Deanna Sheffield, a reporter in Orlando, FL, recently wrote: " ... everybody, it seems, is onboard with conserving resources and sending less to landfills. The warnings are all too familiar: We are depleting the earth's natural resources, running short on landfill space and contributing to global warming by using so much energy.

"The problem is that recycling isn't an effective way of addressing those issues. Curbside recycling is better at assuaging the guilt we collectively feel as ever-hungry consumers than it is at doing something positive for the environment. As such, it's a public-policy crutch. Simple economic theory suggests the planet will never become devoid of raw materials and resources; some will become more scarce than others, true, and when that happens they will also become more expensive. Economic theory also posits that when a commodity gets scarce, its price will rise, creating a demand for a substitute.

"And as for landfills, some experts say we are in no danger of running out of space for them. According to the calculations of Clark Wiseman, a retired economist who spent more than two decades at Gonzaga University in Spokane, WA, the amount of trash generated in the United States over the next 1,000 years could fit in a 40-mile-square area.

"Curbside recycling doesn't pay for itself on a county, state or national level. It is inefficient, and its very existence is predicated on cheap energy. If we continue to pay for it the way we do now - subsidizing it through solid waste fees that don't reflect recycling's true cost - it will remain a losing proposition, because most counties are unwilling to pass the cost of recycling on to residents."

We offer Sheffield statements, which we found by searching the Internet, as a response of one who typically finds recycling to be an ineffective waste of time and resources.

The city of Vermillion is about to embark on a new adventure. To some, it is the realization of a dream. We are going to launch a curbside recycling program in the near future.

Will this "assuage the guilt we collectively feel as ever-hungry consumers," as Sheffield states?

No doubt it will.

Is it a public policy crutch that does nothing for the environment? That's a position open to a great deal of debate.

You don't have to become the biggest tree hugger on your block to be a supporter of recycling. And if all the Al Gore green planet talk makes you uncomfortable, just stop for a second.

Take a deep breath.

And consider this.

Right now, Vermillion citizens recycle about 22 percent of the stuff they throw away each year.

In other words, about one-fifth of what potentially could be garbage never finds an eternal home in our landfill.

Solid Waste Director Phyllis Packard is setting the bar high for the community's recyling program. By enacting curbside recycling, she'd like to see 50 to 55 percent of Vermillion's cans, plastic bottles, cardboard, paper, etc. kept out of the landfill.

"This is a service that is directly for the citizens of Vermillion and only for the citizens of Vermillion," she said.

Naturally, the only way this ambitious goal can be reached is if everyone participates. The city certainly is doing its part. It's about to offer a service that will bring trucks to your curb to pick up all of those recyclables that have been taking up space in your garage. The cost to you will be about $3 plus tax per month.

But here's the kicker. If Vermillion citizens recycle more stuff, Packard naturally has more stuff to sell. That means we already have a lot of untapped potential when it comes to benefitting financially from recycling.

Packard estimates the value of the recyclable materials that Vermillion citizens are currently throwing away is approximately $565,000.

Recycling certainly appears to have the potential to be a very "green" activity.

The Vermillion Plain Talk editorials reflect the opinion of Plain Talk editor David Lias. You may contact him at david.lias@plaintalk.net