Reduce, Reuse, Repudiate?減少、重用、拒絕

While ?recycling campaigns can help limit what heads to the landfill, ?scientists are now saying that it's masked the glaring problem of ?over-production and de-emphasized other waste reduction strategies that ?are far more sustainable.
雖然回收活動可以幫助限制進入垃圾填埋場的東西，但科學家們現(xiàn)在表示，它掩蓋了生產過剩的明顯問題，并淡化了其他更具可持續(xù)性的廢物減少策略。

In a new essay for The Conversation, ?an interdisciplinary group of researchers out of the University of ?Virginia that's been studying the psychology of waste found that many ?people over-emphasize the recycling aspect of the waste management ?industry's "Reduce, Reuse, Recycle" slogan. The result, they say, is a ?major backfiring as the public has come to mistakenly consider recycling ?a get-out-of-jail-free card, confusing which goods are actually ?recyclable in the first place and ignoring the growing waste production ?catastrophe.
在《對話》的一篇新文章中，弗吉尼亞大學的一個跨學科研究小組一直在研究廢物心理學，他們發(fā)現(xiàn)許多人過分強調廢物管理行業(yè)“減少、再利用、回收”口號的回收方面。他們說，結果是適得其反，因為公眾錯誤地考慮回收出獄卡，首先混淆了哪些商品實際上是可回收的，并忽視了日益嚴重的廢物生產災難。

In ?a series of experiments, the UV researchers first asked participants ?first to list "reduce," "reuse," and "recycle" by order of efficacy ?—?the correct answer?being the same one in the old slogan — finding that ?a whopping 78 percent got it wrong. In a second experiment, the ?researchers had participants use a computer program to virtually "sort" ?waste into recycling, compost, and landfill bins.?Unfortunately, the ?outcome of that survey was even more stark, with many incorrectly ?putting non-recyclable waste, such as plastic bags and lightbulbs, into ?the virtual recycle bin.
在一系列實驗中，紫外線研究人員首先要求參與者按照功效順序列出“減少”、“再利用”和“回收”——正確答案與舊口號中的答案相同——發(fā)現(xiàn)高達 ? 78%搞錯了。在第二個實驗中，研究人員讓參與者使用計算機程序將廢物虛擬地“分類”到回收箱、堆肥箱和垃圾填埋箱中。不幸的是，該調查的結果更加嚴峻，許多人錯誤地將塑料袋和燈泡等不可回收垃圾放入虛擬回收箱。

Cause and Effect?因果

While over-emphasizing or getting the recycling protocol wrong is an issue on its own, its downstream effects have been devastating as microplastics from consumer waste continue to pollute our oceans, land masses, and bodies — and as greenhouse gases from the production of all this stuff keep throttling our planet.
雖然過度強調或錯誤地實施回收協(xié)議本身就是一個問題，但其下游影響卻是毀滅性的，因為消費廢物中的微塑料繼續(xù)污染我們的海洋、陸地和身體，而且所有這些產品的生產都產生溫室氣體這些東西一直在限制我們的星球。

While lots of governmental bodies are, as the researchers note, attempting to stem and even ban ?the proliferation of single-use plastic goods such as plastic straws ?and bags, the industries responsible for creating those landfill-bound ?items keep making more and more of them, and even their own mitigation strategies are voluntary.
正如研究人員指出的那樣，盡管許多政府機構正在試圖阻止甚至禁止一次性塑料制品（例如塑料吸管和塑料袋）的擴散，但負責制造這些垃圾填埋場物品的行業(yè)仍在生產越來越多的此類物品，甚至他們自己的緩解策略也是自愿的。

The ?onus to reduce, reuse, and recycle ends up falling on consumers — who, ?as the aforementioned studies show, aren't as well-trained on how to do ?them as we should be.?It's a status quo that does little to tackle the ?global waste crisis and ends up using a lot of logistical and worker power to boot.
減少、再利用和回收的責任最終落到了消費者身上——正如上述研究表明的那樣，消費者并沒有像我們應該的那樣接受過良好的培訓。這種現(xiàn)狀對解決全球垃圾危機無濟于事，最終會消耗大量的后勤和工人力量。