> yet it went bankrupt because companies prefer to buy new plastic which is both cheaper and more convenient. That way things never are going to change. Well,

> yet it went bankrupt because companies prefer to buy new plastic which is both cheaper and more convenient. That way things never are going to change. Well, about that example: 1. Obligatory first point: This is an example of a systematic problem of capitalism, which by default promotes (corporate) profit seeking over other considerations and interests, making it difficult to achieve them. 2. The state could have, theoretically, taxed the purchase of new plastic products, and/or given tax benefits for switching from new-plastic to recycled-plastic, reversing the "cheaper" incentive. 3. There are uses of recycled plastic where new plastic is just, well, just note used (probably because it provides no benefit). Example: Bricks for the construction industry: https://plaex.ca/about-plaex-building-systems-mortarless-interlocking-construction-blocks-1 https://plaex.ca/about-plaex-building-systems-mortarless-int... caveat: Have not researched that extensively 4. Quality of recycled plastic can be improved significantly by a combination of sorting and contaminant removal; and it seems that even with these actions, it might be cheaper - on the market as it exists now - than virgin plastic production. There's a paper by McKinsey on this matter: https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/chemicals/our-insights/beyond-the-bottle-solutions-for-recycling-challenging-plastics https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/chemicals/our-insights/b...