12 members of the Consumer Goods Forum’s (CGF) Coalition of Action on Plastic Waste have published a letter expressing industry demands to procure chemically recycled material produced in line with their environmental safeguards. This follows a wider survey of CGF members, which indicates demand for 800,000 tonnes of chemically recycled material per year by 2030, in addition to their needs for mechanically recycled materials.
The letter is signed by Amcor, Barilla, Colgate-Palmolive, Danone, Ferrero, Haleon, Henkel, Mars, Incorporated, McCain Foods, Mondelēz International, PepsiCo, and Unilever. Expressing their interest in the ‘development of credible and environmentally sound chemical recycling infrastructure’, the parties ‘wish to send a strong signal of support’ for the need for scale in plastics recycling, as well as environmental mitigation.
The parties add that any purchases of chemically recycled material would have to meet the necessary environmental criteria laid out by the industry. The letter continues: “In particular, the sellers must comply with the principles laid out in the Vision and Principles Position Paper published in April 2022.”
The paper – Chemical Recycling in a Circular Economy for Plastics – was published by members of the Coalition, encouraging the development of new plastics recycling technologies that meet six key principles for credibility, safety, and the mitigation of environmental risks:
- Source of input materials: Chemical recycling increases overall recycling volumes. Input material does not include material that can be economically recycled by mechanical recycling in practice and at scale
- Material traceability: Recycled content for chemical recycling is accurately traced from plastic waste inputs through to recycled plastic using a mass balance protocol that is widely accepted and applied. This enables the process to contribute towards both recycling and recyclability targets and recycled content targets.
- Process yields: Suppliers demonstrate they have maximised the plastic-to-plastic portion of outputs for chemical recycling processes, de-prioritised the portion being used for other recycled outputs (e.g. bitumen/asphalt, waxes), and minimised non-recycled outputs such as fuels.
- Environmental impact: The life cycle impact (with a focus on climate) of chemically recycled plastics is credibly demonstrated as equivalent to or lower than fossil fuel-based virgin plastics in a comparable system.
- Health and safety: Emissions and pollution from chemical recycling processes are properly managed to safeguard the health and safety of people and the environment.
- Claims: Claims about chemical recycling made by companies purchasing plastics produced by chemical recycling are communicated credibly and transparently to support consumer decision-making.
The paper was accompanied by an independent Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) study, which stated that ‘system-level emissions would be approximately 40 per cent lower in certain geographies and under certain conditions at-scale chemical recycling was available to process hard-to-recycle plastics, rather than sending these plastics to waste-to-energy incinerators’. The Coalition asserts that ‘although chemical recycling technology is not a silver bullet, it will be an important technology which can serve a vital purpose for the recycling of unavoidable plastic waste which cannot be otherwise recycled mechanically’.
The Coalition adds that ‘demand for chemically recycled material does not reduce the need to continue the scale-up of mechanical recycling infrastructure. It is primarily focused on demand which cannot be met at scale by mechanically recycled materials today’.
Get our weekly digest
resource.co article ai
How will the government and DMOs address the challenges of including glass in DRS while ensuring a level playing field across the UK?
There's no easy solution to include glass in the DRS while maintaining a level playing field. Potential approaches include a phased introduction of glass, potentially with higher deposits to reflect its logistical challenges. The government and DMOs could incentivise innovation in glass packaging design and subsidise dedicated return points for glass-handling. Exemptions for smaller businesses unable to handle glass might also be necessary. Any successful solution will likely blend several approaches. It must address the differing priorities of devolved administrations, balance environmental benefits with logistical and cost implications, and be supported by robust consumer education campaigns emphasizing the importance of glass recycling.