Designing for a Circular Economy 

Written By Itero Communications

The role of chemical recycling in sustainable product design 

dr. Abi mountain

Head of Product and Partnerships

Dr Abi Mountain is the Head of Product & Partnerships at Itero Technologies. Abi drives the development of partnerships for Itero across the recycling value chain in tandem with managing product strategy. Before joining Itero, Abi received her PhD in Chemistry from University College London in collaboration with University of Oxford, DSM, and LANXESS.  

This article is a longer version of an article originally published at Packaging Europe.

Central to addressing the plastic waste problem are the principles of the waste hierarchy - reduce, reuse, and recycle. As plastic will continue to play an important role in the economy, we are faced with technical and systemic challenges across all areas of the waste hierarchy. Yet for all the challenges we face, it is critical to find circular pathways for plastics. 

While many advancements have been made in technical polymers for specific use cases such as barrier properties for food contact applications, the complexity of plastic packaging has hampered recyclability, even as the appetite for recycling has increased. Multiple additives and/or layers required to improve performance contribute to the complexities and have led to mixed waste plastic streams made up of an increasingly complex range of materials. Only recently has the end-of-life of plastics even been considered in the design process. These factors combine to exacerbate already challenging conditions for the reuse and recycling of end-of-life plastics.  

The increased awareness of plastics leaking into our environment at the end of their use has caused a sudden shift in consumer demand for plastic-free products. However, focusing solely on end-of-life pathways for a material doesn’t give us the full picture of environmental and climate impacts. To quote McKinsey’s article on True packaging sustainability: “If we instead prioritise carbon impact, PET (polyethylene terephthalate) plastic bottles appear more favourable because aluminium cans and glass packaging have two to six times, respectively, the direct and indirect carbon footprint when compared with PET plastic bottles. This is largely the result of the more carbon-intensive production processes and transportation of these materials, which are difficult to offset even with higher overall recycling rates.” Furthermore, these analyses must also include the impact of recycling technologies across plastics as well as different materials, and material use should be determined with robust methodology for full life-cycle analysis.  

Another alternative, biodegradable or compostable plastics, also have their challenges at end-of-life. According to a report from CEFLEX (The Circular Economy for Flexible Packaging initiative), biodegradable materials (such as PLA and PHA) are likely to remain niche and the waste stream is expected to remain too small for collection and composting/recycling investment in the medium-term. Another potential risk from these biodegradable materials is the contamination of other waste streams. For example, PET streams being contaminated by PLA.  

While the priority remains the reduction of plastic use, if plastics are the chosen material, they must be redirected into the recycling system instead of landfill or incineration, where most existing mixed plastic waste streams end up. It is also critical to deliver circular solutions from plastics sorted into recycling streams, with these circular solutions displacing virgin oil being taken from the ground. Reshaping our linear plastic cycles to be fully circular requires a wide range of tools, including harmonised design for recycling guidelines, viable reduce and reuse models, and the adoption of multiple recycling pathways. 

Design for (mechanical) recycling guidelines  

‘Design for recycling’ (DfR) guidelines and recyclability assessment tools are increasingly commonplace and varied. The “Eco Design of Plastics Packaging” Round Table initiative has compiled a toolbox that hosts a list of existing guides and tools which have been developed for both rigid and flexible plastic packaging by industry associations and organisations over the last few years. A few key examples include:  

Design for (mechanical) recycling guidelines  

‘Design for recycling’ (DfR) guidelines and recyclability assessment tools are increasingly commonplace and varied. The “Eco Design of Plastics Packaging” Round Table initiative has compiled a toolbox that hosts a list of existing guides and tools which have been developed for both rigid and flexible plastic packaging by industry associations and organisations over the last few years. A few key examples include:  

Fig. 1. The RecyClass Guidelines are based on a traffic lights system (Credit: RecyClass)  

It makes sense that current guidelines are focused on mechanical recycling, as the chemical recycling industry is still growing to a capacity. That being said, early intervention is critical for change in large-scale industries such as plastics. A recent report by Systemiq titled ReShaping Plastics, expects chemical recycling to scale to 3Mt by 2030. Similarly, Plastics Europe estimates that the production of chemically recycled plastics in Europe will increase to 1.3 Mt and 3.4 Mt in 2030.  

Chemical recycling can often increase the value of recycled materials, hereby giving them properties and performance comparable to virgin polymers. These properties are needed by manufacturers, especially to produce plastic packaging used in food-contact applications, which makes up almost 40% of all plastic packaging used in Europe. At the same time, the demand for virgin-equivalent recycled materials in contact-sensitive applications is growing. Chemical recycling fills this need, producing high-quality, pure recycled materials for use in a wide range of applications. And by keeping recycled materials used again in their original applications, chemical recycling can help maximise circularity.  

Design for Recycling 2.0: Design for Circularity  

The need for updated guidelines based on the evolving advances in sorting technologies and the traditional and advanced recycling pathways is acknowledged by CEFLEX in its guidance document: “CEFLEX recognises the capabilities of sorting systems and mechanical recycling are likely to develop significantly in the coming five years, potentially enabling structures currently considered to be nonrecyclable, to be recycled. Enhanced mechanical recycling will also need to be augmented by the development of other technologies. Development of chemical recycling infrastructure will also be required to periodically ‘renew’ and rebuild the base polymer properties, to remove contaminants, residual fractions and recycle items which are too small to be handled by traditional mechanical recycling processes. Wherever possible, these future developments have been taken into consideration in this document, recognising that not all of them will be realised and there will be new technologies not yet considered.”  

While guidelines and frameworks exist to optimise the design of products and packaging for traditional recycling methods, including chemical recycling requirements in guidelines and frameworks can greatly boost the circularity of plastics. 

Chemical recyclers and industry bodies must act as intermediaries between plastic compounders and packaging designers to raise these issues. Product designers can integrate feedback from chemical recyclers on the recyclability of their products through different chemical recycling technologies. Just as with mechanical recycling, where certain additives and dyes can impede the recycling process and compromise product quality, the chemistry of common fillers and property enhancers can be detrimental downstream for chemical recycling technologies and/or their products. By understanding which materials can be more easily recycled through chemical recycling methods, designers can make more informed decisions about material selection and product design.  

Simultaneously, there is also a need to facilitate dialogue between waste managers and downstream petrochemical companies. Waste management companies, so far, have viewed mechanical recycling as the primary outlet because of the limited availability of alternative options. As chemical recycling technologies become part of the mainstream recycling ecosystem, waste management processes must evolve and adapt as well. This is ever apparent when needing to “translate” between the two industries, with waste management talking in terms of % polymer type, whereas petrochemical players speak in parts per million.  

Towards a circular economy for plastic packaging

Chemical recycling is a fundamental part of building a plastics circular economy. With a diverse range of technologies chemical recycling advances plastic circularity through:  

  • facilitating the recycling of materials that are difficult to recycle using current recycling technologies,   

  • enabling the use of a wider range of materials, 

  • encouraging better product design, 

  • and enhancing the quality of recycled materials 

Achieving true circularity is only possible with the required infrastructure needed to support an efficient and technology-agnostic circular ecosystem. This depends on increased investments in plastic waste collection services and advanced sorting technologies such as tracers or digital watermarks.  Investments will also be required to support further advancements in mechanical recycling processes and the rapid scaling of chemical recycling technologies. Their complementary use widens the scope of plastic waste being recycled, which will be crucial for maximising overall recycling rates.   

However, without a well-defined and inclusive policy framework, the path forward will be challenging. Legislation to ensure that chemical recycling counts towards the regulatory targets for recycling and recycled content must be expedited.  

All eyes are now on the UN Plastics Treaty, of which a first draft has just been published. Just before the INC-2 session concluded in Paris, UNEP published a report, “Turning off the Tap: How the world can end plastic pollution and create a circular economy”. The report states that “Plastics-to-plastics chemical recycling offers a promising solution in complement to mechanical recycling”. At Itero, we believe that this treaty presents a unique opportunity for global collaboration on solving the plastics crisis and hope to see continued focus on enshrining circularity at its core.  

Another important piece of legislation, expected to come into effect early next year is the European Union’s Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation (PPWR). In their position paper on PPWR, CEFIC (the European Chemical Industry Council) highlights the importance of chemical recycling as a complementary solution to traditional recycling technologies and calls for improvements in the design, collection, and sorting of packaging waste to deliver recycled content targets. To quote CEFIC’s paper, “It is important that the recyclability requirements remain technology neutral. While not yet specified in the proposal, the assessment of recyclability should consider the materials that can be recycled through all recycling pathways, including chemical recycling technologies.”  

The industry is also actively pursuing legal recognition of the mass balance approach for the allocation of chemically recycled content to the end product. CEFIC views mass balance as a “key enabler” and the “missing link” to deliver on the proposed targets. Along with 30 other associations representing the European plastics value chain, CEFIC recently issued a joint position letter on this critical topic. Additionally, the recent update from the UK Government regarding the launch of a consultation on the use of the mass balance approach for the Plastic Packaging Tax (PPT) is an encouraging development and a step in the right direction. A good example of what’s possible when the whole value chain comes together.  

There is no single solution to address the plastic waste challenge and the transition towards a sustainable and circular plastics economy will require a multi-layered and dynamic approach. Applying the tenets of the waste hierarchy needs to be at the core. For packaging applications where plastics are the best option, it is important to ensure that the package design considers both the functional requirements and sustainable end-of-life solutions. Together with traditional mechanical recycling processes, chemical recycling can ensure higher recycling rates overall. And by bringing the material back into the loop in the same use case, chemical recycling can maximise plastic circularity.  

Itero Communications
Previous

Itero awarded €5m from EU’s Just Transition Fund
Next

Do beach cleans really make a difference?