The Recycling Partnership is committed to advancing a circular economy by building a better recycling system that embraces innovation. This includes technical evolution at the collection level (think electric trucks and improved routing efficiencies), at the MRF level (think AI and robots helping sort our recyclables out of a complex packaging stream), and at the end market level (think of the growing number of end markets for different kinds of materials that can end up in a whole host of goods and products).
Recycling has always evolved and changed. From the beginning of recycling, end markets for recyclables have evolved and grown and continue to do so, responding to economics, business opportunities, regulatory frameworks, and systemic needs. The Partnership’s 2024 State of Recycling Report identifies the critical role end markets play as one of the five requirements of an effective recycling system. From rags to cans, from glass cullet to plastic bottles, when an entrepreneur found a way to turn old stuff into new stuff, recycling has resulted. That landscape continues to grow more complex, both driving and responding to market conditions and consumer demands.
One growing end market for some types of plastics is a process broadly termed chemical recycling. This concept encompasses a wide variety of processes and technologies, which themselves vary on input, process, output, and environmental impact. These processes differ from mechanical recycling in that they use heat, chemical reactions or both to break down plastics into raw materials. In addition to market forces, chemical recycling is responding to the reality that some of plastics in the current packaging stream are difficult or unable to be recycled mechanically. There are also end-use needs that cannot be addressed by mechanical recycling, in particular food-contact needs. The regulatory frameworks governing these technologies have evolved, as well.
Change is good, but it needs to be planet-positive, transparent, and measurable. As the world assesses emerging recycling technology, the following questions must be answered:
- What is the technology? The technologies vary greatly in terms of what they can accept as inputs, what they produce as outputs, the amount of energy they use, and their impacts on the environment and communities. Instead of blanket terms, we need to get to the specifics of the technology so we can accurately assess its ability to deliver.
- What is the impact on climate? Chemical recycling facilities should be environmentally preferable to the production of new plastics and robustly regulated for impact such as carbon emissions, water and air.
- What is the impact on community? These processes should not negatively impact the people, water and air surrounding the facility, especially low-income communities that often bear a disproportionate share of the impact.
- How do the supply chain economics play out? Having the technical capability does not necessarily mean there is access to the supply of material. The challenge is often not the technology of turning old stuff into new stuff, it’s the economics of getting it from the household, through the recycling supply chain, and into a new material in a cost-competitive manner.
- What is the appropriate timeline for scale? Change takes time and it’s important to know how long innovation, if successful, will take to reach meaningful scale.
- What is the goal and how do we ensure transparent impacts? Chemical recycling processes should be driven by a genuine need to turn old plastics into new products with transparent reporting as to what these operations yield. They should not be motivated by a desire to claim that “recycling” is occurring without meaningful production of raw material. As new technologies disrupt past business approaches, ensuring that they are positive for people and the planet will speed up their adoption and impact.
The Recycling Partnership encourages innovation that improves recycling’s ability to protect natural resources and reduce waste. As Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) laws develop and pass, we believe decisions and definitions around chemical recycling and all recycling technologies should be supported by science and data. We also hope these EPR laws influence the packaging being developed and sold around the world, making them more consistent and recyclable, with a lower environmental impact. The dialog around chemical recycling makes it clear that system change, not silver bullets, will be the solution. We encourage robust, transparent, and data-driven discussion.