We’ve all heard the age-old saying “Reduce, reuse, recycle,” a central element of discussions about sustainability. The idea behind this phrase is that in order to lead a sustainable lifestyle, one must minimize waste in one of three ways–reducing consumption, reusing materials whenever possible, and recycling waste that cannot be reused. “Reduce” comes first in the phrase because it precedes the other two in importance–and while all three are important in their own rights, reducing is the foundation of true sustainability.
Reusing is second in the trinity because it is often a sensible choice; opting for the reusable option rather than the single-use alternative is usually more sustainable and cost-effective. However, certain “reusable” products are harmful to the environment and our bodies alike.
Anything plastic, regardless of how sturdy and “reusable” it may be, has the potential to release microplastics, which can cause a number of harmful side effects. Among them are fertility and development issues, diseases and cancer, disrupted photosynthesis, and more–and the list will likely grow longer. Plastic food containers pose a particular threat due to their direct contact with things we consume (especially when heated). Reusable items made of glass, metal, or wood tend to be safer in that regard, but plastic still reigns supreme: it is cheaper to produce, more lightweight, and more universal than other alternatives. Also, of course, reusing only works if the item is actually reused, which sometimes isn’t possible or practical.
Recycling is often seen as an environmental panacea, but it’s actually the least efficient of the three. First and foremost, it is a labor-intensive process that produces results usually of lesser quality than their source materials. This process can also be bad for the environment in its own right because it consumes and releases pollutants for energy and releases microplastics. Recyclables are also prone to contamination; in fact, an estimated 20-70% of plastic intended for recycling overseas is actually unusable and discarded, leading to more production, and in turn, more waste.
Reduction, on the other hand, is the simplest and most effective strategy. It might inconvenience you sometimes, but it has direct and indirect benefits for the environment. Making fewer purchases saves you money and space and reduces waste released into the community. Most importantly, it reduces the demand for (and as such, execution of) production and redirects the market toward sustainable options.
The purpose of this article is not to campaign against reusable products or recycling. Each member of the trinity has its own benefits. Reusable shopping bags, for example, cut down on single-use plastic and can reduce costs for businesses (not to mention the fact that reusable bags are *way* cuter). Plus, recycling might not work well for plastics, but it is much more compatible with materials like steel.
So remember: reduce, reuse, recycle–but most importantly, reduce!