The problem with this entire article, and with this whole movement, is the ad hominem approach.

Many kids these days are getting fed up with the presuppositions that "green" is the good religion.

How about instead of assuming the things that we are trying to convince "wasteful people" of we actually do the hard work of reporting *facts*?

The article starts with an assertion that 75% of bottles being thrown out is "a waste" and ends with a recommendation that more governments tax "wasteful people."

But where are the facts to prove that this is really the best way to use energy -- i.e. to drive around a fleet of trucks collecting used bottles?

Perhaps it isn't "a waste" and it's cheaper and safer for the environment to throw out water bottles? Is there reporting going on that shows that is better for the environment to actually re-process these things one at a time?

The simplest thing to do to win over an audience is demean those you disagree with by calling them names. No one has called anyone sub-human or "a cockroach", granted. But instead of labeling those whose behavior we dislike as "wasteful people" why not demonstrate, a least a little, that they are wasteful.

Many are not convinced that those promoting city recycling programs are actually the "wasteful people" because of the amount of energy currently required to recycle these things.

I spent the Christmas holiday in Belize on Ambergris Caye. This was my third visit in as many years. You can't even walk on the beaches anymore due to all the plastic waste that has washed ashore. Snorkeling / Diving on the barrier reef is akin to swimming in a trashcan. There was some trash the first time I went, this time it was horrible. We (people) are a blight on the planet. Our selfishness knows no bounds when it comes to the destruction we sow.

I wish I had taken pictures, but in my own selfishness, I made sure to frame my shots so that the trash wasn't visible.

"100 million pounds of recycled PET plastic chips".

Per year?
Per minute?
Per decade?

It's a meaningless statistic when no context is given.

These are much needed efforts and people are free to downplay the importance, but instead of poking holes in the process, why not offer up some constructive ideas.

We are making an effort to get Coke to invest in solar power to run this facility, which would make the program more "green" than its current structure.

http://www.greensceneems.com

http://www.mygreenscene.com/thesolarmaidcompany/index.html

And recycle the same glass Coke bottles? Seems absolutely ridiculous that we put energy into melting down and recreating the same thing over and over again - WASH IT!

We should support and promote the Coke’s bottle-to-bottle

plastic recycling plant to achieve our goal of sustainable consumption and
try our best to promote the awareness to recycle plastic bottles and cans we use
daily. I’m mentioning some

facts about recycling plastic bottles and cans their usage and consumption.
 
A used aluminum can is recycled and back on the grocery shelf as a new can, in
as little as 60 days. That's closed loop recycling at its finest!
 
We use over 80,000,000,000 aluminum soda cans every year. Americans use
2,500,000 plastic bottles every hour! Most of them are thrown away.

The energy saved from recycling one glass bottle can run a 100-watt light bulb
for four hours. It also causes 20% less air pollution and 50% less water
pollution than when a new bottle is made from raw material.

The U.S. is the #1 trash-producing country in the world at 1,609 pounds per
person per year. This means that 5% of the world's people generate 40% of the
world's waste.

http://recyclewastematerial.com

This is definitely a step in the right direction, but we need to transition away from this. Bottle bills combined with re-usable bottles (like much of the world uses) would dramatically reduce waste. Giving up bottled water would also help dramatically like you mentioned, but people are giving it up, with smaller government agencies and companies leading the way. With the recession, people will be asking themselves if paying $2 for a liter of water really makes sense when water from the tap is just as good. There already are re-evaluations and I think there will be a lot more to come.