OPINION | PACKAGING
capital cost than new pyrolysis capacity can be built from scratch. Every tonne of previously “chemical- recycling-only” polyolefin waste that a sorting and decontamination upgrade pulls into the mechani- cal stream is a tonne that carries the JRC’s cost advantage with it – and it’s a tonne a recycler can capture with a process upgrade rather than a new-build.
Reading the economics without overstating them It’s worth being precise about the comparison. The JRC models chemical recycling costs against virgin material, not directly against mechanical recycling costs for equivalent food-grade output. Mechanical recycling’s yield advantage is structural – it pre- serves the polymer rather than breaking it down to monomer or hydrocarbon building blocks and reconstructing it, so a far higher share of input tonnage ends up as saleable output. That translates directly into lower energy intensity per tonne recovered and a correspondingly lower carbon footprint, a conclusion the JRC’s modelling supports even though carbon accounting sits outside its core cost analysis. The honest caveat, which the JRC also flags, is
that mechanical recycling has its own ceiling. Polymer properties degrade incrementally with each thermal reprocessing cycle, and heavily contaminated, degraded or genuinely mixed-poly- mer streams will keep needing a route that chemi- cal recycling – pyrolysis in particular – is better suited to provide. The JRC’s yield and cost figures for pyrolysis aren’t an argument against the technol- ogy; they’re an argument for deploying it where it’s genuinely needed, rather than defaulting to it for any polyolefin stream that’s proved hard to sort.
What it means for capacity planning The regulatory backdrop sharpens the timing. Under PPWR, contact-sensitive plastic packaging other than PET must contain a minimum of 10% post-consumer recycled content by January 2030, rising to 25% by 2040; other plastic packaging carries a 35% target by 2030, rising to 65% by 2040. Brand owners will be sourcing hard against those
About the author
Professor Edward Kosior is CEO and Founder at Nextek, which is leading the Nextloopp program for closing the loop on food-grade PP. �
www.nextek.org �
www.nextloopp.com
12 PLASTICS RECYCLING WORLD | September 2026
targets and recyclers who can qualify food-grade PP and PE now are positioned to capture that demand at a structural cost advantage over chemical recycling routes – provided the sorting and decon- tamination investment is in place to earn it. That argues for three things recyclers should be weighing in parallel: continued investment in sorting and decontamination infrastructure, since this is where addressable tonnage actually grows; closer engagement with brand owners and converters on design-for-circular-recycling, so more of what enters collection streams is genuinely suited to mechanical recovery rather than requiring intensive processing by default; and realistic assessment of underused existing capacity as the fastest, lowest-capital route to expanding output, ahead of new-build chemical recycling projects.
Where chemical recycling still has the better claim None of this argues for sidelining chemical recycling. Multi-material laminates, heavily degrad- ed and contaminated waste and streams where sorting to food-grade purity isn’t realistically achievable will stay outside mechanical recycling’s reach for the foreseeable future, and pyrolysis and solvolysis remain the only current routes capable of recovering any value from them. The JRC’s own framing – that chemical recycling can help meet PPWR obligations despite its cost disadvantage – reflects that reality. The two technologies serve different fractions of the waste stream, and the boundary between them has moved, and contin- ues to move, in mechanical recycling’s favour as sorting and decontamination technology improves.
The commercial takeaway for recyclers For reprocessors assembling investment plans for 2030 and beyond, the JRC report is best read as a prompt to test an assumption about their own feedstock, not as a verdict on any single technol- ogy. Where a polyolefin waste stream can be sorted, decontaminated and validated to food- contact standard, the economics now favour capturing that polymer through an upgraded mechanical line rather than watching it get diverted to a pyrolysis plant. Where it genuinely can’t be sorted to that standard, chemical recycling remains the only credible route and merits continued investment on those terms. Getting that allocation right – stream by stream
and increasingly plant by plant – is now as much a capital-planning decision as a technical one. The JRC’s numbers finally give recyclers a solid basis for making it.
www.plasticsrecyclingworld.com
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
