Proportional allocation of recycled content in plastics best option for measuring environmental impact: study reveals

EUROPE – Zero Waste Europe (ZWE) has published a study examining the consequences of different approaches to allocating recycled content in plastic.

The study proves that proportional allocation has the lowest impact on the level-playing field and the largest potential environmental benefits.

National and European policymakers should implement regulations ensuring that mechanical methods remain the primary recycling option for maximum CO2 reduction and circularity score, stresses ZWE’s Chemical Recycling and Plastic-to-Fuels policy officer Lauriane Veillard.

“The aim of introducing recycled content in the EU legislation is to foster the shift toward a more circular and sustainable society,” said Veillard.

“Current developments are made to build trust, reflect reality and achieve real sustainability. Therefore, any environmental claims should be transparent and trustworthy.

“This is an obligation we have toward consumers, but also to highlight differences between inherent recyclability potential of different materials.”

Launched and presented during a Zero Waste Live! Webinar installment, the “Impacts of allocation rules on chemical recycling – Consequences on the environment and maximum circularity of plastics” study calculated the impact of the different allocation rules regarding the environment, material circularity and level-playing field in the recycling landscape.

The study finds that recycled content claims based on proportional allocation led to greater transparency in the plastic recycling market, as it reduces ambiguity about recycled content in plastic outputs.

“If the European Commission (EC) chooses a method for recycled content based on a polymers-only or a fuel-exempt allocation model, a cap on thermo-chemical technologies (pyrolysis and gasification) may be necessary to prevent it from outcompeting mechanical recycling,” she asserts.

“The cap suggested in the study is 12.5-25% on chemical recovery, as proposed in the Dutch Transition Agenda.”

Furthermore, the study finds that in the recycling landscape, a larger share of thermo-chemical technologies results in lower environmental benefits and reduced maximum recycling rates.

EC recommendations

ZWE urges the EC to consider the study’s findings on allocation rules and recycled content targets for plastics in their upcoming files.

The European network calls on the EC to use “batch level” mass balance (instead of allocating it arbitrarily) to determine recycled content so it is clear how much-recycled material is in the final product.

It also suggests the EC should consider capping chemical recovery to avoid overtaking mechanical recycling if polymers-only or fuel-exempt models are used and implement regulations to ensure that mechanical remains the primary recycling option for maximum CO2 reduction and circularity score.

“We see a lot of emphasis on improving the end-of-life treatment of plastic. However, to ensure a scaling-up of an efficient recycling system, changes should also happen at the production phase with an effective design for recycling,” concludes Veillard.

“Study says that around 80% of GHG related to end-of-life treatment of plastic could be avoided with a right design in the first place.”

For all the latest packaging and printing industry news from Africa and the World, subscribe to our NEWSLETTER, follow us on Twitter and LinkedIn, like us on Facebook, and subscribe to our YouTube channel.