The reading passage and lecture are both about single-stream recycling. The reading passage contends that single-stream recycling has some problems. On the other hand, the lecturer believes the problems are not that bad.
First, the lecturer argues that single-stream recycling would not be dangerous. This is because the cart could be parked properly when people follow instruction marked clearly with a little education. Therefore, it would not roll into the street and create traffic hazard. This goes against the reading passage's idea that the one large cart with all sort of recyclables could roll into the road and cause traffic issues.
Second, the lecturer points out single-stream recycling does not decrease available recycling materials. This is due to the fact that gathered recyclables by the recycling are more than loss of contaminated materials. In addition, only one percent of recyclables could be damaged in single-stream recycling, so people could get more recyclable materials by the recycling. This casts doubt on the reading passage's claim that single-stream recycling cause drop of recyclable materials by contaminating the materials.
The final point by the lecturer is that single-stream recycling would not be costly. The reason is that collecting cost could be reduced, so this would cut down the overall expense despite additional cost such as sorting laboring cost. As a result, single-stream recycling would be effective on reducing cost in long run. This rebuts the reading passage's view that single-stream recycling requires more money to sort the collecting recyclable materials so that the cost would increase.