One would think that paper is one of those recyclables that is easy to recycle and should be recycled to cut odwn on the trees being used. The biggest problem is the price paper mills are willing to pay for even the highest grades of paper. And things just seem to be getting worse. As paper manufacturers continue to struggle with the economy and with people trying to cut the amount of paper they use in order to help save the environment, the need for scrap paper at the mills is diminishing. Tons of paper wanting to come in the door and yet no place to send it once it’s processed.

So, we have people screaming on one side that we need to increase the amount of paper we recycle while on the other side, we have recyclers who still need to make a dime or two and can’t do it with prices the way they are. We certainly need to rethink some of the ideas we have about the recycling of some goods and rethink our consumption habits if we are going to come up with any viable solution.

The process of building awareness and rememberability (I know, it’s not really a word but you know what I mean.) for a company or person begins with the name. Choosing a name which will be easily recalled, spelled, written, talked about, associated with something – all of those need to be considered in the process. Coolness or trendiness are the very last reasons to choose a name.

Think back to the “Artist Formerly Known As Prince” and the symbol he used to represent himself. While it might have seemed cool, it was way too awkward and he had to go back to Prince. Such is the case of  Technology Recycling Group and  National Technology Resource Group changing their name to 2trg. This name isn’t easy to write, spell, remember nor does it lead to any association with something. Are you supposed to say it “two turg”,  “two trig”, “two T R G” or perhaps some completely different way?

I don’t claim to be an expert in naming but I have read a few articles on the subject and all of them seem to agree. And, rather than just rely on expertise, I conducted a non-scientific poll around our office and didn’t have one single duplication in the attempt to pronounce it or associate it with anything. As a marketing person with almost 20 years of experience, I find very little “marketing reasoning” behind the choice of the name, which generally proves to be a hindrance to the brandability of the company.

I’m always skeptical about the long-term viability of a new recycled-content plastics manufacturer. Either the costs (both monetary and environmental) don’t justify the means or it’s heavily subsidized by the government. If we had a truly workable solution, you would see it spreading quickly across the country and even around the globe. So, I wasn’t too excited when I read the headlines ” <!– @page { margin: 0.79in } P { margin-bottom: 0.08in } –>Plastics Recycling Plant Ready to Open.”

After reading this article, I am mildly hopeful. If they save the energy they say they do and if it isn’t subsidized by the government, this could be a really good step for all of us. Let’s keep our fingers crossed.

This article certainly raised my eyebrows. I have written a couple of times about Tesla and their electric cars. Now Diamler enters the picture in a very shrewd move. In one fell swoop, Diamler may have leap-frogged all the other major car manufacturers, all while keeping it’s luxury auto image intact. This certainly seems to be a win-win for both these companies. I predicted earlier that Tesla may very well turn the US automotive world on its ear – this move could be the beginning of the tidal wave.

The city of San Francisco appears to be doing an exceptional job at diverting material from the landfill. The recent announcement that they are only 3% away from their goal of 75% recycling is pretty noteworthy. I applaud them. I do want to offer some words of caution. I suggest they do some careful analysis of their recycling efforts to ensure that their efforts aren’t doing more environmental damage than good.

Sometimes, in our race to recycle everything possible, we forget that recycling does take energy; energy for initial processing of material, transportation, and energy for final processing into a useable product. Believe me, I am all for recycling, it is part of what we do. The key is responsible recycling. If San Francisco is achieving a net improvement to the environment (as measured by a non-biased, non-partisan person/organization), then the rest of us should certainly see what we can learn from them to improve recycling across the country and offer the plaudits they deserve.