In response to What is your solution?
most material that is recyclable already comes with incentives (e.g. deposit refund schemes) for households to collect and deliver recyclables. In some cases the incentives might not be strong enough - e.g. the amount received per deposited PET bottle is too small to incentivise households. This proposed solution expects that these households pay (at least $120 per year)? How does it overcome the existing disincentive? Can enough of the rural households that do not have access to collection facilities afford and sustain this?
Lewis, in every community there are individuals who care about recycling and who are willing to pay. In fact, this is how programs work in most existing work throughout the US. Enough people care that it can sustain business while supporting the circular economy.
In response to What is the problem you are solving?
while collection is an issue, the bigger problem is available infrastructure for actual recycling. Thus collection where there is no appropriate infrastructure has little benefits.
Very true, actually having a place to take materials is huge! Fortunately in the current economy there are plenty options both nationally and internationally for recycling! This even including hard to recycle materials.
In response to What is the problem you are solving?
Do these families earn from their recycling?
They don't. Given the current state of recycling markets participants pay $10 a month to subscribe to twice monthly pickups for basic recycling, and typically $2.50 for each added recycling stream.
Have you checked out this other Solve application? Great minds think alike, maybe you should collaborate!
https://solve.mit.edu/challenges/circular-economy/solutions/8160
Remember to complete as many sections of the application as you can! The deadline for revisions is July 22, at 9am ET.
I'm having a difficult time finding where I can edit my solution. Can you point me in the right direction?
to Top