First, it is important to note that they are not criticizing material recycling as only capturing 5% of the value, but rather, the economy, i.e. linear vs circu

First, it is important to note that they are not criticizing material recycling as only capturing 5% of the value, but rather, the economy, i.e. linear vs circular. I think you are missing the point that an historical, linear, consumptive model leaves behind 95% of the value. A circular model seeks to capture as much of that value as possible, ideally 100%. "The current economy is surprisingly wasteful in its model of value creation. In Europe, material recycling and waste-based energy recovery captures only 5 percent of the original raw material value.[2]" "[2] This material value retention ratio is defined as the estimated material and energy output of the European waste management and recycling sector, divided by the output of the raw material sector (adjusted for net primary resource imports and 30 percent embedded resource value in net imported products)." One key point of their analysis is that it includes waste management where material may be buried in a landfill. This highlights the inefficiency of the linear economy. Private companies are paid a fee to bury value. The global recycling industry for materials is extremely competitive. Private companies are fighting tooth and nail for our gold. Water bottles are a great, obvious example of extremely profitable recycling. Water bottles can be recycled easily and turned in to more water bottles, t-shirts, car parts, and on and on. A less obvious, more complicated example is used carpeting. For decades, old discarded carpet has accumulated in landfills. In the linear, consumptive model, landfills were paid to bury the material and its value. It has become such a problem that governments[1] as well as industry trade organization[2] have pledged to tackle the problem. It's complicated because it is multiple materials that can't simply be ground up and remelted. A significant percentage of carpet is nylon, which is very valuable. Today, used carpet is turned in to resin[3], which ultimately becomes furniture, car parts and other useful products. [1] http://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/Carpet/Program.htm http://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/Carpet/Program.htm [2] https://carpetrecovery.org/ https://carpetrecovery.org/ [3] http://www.econyl.com/ http://www.econyl.com/ I noticed this in another response, "My original argument: If recycling were more efficient, it would be privately profitable, and a competitive recycling market would develop." Recycling is very efficient and becoming more so. Incredibly profitable private enterprises that are solely recycling companies operate in a competitive global market. The circular economy is the next evolution of these markets.