State-of-the-art plastics recycling plants using automated, mechanical recycling technologies consume significantly less energy, raw materials and water, and also have less air emissions than traditional plastics manufacturing plants. Replacing virgin plastics with recycled plastics saves approximately 90% of the energy and reduces the emissions of CO2 by one-to-three tonnes per tonne of plastic produced, depending on the type of virgin plastic replaced. If waste plastic is incinerated, even more CO2 is produced (even if used as a fuel source because plastics generate more CO2 per unit of energy created than traditional fuels do) – so recycling saves enormous amounts of CO2 emissions in two ways. The incineration of some plastics can lead to other undesirable by-products unless significant precautions are taken. Clearly, recycling such materials should largely be preferred over incineration.
Governmental mandates and regulations, and certain material additive restrictions have brought new opportunities and challenges to plastics recyclers. Understanding their impact upon the evolution of the plastics recycling industry is important to policy makers, manufacturers, recyclers and consumers.
The Western European consumption of plastics is almost 50 million metric tonnes (2006) and it is expected that the WEEE directive alone will result in more than 400,000 metric tonnes of waste plastics that, until the implementation of the WEEE directive took place, were mostly landfilled or incinerated. Recycling these plastics will largely contribute to reaching the recycling targets set forward by the WEEE and the ELV Directives.
For some applications, plastics must also meet certain compositional requirements. Some additives that are no longer in use must be separated in these post-consumer plastic streams that have been recovered from electronic equipment. For example, certain types of brominated flame retardants, but not all, have been prohibited from being used in new electronic equipment – today technology exists that is able to separate plastics containing such substances as brominated flame retardants.
Since the new Waste Transport Regulation was brought into effect last summer some differences of opinion and interpretation of these regulations have arisen between the EU and member states or regions. While these differences are being resolved, an interim situation can develop that can damage this emerging industry. Such a situation currently exists so it is vital that these differences are ironed out.
The biggest growth in demand for plastics is, not surprisingly, occurring in China and large investments have been made to benefit from this growing market and the imbalanced logistics flows between China and the European Union. At the same time, major investments are being made in the European Union to expand the capacity to recycle plastics from durable goods that can be used to replace virgin plastics in many applications.
A questionable interpretation of some ambiguous wording of the EU Waste Transport Regulation by some EU Member States creates a risk of prohibiting, or at least seriously complicating, the export of plastics-rich waste from durable goods, even within the EU. As a result, Europe is in danger of becoming an uneven playing field in which recyclers are facing unequal competitive circumstances within the European Union, which may cause major investments to be put on hold.
The concept of the European Waste Transport Regulation is currently based on a hugely complicated mechanism of controls of many waste streams, which are impossible to enforce in full.
In the high-tech industry, ‘green lanes’ are being developed. Goods can move freely between companies that are audited as long as these flows of goods are tracked and traced in these safe and secure trade lanes. This concept could be considered for waste as well. It would largely reduce the enforcement efforts of the customs authorities allowing for better controls of the remaining flows that do not move in these ‘smart and secure trade lanes’ and thus create a level playing field.
The environment and economy will both benefit from an improved and more efficient reverse supply chain. This, in turn, would result in increased and optimized recycling of waste streams that reduce the depletion of scarce natural resources – water, oil and minerals – while at the same time protecting the environment by keeping these valuable materials in service.
Chris Slijkhuis is Director of Sourcing, MBA Polymers Inc, Richmond, USA
email: cslijkhuis@mbapolymers.com
