A new report says that chemical recycling is not a viable solution to plastic pollution problems.
Beyond Plastics and the International Pollutants Elimination Network, two groups that have been critical of the plastics industry, unveiled the report on Oct. 31.
"Our research shows that chemical recycling is more of a marketing and lobbying tactic by the petrochemical industry than an actual solution to the problem of plastic waste," Judith Enck, president of Beyond Plastics, said in a news conference.
"The plastics industry was launched in lobbying the marketing campaign promoting what it calls advanced recycling. It is not advanced, and it is not recycling," she said.
In her remarks, she emphasized that chemical recycling is not new, and the report hammered home the point by recruiting Lew Freeman, a former vice president at the Society of the Plastics Industry Inc. — now called the Plastics Industry Association — to write the forward.
Freeman wrote that the plastics industry has spent 35 years promoting recycling as a solution to waste problems, and in that time the recycling rate has increased less than 1 percent to just under 9 percent.
"It now claims that in just half that time — 17 years — the plastics industry will be able to recycle 100 percent of its waste. This report makes a compelling case for doubting the plastics industry's seriousness and ability to achieve its stated goal," he wrote.
The report notes that there are now 11 chemical recycling facilities in the United States. Jennifer Congdon, deputy director of Beyond Plastics and one of the contributors to the report, said those facilities are handling an "insignificant amount of plastics waste," and that many are "struggling to create a profitable product."
"Relying on chemical recycling to process plastic waste is an unreliable and polluting approach to solve the growing problem of plastic pollution," Congdon said.
The sponsors said the report findings are well-timed, as global negotiators will meet Nov. 13-19 in Nairobi, Kenya, for a new round of talks on a United Nations global plastics treaty.
While chemical recycling was not included in the zero draft of the treaty, Enck expects the plastics industry will lobby hard to include it in the future, and she said the U.S. position on whether it should be included is not clear.
"We do not want the treaty negotiators or legislators or regulators to be distracted by the false solution of chemical recycling," Enck said. "The plastics industry has been working hard to weaken environmental regulations around chemical recycling, particularly in the United States."
Lee Bell, an author of the report and IPEN technical adviser, said chemical recycling produces very few useful products while generating large amounts of toxic waste.
"We found that … because plastics are made with toxic chemicals, particularly with toxic additives, the products and the waste that come from chemical recycling, retain these chemicals and when released, these chemicals pose threats to our health and to the environment," Bell said.
Instead of promoting chemical recycling, the report calls for bans on some plastic products, caps on virgin resin production and extended producer responsibility.
Enck also called on states that have passed laws encouraging chemical recycling to repeal them, and for an end to taxpayer subsidies and government funding of chemical recycling projects.
In response to the report, Ross Eisenberg of the American Chemistry Council charged that Beyond Plastics and IPEN were spreading false information about chemical recycling.
“Many proven chemical recycling technologies are in use today, remaking new plastics from used plastics. Recently, the Department of Energy’s Argonne National Laboratory found chemical recycling significantly reduced greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and water use compared to virgin plastics production,” Eisenberg said in a statement.
“It is unfortunate that organizations like Beyond Plastics and IPEN, that have never visited a chemical recycling facility, perpetuate misleading allegations about technologies that are helping reduce plastic waste and minimize environmental impacts. However, it’s not surprising that a group that publicly disavows all recycling would construct its own set of ‘findings’ to spread false information on chemical recycling technologies.”
Enck has frequently generated headlines on plastics issues since she launched Beyond Plastics in January 2019. Her group's reports are often cited by policymakers and the media.
In 2021 Beyond Plastics released a report that said the U.S. plastics industry is a large and growing contributor to greenhouse gas emissions and will be more responsible for climate change than the coal industry within a few years.
In 2022, her group released a report charging that the U.S. plastics recycling rate is much lower than what has been previously reported.
Earlier this year, Beyond Plastics released a report that challenged the safety of PVC water pipe and called for a ban on vinyl chloride monomer.
Enck is a professor at Bennington College in Bennington, Vt., and she was an Environmental Protection Agency regional administrator under former President Barack Obama.
While recent polling suggests that the public is in favor of chemical recycling, the technology has been subject of much debate in legislative and regulatory circles.
Most recently, six Democratic senators wrote a letter on Oct. 27 to Internal Revenue Service to ensure that fuels made from petroleum products, specifically plastic feedstocks, are unable to qualify for the Inflation Reduction Act's sustainable aviation fuel and clean fuels production tax credits.