As recyclers, we know we cannot recycle our way out of the plastic pollution crisis. Last month, that message received national attention when the attorney general of California, Rob Bonta, filed a lawsuit against ExxonMobil, claiming the plastics and petrochemical industry is responsible for our environmental crisis due to deceptive public messaging about plastic recycling.
The lawsuit alleges that ExxonMobil has known for decades that recycling plastics is both technically and economically difficult and would have minimal impact on reducing the vast amount of plastic waste polluting our environment and bodies. Nevertheless, the lawsuit states, the company continued to promote both mechanical and “advanced” recycling as a feasible solution.
The lawsuit calls for the establishment of an “abatement” fund financed by ExxonMobil to address ongoing plastic pollution. This fund would support initiatives such as cleanups and the development of new methods for breaking down plastics. Additionally, Mr. Bonta proposed that the fund could be used for a “re-education” campaign to inform consumers about which plastics are recyclable and, just as importantly, which are not.
We don’t have a recycling crisis. We have a plastic packaging crisis.
In response, ExxonMobil released a statement blaming California’s recycling system, not its products. As recyclers, we know this is not true. Every day, we are saddled with tons of unrecyclable plastics that were never designed for the recycling system and have no end markets – including the markets to which ExxonMobil sells its virgin plastic.
Recycling infrastructure in the United States needs to be strengthened to ensure all communities have access to quality programs. But we, as the boots-on-the-ground operators making recycling work every day, know recycling has become the scapegoat for unchecked plastic packaging production. The problem is not the recycling system—it’s plastics.
Most plastic is not designed for recyclability. Single-use plastic, in particular, is hard to collect and sort, is made with a vast array of dangerous chemicals, and has limited end markets. Unrecyclable plastic packaging that ends up in recycling bins contaminates our paper bales, drives up the cost of sorting and processing, and forces communities to pay more for disposal.
Plastics are problematic in the recycling system
Community members frequently ask: “Does anything actually get recycled?” The answer is YES.
Recycling as a system is not broken. It is an important tool to address climate change and the impacts of our consumption, but it was never meant to be the solution for everything we create. For plastics, in particular, recycling is rarely the answer.
Only a few formats of single-use plastic packaging are actually candidates for recycling in residential recycling systems in the United States. These include PET #1 bottles, hPET #1 thermoform, HDPE #2 bottles (natural and color), and possibly #5 polypropylene containers, depending on the region. These packaging types are sortable, and have domestic end markets that will buy them to put the material back into the supply chain to make new products and packaging.
Even for these types that ARE recyclable, much that needs to be done to improve their recyclability. Right now, we only capture a dismal 23% of PET water and soda bottles. And the highly toxic and carcinogenic chemicals used in their production do not become less harmful through recycling.
Plastic recycling makes up a small percentage of what we actually recycle, but when it does end up in the recycling bin it causes most of the problems in a materials recovery facility (MRF).
Let’s take a look at one MRF to better understand the material composition. Eureka Recycling, an AMBR member, processes mostly residential recycling for Minneapolis, Saint Paul, and surrounding Minnesota communities. Recyclable plastics make up just 7% of the total material processed. Plastic that is not recyclable or not able to be captured also contributes to the 11% residual rate, and is the biggest challenge Eureka Recycling faces in terms of contamination of other materials, like paper and glass. While plastic gets all of the attention, it makes up just a small percentage of what we actually recycle.
Figure A: Eureka Recycling’s annual average material composition by tons. The recycling organization processes mostly residential recycling for Minneapolis, Saint Paul, and surrounding communities in Minnesota.
To improve our recycling system, we need to eliminate problematic plastic, focus on better capturing and sorting of readily recyclable materials, and ensure that the petrochemical and plastic packaging industry are not pushing misleading and deceptive messages. This will ensure we have a strong recycling system that can better support a zero waste future.
Prioritizing reduction, reuse, and authentic recycling
We must invest in capturing the millions of tons of wasted material that we know how to recycle and is in high demand as feedstock. For example, about 50% of all aluminum cans end up in the trash. Increasing recycling rates for aluminum would have a significant climate impact as recycled aluminum is around 95% less energy-intensive to produce than virgin aluminum. Unlike plastic, aluminum can be recycled infinitely.
For the myriad of other non-recyclable, single-use packaging that is currently in our lives, recycling is not a viable or effective solution. Reduction, redesign, and reuse are the most strategic and effective strategies to apply to these wasteful products, which were never designed to be recycled in the first place. To build an effective and efficient recycling system, we have to do all we can to standardize the packaging stream and eliminate the most problematic and unnecessary materials and formats.
Industry “solutions” are a distraction
Industry is pointing to “advanced recycling,” “chemical recycling,” and other unproven, failed, expensive technologies as the way to make all plastic trash recyclable. That idea has been around for 40 years, and it has not been proven economically, logistically, or technologically feasible. As the lawsuit highlights, companies misuse the term “recycling” to greenwash the process of converting mixed plastic waste into fuel, typically through pyrolysis or gasification. Superheating plastic into a fuel to be combusted does not keep those resources in the supply chain as part of a circular economy.
We can’t be distracted and waste our time and money on strategies that are unproven, unlikely to scale, and leave many concerns about toxicity and environmental and human health impacts unaddressed. Any efforts to support ongoing use and recycling of the few forms of recyclable plastic packaging should be backed by policy initiatives that prioritize the elimination of toxics, reduction, reuse, environmental justice, safety for workers and communities, and just transition.