OVERVIEW
however, forecast to accelerate at a faster pace. South-East Asian markets are attractive for the industry owing to a large and growing population and the associated volumes of post-use plastics. Waste collection and sorting infrastructures do, however, remain largely underdeveloped and, with a few exceptions, there is an initial focus on mechanical recycling. Approaching the last quarter of 2022, the chemical recycling industry had reached a signifi- cant threshold. Following many years of develop- ments and announcements the first commercially active facilities are operating, and a significant number of plants are scheduled to start fully commercial operations imminently and during 2023. Even larger capacities are in the pipeline and scheduled to become operational during the forecast period to 2030. Across the industry, there appears to be the
perception that the time has come to deliver on the multitude of announcements made over recent years. Supply chain partners and investors are keen to see facilities starting fully commercial operations, proving that the relevant technologies can be scaled up to operate in an efficient and financially viable manner in the long term. Evidence that they can do so is, in many cases, still outstanding. The same applies to claims relating to carbon foot- prints, energy efficiency, risks to human health, and environmental externalities.
Lock-in effect? Many concerns associated with the growing industry are related to the perception that it, together with other (re)-emerging technologies such as, for example, carbon capture and storage, attempt to offer a technological fix to the world’s problems of high carbon emissions and plastic pollution, while otherwise business continues as usual. A particular concern is that investments into
what is a capital-intensive industry will potentially divert attention away from reducing virgin plastic production and plastic waste generation by creating a “lock-in effect” to an industry and supply chain that relies on a growing stream of waste plastic material for its operations. It is for the chemical recycling industry to show, verified by independent third-party bodies, that it can deliver on its claims and promises without creating the lock-in effects outlined above, and by operating as a complementary technology to mechanical recycling, itself an industry character- ised by innovations and advancements for the processing of a growing range of post-use plastics. What is of concern in the ongoing debate
Chemical Recycling – Global Insight 2023
About the report
AMI Consulting’s recently published Chemical Recycling Global Status 2022 consists of two parts: a PDF report and an interactive Excel file. The file lists 181 chemical recyclers and their 456 sites. For each site,AMI analyses feedstock supply and offtake agreements. It provides a view of chemical recyclers’ partnerships along the value chain at site level, putting their operations into the context of a network of industry relationships, investors, feedstock suppliers, technology partners, and buyers. The data includes available input capacity by region, technology and polymer to 2030. To find out more about the report and how to purchase it,
contact
astrid.dellaporta@
amiplastics.com. Contact the author of the report, AMI consultant Silke Einschuetz, at
silke.einschuetz@amiplastics.com.
around chemical recycling technology is the strong polarisation of opinions. While some proponents of the associated technologies praise their capabili- ties and promise the “biggest”, “most efficient”, “lowest CO2 footprint” plant which will contribute to solving the shortage of recycled material, opponents are quick to condemn “chemical recycling” as if it was one single technology, often with the claim that it involves “burning plastics”. Neither of these two positions is helpful.
Overpromising and neglecting the (in some cases) justified concerns regarding facilities’ externalities has the potential to damage the chemical recycling industry overall, while point blank criticism disre- gards the valuable contribution chemical recycling technologies can make in treating previously non-recyclable material streams. Rather than focusing on the potential competi- tion between two sets of technologies, each of which will need to play its part in improving recycling rates, a whole system approach to waste management and recycling needs to be devel- oped. For this to happen, the focus of attention needs to shift to the ways in which waste material streams are being managed today. This would see the waste management industry evolving from a system that channels significant volumes of unsorted waste into landfill and incineration solutions, towards a system that aims to bring as many materials as possible back into circularity in a clear and decisive recognition of post-use plastics as a valuable resource rather than waste. In many cases, this will require letting go of long-established vested interests and solidified structures of managing waste, and to move towards a higher level of co-operation and partner- ships with the common goal of turning waste into valuable resources.
7
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72
