BASF and partners using pyrolysis process (Beware of CO2).

From an Article by Karen Laird, Plastics News, Feb. 16, 2022

Chemical recycling is setting itself up to be a very big player in the future. German consulting firm Ecoprog GmbH says that as of the end of 2021, there were more than 90 chemical recycling projects in various stages of development worldwide.

More than 20 plants were in operation, although, the study said, most were not commercial plants but mainly served to advance the knowledge of this technology. [So called “pilot plants” or “demonstration facilities.”]

Chemical recycling is a topic of controversial debate within the waste management sector. Supporters argue that in the future, chemical recycling will allow plastics of all kinds to be recycled without downcycling. The element various technologies have in common is that they enable the recovery of contaminated and mixed waste streams that currently cannot be recycled mechanically. That considerably expanda the range of potentially circular plastics.

Critics mainly find fault with the high CO2 emission rates associated with chemical recycling. They also fear that waste streams are being diverted from a more climate-friendly mechanical recycling process in order to be chemically processed.

Controversy aside, the chemical recycling space is a dynamic one, with the overwhelming majority of new projects in planning in Europe. This market development is being driven, said the study, by the potential to recycle a far broader range and quality of plastics combined with the various quotas and targets for recyclability and recycled content use.

However, for this to truly impact on these targets, chemical recycling must first be recognized in the waste hierarchy, the study points out. That is the move favored by the coalition German Traffic-light. Also, planned projects are not the same as executed projects, especially where investments of the magnitude needed for the realisation of a chemical recycling plant are concerned.

Moreover, challenges, such as high energy consumption and uncertainty regarding various technical issues, remain to be overcome. This relates in particular to the purification of the output from depolymerization, such as pyrolysis oil, from contaminants and additives. The discussion about the political classification of chemical recycling is other factor threatening to hinder its implementation.

Regardless, the report concludes that chemical recycling is “a potential key technology in the future production of plastics,” able to generate “large market shares” in the coming years.

These technologies will mainly affect the business model of today’s raw materials producers and the mineral oil industry, which currently supplies the fossil-based building blocks for the plastics industry to these raw materials producers.

This explains the interest of these companies in chemical recycling and why they are the ones that are particularly active in exploring these technologies.

Other active players in the sector are waste management companies – who provide the waste material streams required – and start-ups, whose founding ideas relate to the technical aspects of the process.

#######+++++++#######+++++++#######

“Trend Study – Chemical Recycling” by ecoprog examines the technical fundamentals, market factors, development status, plant inventory, projects and competition in the field of chemical recycling worldwide. The study can be ordered at: www.ecoprog.de

>>>>>>>…………………>>>>>>>…………………>>>>>>>

SEE ALSO: BASF, Quantafuel and REMONDIS want to cooperate on chemical recycling of plastic waste. Pyrolysis oil derived from plastic waste is fed into BASF’s Verbund production, thereby saving the same amount of fossil resources, April 30, 2021

BASF, Quantafuel and REMONDIS have signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) to jointly evaluate a cooperation in chemical recycling including a joint investment into a pyrolysis plant for plastic waste. It is intended that REMONDIS, one of the world’s leading waste and water management companies, supplies suitable plastic waste to the plant, and BASF uses the resulting pyrolysis oil as feedstock in its production Verbund as part of its ChemCyclingTM project. Quantafuel intends to provide the technology and to operate the plant. The company is a specialist for the pyrolysis of mixed plastic waste and the purification of the resulting pyrolysis oil; the technology is jointly developed and being held with BASF. The location of the pyrolysis plant will be evaluated together.

>>>>>>>…………………>>>>>>>…………………>>>>>>>

SEE ALSO: TotalEnergies to use recycled feedstock from Honeywell, Plastics News, February 17, 2022

Honeywell International has agreed to supply TotalEnergies with recycled polymer feedstock from a chemical recycling facility it is building with Sacyr in Spain. “Plastics demand will continue to grow, so it’s critical to create a linkage between waste management and plastics production to strengthen a circular flow of plastics,” said Honeywell executive Ben Owens.

>>>>>>>…………………>>>>>>>…………………>>>>>>>

SEE ALSO: New catalytic hydrocracking tech made for mixed plastics, Plastics Recycling Update, February 16, 2022

A new catalytic hydrocracking process out from a team at Johns Hopkins University turns mixed plastics into a mix of benzene, toluene and xylene, or BTX, that can be used in polystyrene, polycarbonate and other applications. The team is launching a new startup known as CUPTech to bring the technology to market.

Trash island in the Caribbean

From the Report of Minderoo Foundation, May 18, 2021

The contribution of individual plastic producers to the plastic waste crisis has been exposed for the first time, as a new report shows that just 20 companies produce over 50 per cent of all single-use plastic. Top financial institutions enabling plastic waste generation were also identified.

Analysis released today reveals the source and true scale of the global plastic waste crisis. It shows just 20 companies – supported by a small group of financial backers – are responsible for producing over 50 per cent of ‘throwaway’ single-use plastic that ends up as waste worldwide1. Published by Minderoo Foundation, the ‘Plastic Waste Makers Index’ has been developed with partners including Wood Mackenzie, and experts from the London School of Economics and Stockholm Environment Institute among others.

Made almost exclusively from fossil fuels, single-use plastics are the most commonly discarded type of plastic, too frequently becoming pollution. Environmental campaigners have previously placed the blame for plastic waste at the feet of packaged goods brands such as PepsiCo and Coca-Cola.

But now a small group of petrochemical companies who manufacture ‘polymers’ – the building block of plastics – is revealed as the source of the crisis:
>>> Twenty companies are the source of half of all single-use plastic thrown away globally.
>>> ExxonMobil tops the list – contributing 5.9 million tonnes to global plastic waste – closely followed by US chemicals company Dow and China’s Sinopec.
>>> One hundred companies are behind 90 per cent of global single-use plastic production.

Close to 60 per cent of the commercial finance funding single-use production comes from just 20 global banks. A total of US$30 billion of loans from these institutions – including Barclays, HSBC and Bank of America among others – has gone to the sector since 2011.

Twenty asset managers – led by US companies Vanguard Group, BlackRock and Capital Group – hold over US$300 billion worth of shares in the parent companies of single-use plastic polymer producers. Of this, US$10 billion is directly linked to single-use polymer production.

“The plastification of our oceans and the warming of our planet are amongst the greatest threats humanity and nature have ever confronted,” explains Dr Andrew Forrest AO, Chairman and Co-Founder, Minderoo Foundation. “Global efforts will not be enough to reverse this crisis unless government, business and financial leaders act in our children’s and grandchildren’s interests.

“This means: stop making new plastic and start using recycled plastic waste, it means re-allocate capital from virgin producers to those using recycled materials, and importantly, it means redesign plastic so it does no harm and is compostable, so like every other element, it returns to its original molecules, not nano-plastics. And we must act now. Because while we bicker, the oceans are getting trashed with plastic and the environment is getting destroyed by global warming,” Dr Forrest said.

“Tracing the root causes of the plastic waste crisis empowers us to help solve it,” adds Al Gore, former US Vice President. “The trajectories of the climate crisis and the plastic waste crisis are strikingly similar and increasingly intertwined. As awareness of the toll of plastic pollution has grown, the petrochemical industry has told us it’s our own fault and has directed attention toward behavior change from end-users of these products, rather than addressing the problem at its source.”

Minderoo Foundation, author of the report, is calling for:
>>> Petrochemicals companies to be required to disclose their ‘plastic waste footprint’ and commit to transitioning away from fossil fuels towards circular models of plastic production;
>>> Banks and investors to shift capital, investments and finance away from companies producing new fossil-fuel-based virgin plastic production, to companies using recycled plastic feedstocks.

Scale of Inaction and Growing Crisis — The report also lays bare the scale of inaction by plastic producers and how they are compounding the existing throwaway plastic waste crisis:
>>> A 30 per cent increase in global throwaway plastic production is projected over the next five years;
>>> This growth in production will lead to an extra three trillion items of throwaway plastic waste by 2025 alone;
>>> Recycled plastic or feedstocks account for no more than 2 per cent of global single-use plastic production, meaning 98 per cent of these plastics are produced from fuels;
>>> Plastic producers score woefully in a best practice assessment of the move to circular-based forms of production necessary in addressing the crisis;
>>> The global economic downturn caused by the coronavirus pandemic pushed down the price of oil, making fossil-fuel-based single-use plastics even more financially attractive.

“Our reliance on oil and gas is not only fuelling climate change, but as the primary material used in the production of throwaway plastics is also devastating our oceans,” explains Sam Fankhauser, Professor of Climate Change Economics and Policy at the Smith School, University of Oxford and Former Director, Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment, London School of Economics.

“It is critically important petrochemical companies move towards circular-economy-based alternatives if we are going to successfully tackle these interlinked crises. The benefits on offer are transformative and hugely beneficial not only for our environment and ecosystems, but also the communities living with the realities of plastic pollution.”

“This is the first-time the financial and material flows of single-use plastic production have been mapped globally and traced back to their source,” said Toby Gardner, Senior Research Fellow, Stockholm Environment Institute. “Revealing the sheer scale of the global crisis we have on our hands, its critical we break the pattern of inaction. You can’t manage what you can’t measure. Building on the analysis published today, this is why it is so important the small group of companies and banks that dominate global production of throwaway plastics begin to disclose their own data.”

More than 130 million metric tonnes of single-use plastic ended up as waste in 2019 – almost all of which is burned, buried in landfill, or discarded directly into the environment. Nineteen pre cent of this waste – some 25 million metric tonnes – became pollution, dumped in oceans or on land3. This is equivalent to the weight of over 23,000 blue whales, signifying the scale of the crisis, which is already having devastating ecological, social and environmental consequences.

Waste Per Person — The analysis shows which countries are the biggest contributors to the throwaway plastics crisis. Australia and the United States respectively produce the greatest amounts of single-use plastic waste per head of pollution, at more than 50 kg per person per year. In comparison, the average person in China – the largest producer of single-use plastic by volume – produces 18 kg of single-use plastic waste per year; in India that figure is as low as 4 kg per year.

The Plastic Waste-Makers Index is a project of Minderoo Foundation’s No Plastic Waste initiative, which aims to create a world without plastic pollution – a truly circular plastics economy, where fossil fuels are no longer used to produce plastics.

There is a wonderful world to be found after plastics

From the letter of Michelle Chan, Friends of the Earth, March 22, 2021

It’s the public health and environmental crisis that not enough people are talking about: PLASTIC.

Plastic will soon outweigh all the fish in the sea. It fills our rivers and oceans, chokes wildlife, permeates our drinking water and our food, and persists in the environment for centuries.

Discarded plastics don’t just disappear. They break down into smaller and smaller pieces, turning into microplastics that contaminate our water, soil, and the food we eat. Can we count on you to act now to stop plastics from overrunning our environment?

Scientists estimate that there are already 51 trillion pieces of plastic in our oceans. That’s 51 trillion deadly hazards that cause harm to ocean organisms — from the smallest of corals to the largest of whales.

In 2020, over 11 million metric tons of plastic was dumped in the ocean. If this trajectory is allowed to continue, by 2040, 29 million metric tons of plastic will be dumped annually.

One plastic bag, or bottle cap, or fishing net, can suffocate, strangle, or starve its helpless victim. After their bodies decompose, the plastic is released back into the environment where it can kill again — because plastics do not break down.

700 known marine species have been killed by either plastic entanglement or ingestion of plastic — resulting in over a million animal deaths every year.

Sea turtles, dolphins, seals, fish, and sea birds are all at risk if something isn’t done soon to address the plastic crisis. So, let’s take action to protect our vulnerable wildlife from deadly plastic hazards.

The world is facing an indisputable plastic pollution crisis. But it doesn’t end there: the plastics crisis is also linked to the climate crisis. More than 99% of plastic is made from fossil fuels, and one of the main ingredients is a byproduct of natural gas. The fracking boom is fueling an unprecedented surge in plastic production as well.

In fact, because of fracking, the fossil fuel industry plans to increase plastic production by 40% over the next decade. This not only means more fracking pollution, but also an explosion of new toxic petrochemical plants. These plants would be devastating to the health of millions of primarily low-income, Black, and brown Americans along the Gulf Coast and in Appalachia.

Here’s the dirty truth behind their actions: The fossil fuel industry is using plastics as their “get out of jail free” card. With the public demanding a shift away from burning oil and gas for energy or fuel, the industry wants to maximize plastic consumption, including unnecessary single-use plastics.

In short, this industry is destroying our planet with plastic pollution, harming the health of frontline communities, and pushing us further to climate catastrophe. It’s beyond outrageous.

That’s why Friends of the Earth is supporting The Break Free From Plastic Pollution Act, which holds corporations and plastic producers accountable for the plastic pollution crisis. We are also working to push the Biden Administration to enact the Presidential Plastics Action Plan, a comprehensive set of Presidential actions to tackle the crisis with or without Congress. And we’re pushing Congress and the Biden administration to stop giving the fracking industry special treatment as a “clean energy” version of fossil fuels.

As the fossil fuel industry doubles down on plastic as the new frontier for petrochemical production, we must do everything in our power to shape a new future — A future that isn’t bought and shaped by the richest and most powerful industries in the world. A future with a sustainable economy that doesn’t leave anybody behind.

Help us win a plastic-pollution-free future. Support Friends of the Earth with a donation today.

Plastics are choking off our planet EARTH

Thank you, Michelle Chan,
VP of Programs, Friends of the Earth

NOTE: Friends of the Earth
1101 15th Street NW, 11th Floor
Washington, D.C. 20005

Plastic code for reuse applications

From an Article by Dr. Kate Raynes – Goldie, Scitech News (Australia), October 23, 2020

Hands up if you grew up thinking that recycling plastic waste is key to saving the environment. It turns out that for decades the recyclability of plastics was grossly oversold by the plastics industry.

The creation of this recycling ‘myth’ is why, despite 30 years of being diligent recyclers, we have things like the Great Pacific Garbage Patch. In fact, we’ve only recycled 9% of all the plastics we’ve ever produced. And, our use of plastics is still increasing every year.

The reality of the situation is that recycling plastics is actually really hard and expensive. so, how did we get to a world full of plastic?

Triangle of mistruths on plastic products

The myth created around plastic recycling has been one of simplicity. We look for the familiar triangle arrows, then pop the waste in the recycling bin so it can be reused. But the true purpose of those triangles has been misunderstood by the general public ever since their invention in the 1980s.

These triangles were actually created by the plastics industry and, according to a report provided to them in July 1993, were creating “unrealistic expectations” about what could be recycled. But they decided to keep using the codes.

Which is why many people still believe that these triangular symbols (also known as a resin identifier code or RIC) means something is recyclable.

But according to the American Society for Testing and Materials International (ASTM) – which controls the RIC system – the numbered triangles “are not recycle codes“. In fact, they weren’t created for the general public at all. They were made for the post-consumer plastic industry.

Polystyrene cups are about as far from recyclable as you can get – but they still have a resin code. In other words, the symbols make it easier to sort the different types of plastics, some of which cannot be recycled – depending on the recycling facility.

“Unfortunately, just placing your plastic into the recycling bin doesn’t mean it will get recycled,” says Lara Camilla Pinho. She is an architect and lecturer at the UWA School of Design who is researching novel uses of plastic waste.

“The recycling system is complicated and often dictated by market demand. Not all plastic is recyclable. We cannot recycle plastic bags or straws for example.”

Behind the scenes — So, what makes recycling plastics so difficult?

“Essentially, there are two types of plastics – thermoplastics and thermosets. While thermoplastics can be re-melted and re-molded, thermosets contain cross-linked polymers that cannot be separated meaning they cannot be recycled,” says Lara.

“Even thermoplastics have a limit to the amount of times we can recycle them, as each time they are recycled they downgrade in quality.” Even when plastics are recyclable, it is often more costly than simply making new plastics.

Sugar, seaweed and mushrooms — If the conventional recycling system isn’t working, what else can we do with all the plastic we’ve created?

Lara is looking for ways to add value to recycled plastics such as using it in the design and development of architectural products. She hopes to use these architectural products to help underserved communities that are disproportionately affected by plastic waste.

In addition to recycling, we also need to find ways to reduce our use of virgin petroleum-based plastics.

Bioplastic is one such product that has been getting a lot of hype over the last few years. And although they’re better than petroleum-based plastics, bioplastics also come with their own set of challenges.

“There are already a lot of bio-based alternatives to plastic, such as bagasse – a byproduct of sugar cane processing,” says Lara.

View Larger — Sugarcane-based plastics can be used to make big designs – and small ones too. LEGO released their first plant-based bricks in 2018.

Mycelium, a type of fungi we most often associate with mushrooms, are also providing an interesting plastic alternative. “In the field of architecture, mycelium is starting to be used as an alternative to plastic insulation, but also as compostable packaging and bricks,” says Lara. “The bricks take around five days to make and are strong, durable, water resistant and compostable at the end of their use.” Hy-Fi Tower, created by The Living, is an example of a building made from these bricks.

Growing up, we thought we were going to save the world by recycling. But only 9% of all plastics we’ve produced have been recycled, and our use of plastics is still increasing every year. What went wrong?

And finally, there’s seaweed — “[Seaweed is] cheap and can reproduce itself quickly without fertilisers. In architecture, there is use for seaweed as an alternative to plastic insulation but also as cladding, ” says Lara.

More money, more problems — While all these alternatives are great, the main cause of our plastic dilemma is not scientific or technological, but economic.

As long as it remains cheaper to create new plastics from fossil fuels rather than from bioplastics or from recycling, we’re going to be stuck with plastic garbage islands floating in our oceans.

The true cost to our health and our environment has yet to be included in the equation. But once it is, maybe that is when the real shift will happen.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

See also: War on plastic waste faces setback as cost of recycled material soars, Jillian Ambrose, The Guardian, October 13, 2019

For years the cost of making plastic products from recycled flakes was cheaper than relying on virgin plastics made using fossil fuels, meaning the sustainable option was an economic option too. But according to experts it is now cheaper for major manufacturers to use new plastic. (Horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracking have lowered fossil energy price, being practiced widely with minimal environmental regulation.)

Recycling of plastics now problematic

From an Article by Renzo Pipoli, Reuters Events, October 27, 2020

The Canadian federal government announced in October plans to ban six very commonly used single-use plastic items by the end of 2021 to tackle a pollution problem that became more pressing after China banned plastic waste imports in 2018.

Canada’s Environment Minister Jonathan Wilkinson said the ban is part of a broader plan to reach zero plastic waste within a decade that will also include making plastic producers responsible for waste. Only plastics considered both harmful to the environment and costly to recycle were listed.

The coming ban on bags and six-pack rings will affect polyethylene while the one on straws will impact polypropylene (PP). Bans on plastic cutlery and drink stirrers will affect both PP and polystyrene. Bans on plastic food containers will hit expanded polystyrene.

The Canadian government has asked for feedback by December 9th. The ban will not come into effect until the end of 2021.

The planned bans in Canada are part of an international growing tendency, said Ashish Chitalia, Wood Mackenzie’s research director. “That is a trend that we’re seeing since 2018 as it all started when China banned the imports of plastic waste, and that has encouraged exporters of plastic waste, like North America, Europe, to improve their policies and reduce plastic waste at the source,” Chitalia said.

Industry to be responsible for plastic waste collection

The China ban, “along with social pressure to tackle the plastic waste in the environment and landfills,” are encouraging regulators to consider stemming the plastic waste at the source,” Chitalia added.

Wilkinson said single-use plastics easier to collect and recycle were not included.“The focus is on plastics that are particularly problematic, and that is particularly things like expandable polystyrene or Styrofoam,” he said. For example, drink containers and lids were not included, Wilkinson added on an Oct. 7 interview with CTV News.

“The broader part of this plan is to make producers and vendors responsible for the collection and recycling, to set requirements in terms of the amount of product that has to be recycled, to require recycled content standards,” he said.

There is an urgent need in Canada to tackle the plastic waste problem, he explained. “Last year 29,000 tonnes of plastic ended up in our environment. Most of it in our lakes, our rivers, and our ocean,” he said.

Other plans include incentives to consider recyclability in product design, and mandating minimum recycled components in manufacturing.

“When we throw away plastics that don’t get recycled we waste C$8 billion worth of material every year so there’s an opportunity to make sure we’re making good value and good use of resources,” Wilkinson said.

Canadian plastic waste exports under study

According to a 2019 report by Greenpeace about Canadian waste exports following China’s import ban in the preceding year, Canadian plastic waste exporters have struggled to find destinations.

In 2015 Canada exported to China, including Hong Kong, 100,618 tonnes of plastic waste, according to Greenpeace. Then came China’s January 2018 ban on 24 materials, including eight plastics. Since the ban, waste exporters have diverted shipping to countries including Malaysia, Taiwan and several others, but divided in smaller volumes, according to Greenpeace.

Results of a Greenpeace investigation of waste plastic found in unlicensed facilities in Malaysia detected Canadian labels in the plastic waste found there, the report said. Greenpeace called on the Canadian government to meet obligations under the Basel convention on the control of trans-boundary movements of hazardous wastes and their disposal.

U.S. companies warn against plastics ban

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce sent on Sept. 21 a letter to Mary Ng, Canada’s minister of international trade, undersigned by over 50 associations representing plastics from adhesives to vinyl, to warn that the ban undermines free-trade agreements.

“The proposed ban on any product containing plastic and manufactured in the U.S. clearly meets the definition of a non-tariff barrier,” the letter said. A ban “would have a disproportionate trade impact, given the $12.1 billion of manufactured plastic that enters Canada from the United States every year,” it added.

“That is exclusive of other products (like cars, medical supplies and devices, and information technology products) that contain plastic components or goods that require plastic to prevent contamination, such as food,” it added. “Such a precedent would create further incentives to ban trade by other governments, which could impact over $10 billion in Canadian exports of plastics and plastic products,” it added.

Industry concerned about ‘toxic’ designation

Both the U.S. and Canadian plastic industries object to the use of the word ‘toxic’ to describe plastics. “Consumers would assume that every day and essential products that contain plastic are now toxic,” the U.S. Chamber of Commerce letter said.

The Chemistry Industry Association of Canada (CIAC) on Oct. 7 shared the U.S. concern about the designation of plastics as ‘toxic’ and about using the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA) to regulate plastic disposal.

Wilkinson has said that if the issue around the word ‘toxic’ is one of nomenclature, the government is open to discussions but will not renounce efforts to protect the environment.

The CIAC has also shown concern about increased carbon taxation.

Canadian industry warns against ‘premature’ decisions

The Canadian government should not take “premature” decisions, the CIAC added.

Canada’s plastics producers are improving design for recycle and reuse models; and investing in recycling, it said. The industry’s own goals aim for products becoming fully recyclable or recoverable by 2030, while all plastic should be reused, recycled or recovered by 2040.

Programs to eliminate plastic pellets release from industry operations into rivers and oceans will be in place by 2022.

Canada’s plastics manufacturers add C$28 billion to the economy annually and employ 93,000 Canadians, it said. According to Wood Mackenzie’s Chitalia, the ban “gives an opportunity for Canadian producers of bioplastics to penetrate single-use plastics markets.”

###########################

See also: Plastic Pollution Coalition calls out retailers ….

Calling on AMAZON: “Ditch Single-Use Plastic Packaging”

It’s time to stop plastics pollution everywhere

Plastics pollution is severe and getting worse

From an Article by Michael Tanenbaum, Philly Voice, December 12, 2019

Philadelphia City Council passed a bill Thursday that will ban retailers from providing customers with single-use plastic bags, ending a 12-year effort to enact the environmentally minded legislation.

The ban spearheaded by Councilman Mark Squilla, who pushed for it previously on four separate occasions, would take effect July 2, 2020, pending the final signature from Mayor Jim Kenney.

Businesses affected include supermarkets, convenience stores, service stations, department stores, dollar stores, clothing stores, restaurants, food trucks, farmers’ markets, dry cleaners, and delivery services

Despite an attempt to also impose a 15-cent fee for all other single-use bags – such as paper and heavier plastic bags – provided by businesses to customers, that provision was ditched when other council members argued it would disproportionately impact the city’s poorer residents.

The law is intended to both reduce waste and save the city money. Philadelphia spends between $9 million and $12 million a year cleaning plastic bag waste from the streets, sewers, and bodies of water.

“Philadelphia uses approximately 1 billion single-use bags every year, and most of those are plastic,” said Joseph Otis Minott, executive director of Clean Air Council. “These bags litter our communities and cost taxpayers millions of dollars every year to clean up. Although this bill is long overdue and misses a very important fee component, we are very pleased that City Council has finally started to address the chronic, and devastating litter problems the city faces.”

Environmental groups withdrew support for the bill when the 15-cent fee was dropped, claiming the ban would be far less effective if customers faced no penalty for not bringing a reusable bag.

The bill does include a study on the outcome of the program to determine whether it needs to be adjusted, potentially by adding a fee at a future date.

“By banning single-use plastic retail bags, Philadelphia has joined hundreds of other communities across the country in sending a message that we realize there is a plastic problem,” Minott added. “We hope that this law will be amended in the next session to include a fee on all other bags.”

The Three (3) R’s for Our Green World

Shale-fueled US plastics boom puts spotlight on sustainability

From S & P Global Platts News Service, October 22, 2019

Virgin plastic production is thriving in the US, fueled by the North American shale boom. But the reversal of fortune for the US chemical industry has highlighted a bigger challenge amid widespread concern about plastic waste and sustainability.

The growth of shale activity across the US unearthed ethane feedstock so cheap that a region that had been facing naphtha-fed plant shutdowns and petrochemical imports saw the cost advantage of home-fracked gas shaping its future as a global petrochemical supplier.

As such, the focus has overwhelmingly been on ethane-fed crackers and derivative polyethylene (PE), the resin used to make the most-used plastics in the world, and less on how to deal with the plastics they produce after use.

Companies are stepping up their efforts in recycled plastics, most notably with the Alliance to End Plastic Waste, to which dozens of companies have committed more than $1 billion to find solutions to the plastic waste problem.

While petrochemical giants like Dow, BASF, LyondellBasell, Sabic, Braskem, Sinopec, Sasol and Reliance Industries are among the alliance’s members, most efforts in the US focus on research and funding.

Production is still mainly virgin plastics, with inclusion of recycled resin in new plastic products being pushed by resin buyers. And resin producers face the same key challenge as their counterparts in other regions, of sourcing enough high-quality plastic waste as a feedstock.

New ethylene and polyethylene (PE) capacity growth

Fourteen new ethane crackers that are operational, under construction or planned from 2017 beyond 2020 will add nearly 18.5 million mt/year, or 52%, more US ethylene capacity. In addition, 28 new PE plants starting up or planned in the same span will increase capacity by nearly 60%, or 13.67 million mt/year.

Other derivatives are accompanying some of the new crackers, such as monoethylene glycol or alcohols units, and a new polypropylene plant under construction. The companies that went all in on these projects include the biggest global names in petrochemicals: Dow, ExxonMobil, Chevron Phillips Chemical, LyondellBasell, Formosa Plastics USA, Sasol and Ineos.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Massive cranes, some over 700 ft. tall dominate “Cracker” construction site

Article by Gerry Ricciutti, WKBN News, September 24, 2019

“Work could take another year and a half to complete”

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

ExxonMobil Scouting Property For 2nd Cracker Plant In Beaver County

From an Article by Reid Frazer, StateImpact Penna., October 17, 2019

ExxonMobil is reportedly looking for land to build a large chemical plant in Beaver County. If built, it would be the second major chemical plant in Beaver County built to take advantage of cheap natural gas from the region’s fracking industry.

Shell is already buidling a six-billion dollar plant in Monaca that will make plastic out of ethane, a common byproduct of natural gas. Other companies are looking at locations in Ohio and West Virginia.

“Certainly there is a a large supply of (natural gas liquids) which could potentially be converted into plastics for industrial use,” said Jennifer Van Dinter, an analyst at S&P Global Platts.

“By the early 2020s, we’re (projecting) between about 500,000 and 600,000 barrels a day of ethane being produced, and that would be capable of supporting four to five petrochemical facilities,” Van Dinter said.

Plastics are an overwhelming problem for society

Editorial from Morgantown Dominion Post, August 16, 2019

More than 50 years later, we are still reckoning with that one word.
In an iconic scene in the 1968 film, “The Graduate,” a brief dialogue ensues between the recent college graduate and a family friend at his graduation party.

Mr. McGuire: “I want to say one word to you. Just one word.” Benjamin: “Yes, sir.” Mr. McGuire: “Are you listening?” Benjamin: “Yes, I am.” Mr. McGuire: “Plastics.”

Many have over-analyzed that exchange from a score of perspectives but we’re going to keep it simple here. The future in 1968 was going to be in the booming plastics industry and Benjamin should look to a career in it.

Half a century later we’re wallowing, no, drowning in that industry’s pollution from the high seas to the lowlands.

To its credit, the Monongalia County Commission took the initiative on plastic recycling years ago and has just kept going with it. Ditto for the city of Morgantown contracting with its trash hauler to provide for single-stream recycling.

However, we’re losing the battle on plastics recycling and look to be harming the environment in our efforts. For instance, the good done by the recycling roundups and pickups is often undercut by carbon emissions of the hundreds of vehicles those tons of plastics arrive in. Not to mention the water used to clean them for recycling.

We recently read that despite Lane County, Ore.’s successful roundups it decided to turn over plastic recycling to its residents. After volunteers undergo training to serve as community collectors their goal is to collect two cubic yards of plastic before scheduling a date to drop it off for recycling.

Two cubic yards is approximately the size of a pickup truck bed or a jumbo refrigerator. Collectors may be neighbors, businesses, churches, civic groups or others. Yet, even if that program’s goal of 300 collectors is met it still won’t stem the tide of plastic needing to be recycled.

It’s estimated worldwide, only about 14% or 15% of all plastic is recycled. The problem it would seem is our society generates far more plastic than it needs. We realize there might be bigger issues than goals to collect No. 2, 4 and 5 plastic bottles, jugs, tubs and lids.

But any policies and programs to endlessly recycle single-use cutlery, bottles and straws is delusional without a new approach to this issue. Aiming for no-plastic use for the vast majority of people is unrealistic.

However, we can all do more to overcome our plastics’ addiction. Clearly, consumers may not know where to start, but if everyone takes some responsibility for this issue and government leads we can do better.

If we use less plastics to begin with and collect more of it we can make a greater difference. Otherwise, that one word 50 years from today may just spell, disaster.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

See also: “Marium, The Dugong Who Charmed Thailand, Dies After Ingesting Plastic,” Amy Held, NPR, August 17, 2019

https://www.npr.org/2019/08/17/752042032/marium-the-dugong-that-charmed-thailand-dies-after-ingesting-plastic/

Farm Greenhouse Plastics Abound

Agricultural Plastic Recycling Effort to Begin December 9, 2015

“Rows of White Tubes line many Pendleton County fields as farmers prepare for winter feeding season.  An area recycling program is aimed at disposing of the used plastic in an environmentally friendly way.”

>>> From an Article in The Pendleton Times, Franklin, WV, November 26, 2015

According to a study published by Penn State University (PSU) in 2014, the agriculture industy uses hundreds of millions of pounds of plastic and the amount is expected to rise.  Plastic allows farmers to increase production and decrease costs.  The most common use of plastic, locally, is for silage tubes, bale wrap and net wrap, all of which result in less spoilage of forages and increased product.

For many years landfills have been the popular “dumping place” for these products.  On-farm disposal can create unsightly piles and/or havens for rodents such as mice and snakes.

In the PSU study, 60% of the farmers surveyed indicated that they disposed of the used plastic either by burning on site or by hauling the waste to a landfill. Unfortunately, burning or burying the plastic on site may require a permit and landfill space is rapidly disappearing. (In 1979, there were 18,500 landfills nationwide but by 2009 the number had dropped to 1,908).

Luckily, Pendleton County farmers now have an environmentally responsible solution to eliminate those white mounds that accumulate near feeding areas this time of year.  The Region VIII Solid Waste Authority, WV-DEP, WV Farm Bureau and West Virginia University Extension Service are continuing a project to collect, free of charge, certain agricultural plastic for recycling.

Recycling takes the plastic from waste and returns it to the manufacturing process.  Used plastic is collected at the drop-off and shipped to a recycler where it is separated, cleaned and pelletized or shredded before being reprocessed.  The reprocessed plastic is used to make such products as trash bags, flower pots, park benches, industrial pallets and composite lumber.

However, as with most recycling projects it does take a little planning.  Agricultural plastics that can be recycled include: silage bags, net wrap, silage wrap, bunk silo covers and greenhouse plastic.  These plastics should be kept relatively clean (no mud or manure) and dry. It should be free of as much vegetative material as possible, in bundles that can be handled by one person, and collected and stored off the ground and in a dry location before delivery.  New wrap of all colors can be recycled, however, the colors must be separated.  Rock, soil and/or manure covered plastic should not be delivered as excessively dirty or contaminated material will not be accepted for recycling.

Unfortunately, this project cannot accept plastic bale twine, row covers, nursery pots, irrigation tubing, plastic jugs or plastic bottles.  Unacceptable materials will be immediately returned to the hauler.

Starting in December, agricultural plastic will be accepted for recycling at the Petersburg Transfer Station on the second Wednesday of the month from 8 AM to 3 PM.

For more information on the Agricultural Plastic Recycling Program in Region VIII, contact David Seymour at the Pendleton County Extension Office.

<< An article from last year about this program is on-line >>