As Plastics Keep Piling Up, Can 'Advanced' Recycling Cut ...

Proponents of a process called pyrolysis—including oil and gas companies—contend it will prevent post-consumer plastics from ending up in landfills and reduce pollution. However, critics argue that converting waste into petroleum feedstock will only perpetuate a reliance on fossil fuels.

You will receive efficient and thoughtful service from Sihai Energy.

Bob Powell spent more than a decade in the energy industry before focusing on the problem of plastic waste. “I’m very passionate about the environment,” he says. He considers the growing issue of irresponsibly discarded plastic to be a major environmental concern, right behind global warming and drought. In his search for solutions, he discovered a suite of technologies that uses chemicals and heat to convert plastic into oil for the production of more plastic.

Since then, Powell founded a plastics renewal company, Brightmark, Inc. Its first plant is currently in its start-up phase and has processed 2,000 tons of waste plastic at its Circularity Center in Ashley, Indiana. Using an advanced recycling technique known as pyrolysis, post-consumer plastics delivered to the Brightmark plant undergo intense heat in an oxygen-starved environment, causing their molecules to break apart. This process yields a type of oil similar to plastic's petroleum feedstock, along with some waste byproducts. Ideally, Powell states, Brightmark will sell this oil to manufacture new plastic, promoting genuine circularity in the manufacturing supply chain.

Around the globe, companies are planning pyrolysis plants, asserting they will address the urgent issue of plastic pollution. Small startups and demonstration projects are collaborating with larger corporations, including petroleum and chemical giants. Chevron Phillips recently received a patent for its proprietary pyrolysis process, while ExxonMobil announced in March that it is considering opening pyrolysis plants in Baton Rouge, Louisiana; Beaumont, Texas; and Joliet, Illinois. Additionally, ExxonMobil already operates a pyrolysis facility in Baytown, Texas, which claims to recycle 500,000 tons of plastic waste annually by 2024.

“There’s a lack of transparency about how much plastic they’re recycling and what the end product will be used for,” a critic states.

Globally, the market for advanced recycling technologies is projected to exceed $9 billion by 2028, up from $270 million in 2021, according to a report by Research and Markets, an industry analysis firm. This represents a 32 percent increase each year over nine years.

Supporters of pyrolysis argue that it will keep plastic out of landfills, incinerators, and waterways, thus preventing it from harming marine life and ensuring toxic components do not leach into soil and water. The American Chemistry Council claims that advanced recycling reduces greenhouse gas emissions by 43 percent compared to waste-to-energy incineration of plastic films made from virgin resources.

The technology can handle plastics that cannot be mechanically melted or remolded—those stamped with the numbers three through seven. This includes certain plastic films, juice pouches, and polystyrene foam take-out boxes. The pyrolysis vessel itself does not emit any harmful substances, as there is no oxygen for combustion. However, heating it with fossil fuels releases typical greenhouse gases and other pollutants.

Nonetheless, opponents argue that pyrolysis advocates are not fully honest about their production outcomes. “There’s a real lack of transparency concerning how much plastic they’re recycling and what their end product—pyrolysis oil—will actually be used for,” says Veena Singla, a senior scientist at the Natural Resources Defense Council.

Some companies, like LG Chem in South Korea, have verifiable plans to transform plastic items into useful hard goods. The company has teamed up with the marine-waste disposal entity NETSPA to convert fishnets and buoys into a substance called “aerogel,” a super-light insulation. Its pyrolysis plant near Seoul is scheduled to begin operations in late 2024.

However, as Singla points out, pyrolysis primarily produces oil intended for refinement and sale as fuel. An analysis by the Minderoo Foundation, an Australia-based philanthropy focused on the environment, predicted that out of the 2 million tons of advanced recycling capacity expected to come online within five years, less than half a million tons will actually be recycled back into plastic goods. The rest will be used for powering airplanes, trucks, and other heavy transportation.

The viability of turning plastics into fuel hinges on the type of plastic processed and the current price of oil. While it may be profitable, Singla emphasizes that this is not true recycling. “Recycling benefits arise when materials are reintegrated into the production cycle, reducing the demand for virgin resources. That is what traditional mechanical recycling of simple polyethylene terephthalate (PETE) and high-density polyethylene (HDPE) does.” By using plastic as fuel, she cautions, “it does not feed back into plastic production, necessitating continued extraction of fossil fuels.”

The data from one study indicates that creating pyrolysis oil from used plastic could be more harmful to the climate than extracting crude oil from the ground.

Powell asserts his commitment to achieving 100 percent circularity—transitioning from plastic back to plastic—“and we will be relentless in that pursuit.” Nonetheless, he acknowledges that as the market evolves and recycled plastic prices drop, some pyrolysis oil might initially be sold as fuel. He mentions, “In emerging economies, there might not be a practical way to utilize the liquids as feedstock for plastic manufacturing.” However, Powell believes that converting plastics into fuel is preferable to allowing the 90 percent of post-consumer plastic that remains unrecycled to accumulate in the environment. “You’ve likely seen videos of areas inundated with rivers of plastic waste. If we could extract that plastic and convert it into fuel, wouldn’t that be a better environmental outcome?”

For more information about Pyrolysis Plant, please contact us for professional answers.

“Yes, it is,” he responds. “You’d better believe it.”

Converting plastic into fuel would certainly help sustain the petroleum-based polymer industry, which some consider the primary goal of advanced chemical recycling. “The fossil gas industry is attempting to leverage plastics to extend their production, even as they contribute significantly to climate chaos,” states Senator Jeff Merkley of Oregon. He is among 47 U.S. Senators—all Democrats—who signed a letter protesting the EPA’s proposal to classify pyrolysis and gasification as manufacturing instead of incineration, which faces stricter regulations. Merkley has also questioned the EPA’s inclusion of plastic-derived fuel as a “waste-based” fuel under the Renewable Fuel Standard, a federal initiative that mandates transportation fuels sold in the U.S. to contain a varying percentage of renewable fuels to diminish greenhouse gas emissions.

Fuel produced from plastic does not satisfy basic criteria for biofuels or renewable fuels, asserts Taylor Uekert, a researcher at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) in Golden, Colorado, and lead author of a study examining plastics recycling methods. “Plastic is not an infinitely renewable resource,” emphasizes Uekert. Moreover, plastic-based fuel is not a climate-friendly solution. “When converting plastic back into oil for fuel, one must compare the environmental effects with those of producing fuel from fossil sources.”

NREL researchers have begun gathering data from patent applications to assess the energy needed to create pyrolysis oil versus the energy generated from burning that oil. Preliminary data suggests that generating pyrolysis oil from recycled plastic, factoring in the energy necessary to heat the vessel, results in higher climate impact compared to conventional crude oil extraction.

“In general, you’ll generate higher greenhouse gas emissions from pyrolysis than you would from conventional drilling,” states Uekert. Furthermore, pure pyrolysis oil cannot be directly added to gasoline tanks; it requires refinement. The refining process poses significant risks, particularly to communities living near refineries—often comprised of Black, Brown, or low-income populations—exposing them to additional toxic emissions.

A citizens' group in Mississippi is suing the EPA for approving plastic-based fuel production at a Chevron refinery.

Investigative reporting by ProPublica revealed data from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency indicating long-term exposure to pollutants produced during plastic-based jet fuel production could lead to a one-in-four lifetime cancer risk. “That kind of risk is unacceptable,” remarked Linda Birnbaum, former head of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences. Despite this, the EPA has permitted production of this “new chemical” at a Chevron refinery in Pascagoula, Mississippi, without disclosing the proprietary substance's name.

Chevron’s refinery is not the only facility converting pyrolysis oil into transportation fuels. Katherine O’Brien, a senior attorney with the environmental law organization Earthjustice, states, “We are aware of other facilities across the country also indicating they refine or produce fuel products from pyrolysis oils.” However, understanding the full extent of the issue and identifying communities at risk is challenging due to the EPA's significant lack of transparency in approving these new chemicals. Earthjustice currently represents a Mississippi citizens’ coalition taking legal action against the EPA for approving Chevron’s production of plastic-based fuel under the Toxic Substances Control Act. O’Brien asserts, “We aim to challenge the EPA's transparency failures as a legal violation in this case.”

Plastic waste remains a pressing issue, as highlighted by Alexis Goldsmith, an organizer with the nonprofit Beyond Plastics. She argues that pyrolysis and similar processes—which she refers to as “false recycling”—have additional drawbacks: they divert political momentum from waste reduction efforts. “This development could discourage lawmakers from enacting plastic bag bans and other measures that could reduce plastic usage,” she asserts. Rather than tackling plastic consumption, certain state governments endorse pyrolysis and gasification as solutions for plastic waste, undermining initiatives to minimize polymer use within the consumer and business sectors. As of April 2021, 24 states, including Indiana, where Brightmark’s Circularity Center is located, have enacted legislation categorizing pyrolysis and gasification as manufacturing rather than incineration or solid waste disposal, allowing these plants to operate under less stringent regulations and sometimes receive government incentives for job creation.

Goldsmith believes this approach is fundamentally misguided. “We cannot recycle our way out of the plastic waste crisis,” she states, whether through mechanical or chemical methods. “We must hold the world’s largest plastic polluters accountable and compel them to reduce the amount of plastic they introduce into the market in the first instance.”

So how should society manage the hundreds of millions of tons of polymers already present in the environment, consumer sector, and waste stream? “Contain them,” she advises, “similar to how we handle nuclear waste. It is better to isolate them in a landfill than to incinerate them.”

Correction, June 5, 2024: An earlier version of this article misidentified a senior attorney at Earthjustice. She is Katherine O’Brien, not Kathleen O’Brien.

For more details on the 10 ton tire pyrolysis plant, feel free to reach out to us.