Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
School of Civil Engineering
PATHOGEN CONTROL ENGINEERING INSTITUTE
INSTITUTE FOR RESILIENT INFRASTRUCTURE
Plastic waste – recycling via export? Implications for resource and value recovery
Dr Costas Velis
Pathogen Control Engineering
Institute
iRI-Institute for Resilient
Infrastructure
water@
leeds
School of Civil Engineering
Core research institutes
Other research Institutes / entities with
SWM and resource efficiency portfolios
ERI
Energy Research Institute
CIER
Centre for Integrated Energy Research
SRI
Sustainability Research Institute
Energy Resources Institute -
Experimental facilities
• Thermal conversion of biomass
• Small scale laboratory rigs
• Large analytical laboratory
• Water analysis
• Environmental analysis
Source: 1979 ISWA Waste Minimisation
Conference, Geneva
Resource efficiency: a central
notion for today’s society
Slide source:
David C Wilson
Recycling markets – which model?
Resource efficiency +
effectiveness Zero waste
Cradle to cradle
Sustainable consumption
and production
Final storage quality landfill
Circular economy
Low carbon footprint
Resilient and adaptable
infrastructure
Materials criticality
2020 aim
“More materials, including materials
having a
significant impact on the environment and
critical raw materials, are recycled”
2020 aim
“Energy recovery is limited to
non recyclable materials,
landfilling is virtually eliminated
and high quality recycling is
ensured”
Roadmap to a Resource Efficient Europe
(COM (2011) 571)
REALITY
“In some Member States more
than 80% of waste is recycled,
indicating the possibilities of
using waste as one of the EU’s
key resources”
How to define / measure?
How to ensure / evaluate?
Differentiate based on materials criticality / impacts
“Recycled” is connected to
“using” – is it the case??
Global scale realities:
E-waste distribution
Source: International electronics recovery coalition, available at http://www.ierc.info/e-waste-dumping-an-interactive-map/
So
urc
e: h
ttp
://w
ww
.scra
pm
onste
r.co
m/n
ew
s/b
are
ly-4
.5-
of-
india
s-e
-wa
ste
-gets
-re
cycle
d-a
ssoch
am
/1/5
87
1
Waste everywhere... Unintended global
flows and consequences...
Plastics floating in the ocean
Source:
http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/20
07/12/are-there-reall.html
Source:
http://thecoolgadgets.com/plastic-eating-
marine-microbes-will-it-solve-ocean-plastic-
contamination-issue/
Plastics ending up at the beach
Project Coordinator: A. Mavropoulos, ISWA STC Chair
Scientific co-ordinator : Prof D. Wilson
Members: J. Cooper, B. Appelqvist, C. Velis
Examine and make recommendations on issues
arising from the interaction between globalisation
and waste management
Contributing: more than 60 scientists
and countless practitioners
Web-page: http://www.iswa.org/en/685/task_force_details/tf/show_detail/task-force-on-
globalisation-and-waste-management.htmlInformal
Globalisation and Waste Management
Task Force 2011-2013
Globalisation and Waste Management
ISWA TASK FORCE
Megacities
Beacon conference - Singapore July 2012
ISWA Report on Underground SWM solutions - in most read of Knowledge
base
‘Globalising MFA’ decision support tool +
publication
Informal Sector
International expert workshop - Buenos
Aires 2011
‘InteRa’ framework and tool : WM&R paper and
CGI keynote presentation
ISWA publication Award 2013 – in most
read of WM&R
Global Recycling Markets
ISWA report:
Global plastic recycling markets
Vienna ISWA Congress Special
Session
(1) Paper markets and (2)Trafficking
Pre-view today
Generated already press interest (2
Guardian articles)
International Collaboration
and Aid
PhD research partly supported by ISWA
‘International Development aid for
waste management in low and middle income
countries’
Global Plastics Recycling Markets
ISWA report info in the Press
Plastics report to be launched
during the European Group meeting
in 16-17 June, Brussels
Global map of export transactions in
waste plastic - 2011
Code 3915:
“waste, pairings
and scraps of
plastics”
Data source:
(UN Comtrade)
:
Top world plastic waste exporters /
importers (UN comtradre 2012)
Code 3915:
“waste, pairings
and scraps of
plastics”
Data source: (UN
Comtrade)
Global map of import transactions in
waste plastic – 2011: China rules!
World exports of plastics scrap to
China including HK SAR in 2011
Source: Zhou, 2012
European waste plastics
‘value recovery’
Adopted from: Consultic,
as cited by (Plastics
Europe, 2013)
► 87% wt. to China + Hong Kong SAR
• Trend is relatively stable: 2010: 3.373Mt; 2011: 3.365Mt; 2012: 3.358Mt
• Destination (target countries) mainly Asian (South, South East, East)
• Rising trend of direct exports to China, and also to India
► Overall dependence on Chinese market demand is even greater!
• Exports to South-East Asian (ASEAN) countries to a great extend
finally find their way towards China
► EU-27 imports comparatively insignificant (0.4 Mt vs.3.4Mt exports)
• Outside Europe countries: negligible contribution
Europe depends on exporting to China
(87% wt. of exports)
Waste plastics flows in the UK and... beyond
Reprocessed for export?
Around 70% wt. of “recycled” UK plastics are exported
Source: Zhou, 2012
EU-27 used plastics comparative analysis
(3.4 Mt of exports)
What happens within China?
Oligospony:
56% wt. of worlds’ imports
goes to China
High consumption and hence
demand for polymers
(primary and secondary)
China: in high demand of (waste) plastics
► China in top consumers of plastics: plastic products consumption grew rapidly from
22kg per capita (kg p-1) in 2005 to 46kg p-1 in 2010 (Liao, 2011).
► Chinese domestic supply: inadequate to meet demand
• Almost half of primary material is imported
• Total yearly imports of primary plastics covering just less than 50% of
total demand (2011: 23Mt)
• Dependency on imports of one commodity should not exceed 50%
• Reduces Chinese dependency on primary plastics imports
► Prediction for 29Mt plastic scrap demand by 2015 (China + HK – Source:
Poyry, based on CBI China projections)
• Europe now exports: 3.4Mt
3 possible destinations within China
“3-non enterprises”: no rules for operation – no quality standards – no inspection
Big centralised reprocessing facilities
Incineration / energy from waste
Estimated use of recycled
plastics in China
► Data-sets not fully mutually consistent (use of recycled plastics and total
recovered plastics)
• Domestic recovered plastics: almost twice as imports in 2011
• Despite that recycling of domestic waste plastics is still very low
(But: target for 70% recycling set!)
• 2006 and 2007: use of recycled plastics lower than imports
So
urc
e: Z
ho
u, 2
01
2
Fate of imported waste plastics in China?
► HYPOTESIS: Quality of imported plastics scrap is higher than
domestically obtained (or perceived as such)
• Imports needed due to quality better than domestic Chinese sources
► Following HYPOTETHES:
• Most / best of imported used for new plastics production
• Worst of imported / best of domestic ends up in 3-nons
• Most of domestically collected material ends up in EfW?
► Plastics reprocessing in China: Wide spectrum of industry
• Three ‘non’ enterprises” - Mainly small-scale, family owned; low-tech
manufacturing practices; very low / no environmental protection
• Most products: low quality for own Chinese affordable
consumption
• Manufacturing / export of counterfeit goods?
“A Chinese woman holds her baby as
she strips labels from plastic soda
bottles so they can be recycled.”
Copyright: Peter Ford/The Christian
Science Monitor. After (Ford, 2013)
“Coal fired extruder in a small
recycling plant in China.”
After (Jefferson 2010)
“Children sorting out tiny specks of
wrong colored plastic chips. Many
hundreds of bags await their eyes
and fingers.” © BAN. After (Pucket
et al., 2002)
Around 70% wt. of “recycled” UK plastics are exported: IMPLICATIONS?
Recycled in China in 3- non enterprises -
implications for resource recovery?
► Variable manufacturing practices: High use of additives + low quality products
► = down-cycling + increased pollution of materials cycle
► Poor worker heath and safety
► Environmental protection not apriority (Wastewater treatment? Melting?) criticised
for absence of environmental standards (China Plastics Scarp Association)
Quality controls implemented at China’s
customs upset the entire global market
Photo by Dan Kitwood/Getty Images – Web
source: WONGBLOG (Plumer, 2013)
•“Green fence
operation” : enhanced
enforcement campaign
implemented at Chinese
customs
• Since February-
October 2013
• It implements
legislation on quality of
imported waste-derived
secondary raw materials.
• 2009 Chinese
regulations allow up only
1.5% wt. physical
contamination
‘Green Fence Operation’
is rapidly changing import facts
Global recycling market is complex
International recycling markets for plastics scrap - complex interplay of:
(1) National (domestic) solid waste collection capabilities (formal and informal),
reprocessing capabilities and needs, and export /transport laws and controls.
(2) Market demand and import controls at major destination countries (e.g. China) and investment in raw material production elsewhere (e.g. Chinese investments in Africa).
(3) Global supply chain networks: transport logistics and costs (westbound freight rates,
number of empty containers returning to Asia (“reverse haulage”), customs).
(4) Cost of primary resins, dependent on oil and natural gas prices (prime
determinant of the price of recycled plastics)
(5) Technological innovation: (new resins, composites, oxo-degradable and compostable
plastics, sensor-based sorting, chemical recycling).
(6) International and domestic politics (price dumping? – economic growth and
employment generation – “green economy”)
A least environmental
standards pathway?
► Least environmental standards / resistence path is often followed
• Applies to waste trafficking (e.g. WEEE)
• Same for global waste and secondary raw materials trans-shipment?
• Support for hypothesis: (1) Hong Kong and China (2) role of ASEAN
countries (3) reaction to Green Fence Operation
► ? A direct link between:
• Western consumption patterns and
• Small-scale low-tech reprocessing enterprises in South Asia?
• Negative correlation between amount of exported waste and
wages in importing countries (D'Amato, Lozzi et al., 2012)
Life cycle assessment: not enough,
usually downstream + not dynamic
LCA evidence that plastics recycling over performing EfW
only if virgin polymer is replaced above 70-80%
Quality of recycling
• Technical materials life-cycle(s)
• What it the technically feasible level of recycling?
• What is the desirable (environmental) cost for recycling?
• Should de-pollution of materials cycles and environment count?
• Multiple life closed loop-recycling: e.g. Glass bottles beer / non
alcoholic beverages in Denmark: collected washed recycled up to 33
times: current incentives lead just to recycling
• Water released vs used: not recycling in EfW; recycling in composting
and particularly in biodrying MBTs: at least 25% wt. losses
Reuter et al. Minerals Engineering 2006 19(5):
Recyclability of a product = function of:
Materials used (intrinsic property: polymer + additives)
+ quality of the recycling streams:
• mineral classes (combination of materials due to design, shredding and separation)
• particle size distribution
• degree of liberation (multi-material particles
• efficiency of physical separation
Best for recycling: avoid legislation enforcing a certain fixed recycling quota
- Instead: enable at all times flexibility
Scientific background on limits to recycling –
Example : ELVs
A complex and potentially vulnerable market
China oligospony – huge EU dependence
Poor environmental control and H&S, and sub-optimal manufacturing practices in China
General pathway of least environmental performance – risk transfer
Dispersion of PoPs vs. destruction in EfW?
Environmental aspired benefits may not materialise
Lost of opportunities for high value closed-loop recycling value recovery and local green growth and energy generation under optimal conditions
Issues with plastics recycling via exports
Some key challenges for our
recycling systems
► What EU will do if China did not receive any of their recyclables?
► Why EU (and USA and Japan) have to export so much materials? A
starting point to rethink the sustainability of the current practices
► Environmentally, a lot depends on the local (mostly Chinese)
management of recyclables - which is not 100% known to us
► Need consider the global dimensions of waste management and
introduce better international cooperation
► In the long-term Chinese oligospony in recyclables creates need for a
strong, more regional waste management and recycling markets
► (Cost-) Effective single stream collection + local reprocessing systems
need to be developed: e.g. closed-loop PET + HDPE in the UK
2020 aim
“More materials, including materials
having a
significant impact on the environment and
critical raw materials, are recycled”
2020 aim
“Energy recovery is limited to
non recyclable materials,
landfilling is virtually eliminated
and high quality recycling is
ensured”
Roadmap to a Resource Efficient Europe
(COM (2011) 571)
REALITY
“In some Member States more
than 80% of waste is recycled,
indicating the possibilities of
using waste as one of the EU’s
key resources”
How to define / measure?
How to ensure / evaluate?
Differentiate based on materials criticality / impacts
“Recycled” is connected to
“using” – is it the case??
Waste hierarchy and resource efficiency
o If hierarchy mandatory and meaningful: clear differentiation on the level of
contribution to resource efficiency
o Different UTILITY between Re-use >> recycling >> recovery levels
o In “recycling” virgin (raw) materials should be replaced
o Resource efficiency contribution of recycling needs a systems evaluation
approach: e.g. via
o Life cycle / Exergy + material flows analysis
o Closed loop vs. down-cycling: cannot be equal
o Multiple life closed-loop recycling should be rewarded
o What in the absence of technically feasible recycling?
o What is the optimal sustainable recycling level?
o What if down-cycling or energy recovery is best available option?
o Poorly controlled export + down-cycling vs. safe energy recovery?
o How does material criticality influences recycling performance evaluation?
Waste hierarchy according to revised WFD:
2008/98/EC Directive (Art. 4)
So
urc
e:
htt
p:/
/ww
w.e
hs
gs
.co
m/c
om
pa
ny-e
tho
s.h
tml
At best: just a static “environmental” hierarchy of
waste processing options: simplistic >> simple?
Third sector – largely ignored
Not much yet – focus onwards
Main beneficiary: collection for
recycling
Recovery – where is the limit?
Disposal: move away – BUT
safe final sinks + dev.
Countries?
Waste sorting 200 y ago in London
Then sanitation era arrived
(Velis et al., 2009, Waste Management)
1750s
Demand for soil improver
1820s
Dust-yards: Peak of “dust” value
1842
Chadwick’s sanitary report
1850s
Waste management cost exceeds dust trade profits
1890s
Mechanisation of dust-yards (first Material Recycling Factories)
Drivers for waste management
1020 1850 1970 1990 2000
Resource
value
Public Health
- collection
Climate change
Environment
- disposal Sli
de c
op
yri
gh
t © D
cW
2010
Resource
management
Rediscover
recycling
2020
:
Advance of recycling in EU
• 1990: poor recycling levels for EU 12 MSs municipal waste recycling
rates
• Ranged from 1 to 20% wt.
• Half of 12 MSs between <1 – 6% (Source: Environmental Resources Limited:1992)
• Today: High recycling rates (40% or more) achieved – targets set
• Benefits and advantages of technical and bio-based (green) materials recycling /
recovery management systems were rediscovered
• Invested heavily in physical infrastructure and communication strategies, increasing
public participation in separate collection schemes, and overall recycling rates to current
levels of 40% or more
• A resource efficiency motivation?
• Not primarily commodity value of recovered materials
• But: recycling market as a competitive ‘sink’ - alternative to increasingly expensive
landfill disposal and EfW
Is waste hierarchy is outdated?
No systems - boundaries
No multiple aspects of value
No trade-offs
No optimisation
System A
Environment Economics
Social
System B
System C
Optimal value
R1 EfW formula: defining the line between
recovery vs. disposal
• The single most important recent development
• WFD 2008/98/EC: allows efficient EfW facilities to be classified as ‘energy
recovery’ operations
• ‘R1 energy efficiency formula’
• Systems and measurable outcome focused approach
• Single level limit (target – inflexible): R1>0.60 for existing plants - R1>0.65
for new plants
• Issues with universal applicability – implementation (was the BREF spirit
met?)
( )1
0.97*( )
P f i
w f
E E ER
E E
Energy from waste as input /output system
So
urc
e: P
avla
s a
nd
To
us, 2
00
8
, , ( ) ,( )
1
, ,
1
2.6* 1.1* ( )
1
0.97*( )
n
el th f i f i i el i th
i
n
w w f i f i
i
E E m NCV E E
R
M NCV m NCV
Technical corrective factor: energy losses due to radiation and bottom ash
R1 EfW formula: defining the line between
recovery vs. disposal
Policy choices on background energy mix – technical capabilities
R1 EfW formula – sensitivity analysis and
implications
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
Electric Eff
Fuel
Eiel
Eith
Mw
NCVw
Pearson'sCoefficient
o Every mathematical formula has inherent implications
o Every system boundaries has fundamental consequences
o Policy decisions may not apply equally well universally (e.g. climate )
o Need to typify processing and materials value chain – how?
Source: Chatzopoulou et al., 2012
Extracting value from waste plastics
► Recycling rediscovered – high “collection for recycling” rates in EU
►Unclear lines between recycling – recovery (definition + measurement)
►System boundaries? MRF input vs. virgin material substitution?
►Overestimation by considering rejects as “recycled”
►No evaluation at all: E.g. as the EfW is leading the way to quantifying
efficiency and quality via R1 and biogenic content measurement
►No quality, no material criticality, no systems / overall resource efficiency
considerations for recycling
►Export often for down-cycling ? – human health and environmental risks?
“If you cannot measure it, you cannot manage it”
C-VORR at University of Leeds:
novel framework and tool
for optimizing resource efficiency beyond just
solid waste management
Make trade offs explicit – eliminate partial accounting
Extend to comprehensive environmental and social valuation
Do not lose transparency by unnecessary aggregation
Separate objective measurement from value judgment
Explicitly design your system boundaries
Include all ‘values’ that could be of relevance
Sophisticated multi-objective optimisation
Inform the urge to circular and green economy with real
comprehensive evidence
Complex Value Optimisation
of Resource Recovery
Please join our efforts
for an evidence-based
circular and green economy
Recycling
business as usual
High unverifiable
numbers
Recycling for resource recovery
Quality and impact
orientated
Systems optimisation
Lower recycling numbers – more tangible benefits
Meaningful waste hierarchy level
distinctions
Clear quantification of contribution to resource
recovery
Systems holistic approach – scientific + policy metrics as R1
EfW
Multiple closed loop and down-cycling equal
No End of Waste – quality management
No metrics – poor data –low confidence
Collected for recycling- exported for???
Recycling operation modes: BAU vs. focusing
on actual resource efficiency quality outcomes
Used plastics research at Leeds
Global post-consumer quantities / composition
Behaviour during thermal processing (thermo-gravimetric methods)
Plastics in marine litter
Flame retardants (PBDEs) safe thermal disposal
Dependencies and optimisation of R1 formula (calorific value influence)
Overall systems value recovery optimisation
(C-VORR)
