push plastic out of its most commonplace uses, but for a lot of applications I think the only really viable alternatives are going to be biodegradable bioplastics. A lot of people have had bad experiences with the starch-based alternatives (those are the spoons that dissolve in your coffee before you can stir it, for example) but there are options like PHA coming into the market now that both last for a useful amount of time and biodegrade on a meaningful timescale.