CHEMICAL RECYCLING CONCLUSION

The plastic chemical recycling processes are emerging technologies that are almost entirely at pilot stage with the exception of some SCWO technologies. Corporations who sell large volumes of plastic in the form of products and packaging, such as BASF38, Unilever39, Proctor and Gamble40, Mitsubishi Chemical Corporation41, Dow Chemical42, Chevron Phillips Chemical Company LLC 43, and others, are partnering with or acquiring engineering start-ups, established chemical recycling companies, and technologies to focus on conversion of plastic waste to plastic or chemical feedstock. Fast-Moving Consumer Goods companies (FMCGC) have generated extensive media about their attempts to engage chemical recycling as a solution to the plastic pollution issue, distracting the public and policymakers from the environmental impacts of plastic. Chemical recycling is also the centerpiece of solutions proposed by The Alliance to End Plastic Waste44, a cynically named consortium of companies such as Dow Chemical, DSM, ExxonMobil, Formosa Plastics Corporation, and many other petrochemical and FMCGC who produce the petrochemicals and plastics at the heart of the pollution problem.

As an example, Coca-Cola has engaged in agreements with Ioniqa, which has recently commissioned a 10,000 tpa plant in the Netherlands, and with Loop industries46 to access depolymerized, recycled PET content for their packaging. Loop Industries, Inc., depolymerize PET plastic and polyester fiber, plastic bottles, packaging, carpets, and textiles, as well as ocean plastics that have been degraded by the sun and salt. The Loop system reduces PET waste to its monomers Dimethyl Terephthalate (DMT) and Monoethylene Glycol (MEG) under low heat at atmospheric pressure.

 Rather than limiting the exponential growth in plastics production, the use of chemical recycling is seen by large petrochemical corporates as a means to continue with business as usual, while “chemical recycling processes can count towards recycling targets”. The aim is not reducing plastics production, it is minimalistic regulatory compliance and a marketing strategy to avoid plastic bans.

Chemical recycling can conserve resources and perhaps recycle some forms of plastic scrap that mechanical recycling cannot (such as contaminated and mixed polymers). This effort may contribute in a marginal way to the circular economy, but there are many questions about scale-up, energy intensity, pollution, and residues that cannot be answered for lack of industry data. However, there is enough information around techniques like pyrolysis to suggest there will be significant problems, and the concept of chemical/solvent ‘purification’ suggests that contaminated residue will be a significant hazardous output of these processes.

But in the end, no amount of chemical recycling (or mechanical recycling) will fundamentally resolve the plastic pollution issue, while petrochemical plastic production rates skyrocket in a supply-driven attempt to pivot petrochemical companies away from carbon liabilities in fossil fuels. As long as petrochemical corporations see plastic production as a safe haven to maintain extraction and production of petrochemicals, then plastic pollution will continue to blight the planet. Until global regulation can minimize plastic production within ecologically sustainable limits with high corresponding rates of mechanical and chemical recycling, then chemical recycling will remain a public relations distraction.