A closer look

KCCGuardianHeader1 copy.jpg

A Closer Look: “Advanced Recycling”

During the 2021 General assembly, the House Natural Resources & Energy Committee heard presentations on House Bill 345, filed by Rep. Adam Bowling, (now pre-filed as BR192) which was introduced “for discussion only.” The bill would have exempted “advanced recycling” facilities from solid waste regulations. So what is “advanced recycling”? (You can find the American Chemistry Council’s presentation to that committee here).

As you may have seen in your own communities, many municipalities have had to adjust or scale back some of their recycling programs. Part of the pressures on these programs have stemmed from many countries reducing their acceptance of plastic, paper, and aluminum wastes, particularly China, who changed their policies for accepting plastics and certain other recyclables in 2018.

Now the plastics and recycling industries, such as the American Chemistry Council, are looking toward this new solution: chemical recycling, also known as  “advanced recycling.”

Advanced recycling is a process that allows used plastics to be recycled into other plastics and feed materials for re-use. While this may at first sound positive, the process for re-transforming plastics can be intensive and produce hazardous byproducts. These facilities generally involve a chemical process that heats and vaporizes plastics to become feedstock for new plastic uses, fuels, lubricants and other chemicals. It can often accept plastic materials that are not recyclable through mechanical means. And that is what makes the technology so attractive to legislatures and municipalities.

This is a new industry, and not well-tested over time. (See this recent special investigative report from Reuters on the plastics recycling industry and “advanced recycling”). Yet some states are already providing significant tax breaks and weakening regulations in order to attract these facilities. The bill that was initially discussed in Kentucky is similar to many bills in other states, re-classifying this process as a manufacturing process, rather than a solid waste process.

Aside from the regulation of the process itself, the fundamental problem for environmentalists with plastics-to-plastics or plastics-to-fuel conversion of plastic waste, is that it provides an opportunity for chemical manufacturers to continue to produce plastic and generate petrochemical products. The Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives, an environmental network that has been deeply critical of this technology, has described advanced recycling as a “distraction” rather than a solution. Since the petrochemical industry is increasingly being targeted for its significant carbon footprint, the solutions need to focus on the reduction of plastics and petrochemicals.

However the American Chemistry Council, through their own studies, has been describing this process as “producing fewer harmful emissions than other common sources of air pollution.” As a young industry, there are few studies to back up some of ACC’s claims, including their effectiveness at recycling a full spectrum of plastics.

The Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives (https://www.no-burn.org/) has been one of the primary critics of efforts to pass these kinds of bills in other states. We will be watching the progress of this legislation and keep you informed on this debate.

Previous
Previous

The Work Ahead

Next
Next

Sunny Days Ahead