PR95455 

PARIS, April 13, 2022 /PRNewswire=KYODO JBN/ --

- For the first time, consumer good companies are joining forces through The

Consumer Goods Forum (CGF) to set the agenda for the development of new plastic

recycling technologies.

- The CGF's Coalition of Action on Plastic Waste has today published an

independent scientific study which demonstrates that the chemical recycling of

hard-to-recycle plastic waste could reduce the climate impact of plastic when

compared to waste-to-energy incineration.

- 16 member companies have also co-authored a paper which outlines a set of

principles for credible, safe and environmentally sound development of the

chemical recycling industry.

As part of its mission to tackle the plastic pollution challenge and help

advance a world where no plastic ends up in nature, The Consumer Goods Forum's

(CGF) Plastic Waste Coalition of Action (the Coalition) is pleased to announce

the publication of a Vision and Principles Paper, entitled "Chemical Recycling

in a Circular Economy for Plastics" [

https://www.theconsumergoodsforum.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/Chemical-Recycling-in-a-Circular-Economy-A-Vision-and-Principles-Paper.pdf

] which encourages the development of new plastics recycling technologies that

meet six key principles for credible, safe and environmentally sound

development. In support of this position paper, the Coalition has also

published a new independent Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) study [

https://www.theconsumergoodsforum.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/Life-Cycle-Assessment-of-Chemical-Recycling-for-Food-Grade-Film.pdf

] , that demonstrates that the chemical recycling of hard-to-recycle plastic

waste could reduce the climate impact of plastic when compared to

waste-to-energy incineration.

Guided by the global commitment led by the Ellen MacArthur Foundation, and in

line with the newly announced UN Treaty on Plastic Pollution, the Coalition is

committed to driving progress towards realising a circular economy. To this

end, in 2021, the Coalition launched its full set of Golden Design Rules, for

the design of plastic packaging. At the same time, members developed a

framework for optimal Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) programmes, as

part of their engagement in advanced and transitional markets to increase

recycling rates for packaging that cannot be reused. The Coalition is equally

working to encourage recycling innovation to close the loop, including chemical

recycling to complement the growing mechanical capacity.

To help to achieve this final aim, the Coalition has aligned on a common vision

and set of principles for the safe scaling of pyrolysis-based chemical

recycling, which the Coalition believes provides guidance for the positive

development of the technology. The paper states that chemical recycling could

increase packaging recycling rates which could enable recyclability targets to

be met, more specifically for hard-to-recycle plastics, for example

post-consumer flexible film. To ensure that chemical recycling is developed and

operated under credible, credible, safe and environmentally sound conditions

and to help encourage this, the paper outlines six key principles which relate

to: the complementarity with mechanical recycling, material traceability,

process yields and environmental impact, health and safety as well as claims.

Members of the CGF's Plastic Waste Coalition hope to play a role in making a

positive case for a credible and safe chemical recycling system. The CGF

members would welcome feedback and engagement on this study and its broader

work within the Plastic Waste Coalition of Action.

Barry Parkin, Chief Sustainability Officer, Mars, Incorporated, said, "Chemical

Recycling is a critical complement to Mechanical Recycling as it will allow

large quantities of flexible packaging to be recycled into food grade

packaging. This study demonstrates that chemical recycling has a significantly

lower carbon footprint than the current end of life of flexible packaging."

Colin Kerr, Packaging Director, Unilever, said, "As we continue to reduce the

use of virgin plastic, new technologies such as chemical recycling can help

drive up recycling rates and increase the availability of food grade recycled

materials. The principles and Life Cycle Assessment work from The Consumer

Goods Forum is key to ensuring this can happen in a safe and environmentally

sound way."

Llorenc Mila i Canals, PhD, Head of the Life Cycle Initiative Secretariat,

United Nations Environmental Programme, said, "It is crucial to consider all

potential environmental impacts across the life cycle of production and

consumption systems when assessing technologies such as chemical recycling of

plastics. A specific challenge with relatively new technologies is including

the chemical composition of discharges, emissions and wastes from facilities,

along with the need for additional pollution control equipment and management;

these should form part of the assessment. Life Cycle Assessment is the

standardised tool to do just that, assuring the necessary scrutiny by experts

and interested parties; the Consumer Goods Forum has initiated a very useful

process to shed light on many of these aspects in this report"

Sander Defruyt, Lead, New Plastics Economy, Ellen MacArthur Foundation, said

"Recognising that reduction and reuse of packaging should be prioritised, and

recognising the limitations of the technology, the paper puts forward the

industries' position on what role Pyrolysis CR could play in the transition to

a circular economy for plastics and what key principles and boundary conditions

it should adhere to."

As part of the Coalition's work, an independent study to look specifically at

the topic of climate change impact was commissioned. The study was carried out

by environmental expert consultancy Sphera and peer-reviewed throughout the

process by a panel of experts from the United Nations Environmental Programme,

Northwestern University (USA), and Eunomia. The study provides a life cycle

impact assessment, and compares conventional plastics produced from fossil and

incinerated at end of life, with chemically-recycled plastic in a circular

system.

Its findings demonstrate that chemical recycling of hard-to-recycle plastic

waste could reduce the climate impact of plastic when compared to

waste-to-energy incineration. Specifically, the life cycle GHG emissions of

flexible consumer packaging made from plastic waste through pyrolysis-based

chemical recycling and recycled at end of life is 43% lower than plastic films

manufactured from fossil fuels and disposed through incineration at end of

life.

Further details on the findings of the LCA can be found in the Technical Report

[

https://www.theconsumergoodsforum.com/life-cycle-assessment-of-chemical-recycling-for-food-grade-film/

] and the Non-Technical Summary [

https://www.theconsumergoodsforum.com/non-technical-executive-summary-of-the-lca-report-of-chemical-recycling/

].

Contact

Ignacio Gavilan

Director, Environmental Sustainability

environmental@theconsumergoodsforum.com

Louise Chester

Communications Officer

l.chester@theconsumergoodsforum.com

Logo -

https://mma.prnewswire.com/media/1279200/The_Consumer_Goods_Forum_Logo.jpg

Source: The Consumer Goods Forum