If you’ve spent much time on Instagram lately, you’ve likely seen the paid media campaigns from America’s Plastic Makers asking for support by telling Congress to get behind “Innovative Policies for Plastic Recycling.” There’s even a pre-written text embedded in the ads that you can just add your email address to, and your missive on the need for improved recycling is on the way.
It’s hard to argue that recycling innovation is something we will need desperately before long. We’ve talked several times here about the linear model of make, use, and dispose that plastics follow, resulting in large amounts buried in landfills or littering our oceans and waterways.
The American Chemistry Council’s (ACC) position statement, placed prominently on their landing page, also introduces the concept of “advanced recycling,” which they define as follows:
We support policies that recognize the products of advanced recycling as recycling, and policies that recognize advanced recycling as a highly engineered manufacturing process that can produce new virgin equivalent plastics and chemicals and complement mechanical recycling methods currently in use. 
On the surface, this seems like an initiative worth supporting. According to the ACC, 5.5 million metric tons of waste could potentially be diverted from landfills annually as result of announced investments in advanced recycling since 2017. The ACC suggests that to recycle them, “we need to implement emerging recycling technologies often referred to as “advanced recycling” (or “chemical recycling”). These technologies complement existing mechanical recycling methods, allowing more types of used plastics (i.e. those items with the recycling numbers 3-7 on the container) to be recaptured and remanufactured into new plastics and products.”
But, as is frequently the case, just about any industry trade organization has a significant vested interest for promoting a specific answer to a problem. America’s Plastic Makers suggest “Advanced Recycling for plastics harnesses the power of science and technology to convert plastic waste into new products that can be recycled again and again. It's sustainable, it's innovative — and it's already here.” Whew, seems like we should jump right in with both feet right now!
Of course, the surge by the world’s largest petrochemical and oil companies into plastic recycling as an industry plan B is now in question, thanks to the historic UN agreement endorsed by 175 nations this last month to end plastic pollution. Despite extensive lobbying efforts to narrow the proposal to deal with plastic waste management, the treaty signed by 175 countries could place equal onus on plastic makers to limit their production.
I believe that especially now, as the world grapples with reliance on oil and gas, that the industry needs solutions to plastic pollution that do not require it to scale back this production. The growth area it had seized on was chemical or “advanced” recycling, technology that turns plastic waste back into raw materials, or oils and gases, that are then fed back into petrochemical production. Less than 10 percent of the nearly 370 million tons of plastic produced annually is recyclable. The demand for recycled plastic is surging as consumer goods companies come under pressure to reduce their environmental impact. Adding to the pressure to institute more “advanced recycling” is the fact the world’s largest petrochemical companies like Dow, Sabic, and Chevron, have all formed partnerships with recycling start-ups.
A recent report from the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) entitled “Recycling Lies: ‘Chemical Recycling’ of Plastic Is Just Greenwashing Incineration” says that many of the cutting-edge plastics processing technologies known collectively as chemical recycling are releasing large quantities of toxic and hazardous substances into the environment. And the majority of these new plants, while they are making fuel and chemicals, are producing no recycled plastic at all.
The NRDC investigation used publicly available data from the summer of 2021 from U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) databases and state environmental permits for chemical recycling facilities across the United States. The NRDC identified eight sites that were either already operating or expected to become operational in the near future. EPA records revealed that several of these recycling facilities were disposing of large amounts of hazardous waste containing chemicals such as benzene (a known carcinogen) as well as lead, cadmium, and chromium. State-level environmental permits for six facilities allowed for the release of hazardous air pollutants, including chemicals that can cause cancer or birth defects.
“The facilities were releasing or permitted to release a variety of hazardous air pollutants,” said Senior Scientist and report author Veena Singla in an NRDC release. “That’s certainly of concern for the communities in direct proximity.” Those communities, the report found, were disproportionally low-income neighborhoods and communities of color. About 380,000 people live within three miles of the 8 facilities and could easily already have been impacted by toxic emissions.
The industry trade group couldn’t let that be the final word, of course. Plastics Industry Association Vice President of Government Affairs Matt Seaholm, accused the NRDC report of utilizing “cherry-picked examples, incomplete data, and unsubstantiated claims.” He said that “Attacks on advanced recycling technologies tend to follow the same pattern: ignoring the advancements and investments from many different companies, making unrealistic calls to end plastics production, and ignoring industry positions on waste-to-fuel recovery. NRDC’s report is no different.”
Americans love recycling. It’s the number one thing they think companies should be doing to positively impact purchase decisions by the consumer. According to the Shelton Group, a sustainability marketing group, 85 percent of our fellow citizens agree that recycling is the bare minimum that we can each do for the environment. But 49 percent of us say the recycling system in America is not working well, and 30 percent of us are not confident that what we put in our recycling bins is actually getting recycled. That confidence level is actually now moving in the wrong direction. In 2019, only 14 percent of us were not confident that our recyclables were actually getting recycled; in 2020, it was 23 percent.
Why does this matter to you, and your clients? If people adopt the attitude that “recycling doesn’t really work, so why bother?” then we end up with more waste in the landfill, with no chance to sort it and get it to an organization that might be able to use it. Even if we have to continue the argument for a while over whether traditional mechanical, or new chemical recycling, is best for all of us. In the end, recycling is still the answer. Hopefully you, and your clients think so, too.
Jeff Jacobs has been an expert in building brands and brand stewardship for 40 years, working in commercial television, Hollywood film and home video, publishing, and promotional brand merchandise. He’s a staunch advocate of consumer product safety and has a deep passion and belief regarding the issues surrounding compliance and corporate social responsibility. He retired as executive director of Quality Certification Alliance, the only non-profit dedicated to helping suppliers provide safe and compliant promotional products. Before that, he was director of brand merchandise for Michelin. Connect with Jeff on Twitter, LinkedIn, Instagram, or read his latest musings on food, travel and social media on his personal blog jeffreypjacobs.com. Email jacobs.jeffreyp@gmail.com.