Mainpage arrow Introduction arrow Plastic Recycling
Plastic Recycling - "Put a square peg into a round hole"

Overwhelming plastic waste

2011_apme_plastic_recycling_2010.jpgWe are rapidly replacing steel, glass, wood and other materials with more and more plastics. Yet whilst society’s consumption of plastics steadily increases, and our landfills reach their limits, for years we still maintain the public impression that, through waste collection and recycling, we can manage our resources. The EU Commission demonstrates resolve by imposing high recovery quotas, which do not necessarily lead to more recycling.
However, the reality only becomes evident when existing published data from 2010 is analysed in context: We still bury 42% and incinerate 34% of collected plastic waste (in 2003 it was 60% and 20%). At this rate we are returning 76% (16.4 million tons) of waste to the environment. Of course one has to ask, whether this has been done in an ecologically sound manner, even if incineration is considered as energy recovery and is often favoured as the best solution by the plastic producing industry – but especially excluded from “recycling” by the European Commission. Mechanical recycling has limitations, although one should not undervalue the volumes recycled (6 million tons). Feedstock recycling is almost irrelevant and no longer itemized since 2008. The data for the chart has been taken from a study published in 2011 entitled “Plastics – The Facts 201136)” and from early studies1,33,34,35) from Plastics Europe – Association of Plastics Manufacturers  (APME -www.plasticseurope.org).

2006.04.17 icis plastic recycling overstated.jpgThe high recycling rates as published by APME in 20062) were strongly questioned by the European Plastics Recyclers Association (EuPR)31), which reported declining recycling levels and plastic waste export flows continuing to damage their business (source:www.plasticker.de). EuPR participated in the new surveys and the trend clearly shows rapidly increasing volumes of plastics produced and consumed until 2007, followed by a decline during the financial crisis 2008/2009 with a slight recovery in 2010, when the collected volume of post consumer plastic waste stagnates and considerably declines during the last 17 years. In relation to the consumption recycling levels were achieved in the range of only 10% (mechanical and feedstock recycling) of the plastics consumed. The increase in % of collected plastic waste volumes in 2008 and 2009 is not an improvement, but relates to stagnating collected volumes in a period of shrinking consumption during the financial crisis.


One could ask: Why do we actually collect every year plastic waste that represents only half of the volume we consume? APME explains this with “long-life application”36).
Our today recovery rates, in relation to the collected plastic waste represent only “half the truth”, because the balance of un-collected plastic waste volumes during the production period from 1993 until 2010 shows that after all there are still 406 million tons in circulation (280 million tons in 2006), or may be located at places not known to us.

Conclusion: We collect approximately only half of the consumed plastics as waste and still incinerate and land-fill three quarters of it.

 

What is the attractiveness of energy, water and plastic waste?

All resources on earth are limited and major companies are striving to control energy, water and waste. The ongoing concentration in these markets is powered by guaranteed profit margins to be gained due to the dependence of countries, their citizens and governments on these resources. Oil prices continued to rise steadily until 2008 and, as a consequence, so did the prices for raw materials used for plastic production, which in turn led to further consolidation and job losses. In the meantime, it is no longer a secret that the national oil reserves of the United States will only suffice for another 40 years – making a forecast for the future development of plastic prices not too difficult.
When the financial crisis came in 2008/2009 and the oil price crashed again, prices for commodity plastics and their raw materials decreased to an even greater extent. In the period from November 2008 until January 2009 benzene was even cheaper than oil (from which it is produced), showing the situation was not realistic. Besides the focus on the resources there exist yet other important correlations. At low oil prices investment in oil production is cut back, due to lower profitability, thus leading to a reduction of new projects, which will be taken up again when a recovering economy creates the pre-programmed supply crunch and pushes the oil price up again. The prices for plastics will of course follow.2011.09._crude_oil.jpg   
Increasing feed-stock prices will inevitably support higher recycling costs, and thus create new, attractive and profitable industries and work places.
What was considered unattractive due to low oil prices, should be today an intelligent step to achieving cost-attractive feed-stocks.
The recent raw material policy of the European Commission from November 2008 concludes, that “Recycling presents a huge opportunity to reduce import dependency for raw materials,” lamenting that many end-of-life products are “illegally shipped outside the EU and are hence not recycled within the EU” 32).
What logic lies behind the high and unrealistic recovery quotas of the EU Commission and the national subsidies for the collection and sorting of plastic waste (often passed on as a compulsory levy for consumers). When many of these feed-stocks, collected in the EU at great expense, are then sold cheaply to the Far East, yet ultimately return to us as cheap end-products (e.g. polyester in textile fibres or polystyrene in injection-moulded parts), does it want to further undermine the competitiveness of European production sites?
If our citizens have already financed the collection of these resources, then surely it is they who should benefit from new technologies and jobs, created through the recycling of our plastic waste.  
Many of our products could be more competitive, if our costs were reduced through intelligent recycling and if we were able to use our waste ourselves, instead of handing it to our competitors so that they can further reduce their costs.
In the mean time we get to the end of the year 2011, a second financial crisis knocks again at our door and the average oil price reached $ 80 per barrel. The oil price is at the same level it was in the beginning of 2008, before the shock of the 1st financial crisis. The raw material prices increased as well and in the present environment of civil commotion in Middle East fluctuations are pre-programmed. Since 2003 the oil price is on a rise and shows higher variability compared with the past, but on a higher level. 
This counts of course also for plastics and their precursors und creates a problem e.g. for producers of cars and electro(nic) devices, because it will be difficult to pass such increases in cost to consumers if their real buying power decreases.

When comes the right moment in time for Europe actively to invest into new recycling technologies?

The Basel Convention from 22 March 1989, on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal, is an International treaty.

The European Union has adopted the Council Regulation 259/93/EC on the supervision and control of shipments of waste for all member states in 1993. The new Regulation (EC) No 1013/2006 of the European Parliament and the Council replaces 259/93 and applies since 12 July 2007, aiming at preventing fictitious waste recycling.

May be this is the more realistic explanation for part of the still not returned plastic waste, because of missing control it already arrived in Ghana or China and was burned on open fields as electro(nic) waste, to recover the metals. The smoke signals should be easily visible. 

                                                                                              April 2008 / updated 10/2011                                                                                               Dr. Gerald G. Altnau
                                                                                              Associate of CreaCycle GmbH
                                                                                              This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it  

Literature:
01. APME – „The compelling facts about plastics“ published January 2008 - PDF
02. Plastics Europe – “An analysis of plastics consumption and recovery in Europe” published Summer 2004 - PDF
31. Plasticker News 21 April 2006 „EuPR: Concern about Plastics Europe Study on Waste Management“ – Link
32. Neue Strategie der EU Kommission zur Rohstoffversorgung 4.Nov. 2008 - link   
33. Plastics Europe 2008 – Compelling facts about plastics 2007 - link
34. Plastics Europe 2009 – Compelling facts about plastics 2008 - link
35. Plastics Europe 2010 – The Facts – plastic production and recovery 2009 - link
36. Plastics Europe 2011 - The Facts - plastic production and recovery 2010 - link

 

  top