Plastic Waste Management DRAFT IMPLEMENTATION FRAMEWORK

Preface:

Swachh Bharat Mission has been able to achieve significant strides over the last 4 years by providing underserved areas access to toilets and encouraging their sustainable use. More than 300 plus districts in India are now ODF with a toilet coverage of nearly 79% in rural India. As we chart the course ahead for SBM and increasing ODF coverage in India, it is an opportune moment to develop a comprehensive framework for ODF sustainability and ODF plus activities, namely Solid and Liquid Resource Management in rural areas. Organizing the solid and liquid resource management markets in rural areas will crowd in investment from the private sector, and lead to long-term stable job growth in rural communities. With appropriate policy nudges, these can be scaled up into opportunities for growth in rural India. This SLRM draft document serves as a platform for building a rural SLRM implementation framework for Plastic Waste Management to various stakeholders from districts and states across India. Each technological theme (plastics, menstrual health, biodegradable waste, animal waste, grey water and faecal sludge) explored here addresses a particular type of waste, the challenges present and recommends solutions for sustainable value generation.

With such trends in urban India there is also a need to make rural India capable of managing their plastic waste. Plastic waste has emerged as a major problem in rural areas and the issue of management of plastic waste will also become challenge overtime. As population in India is forecasted to experience an unprecedented growth from currently 1.31 billion to 1.65 billion by 2030, the management of plastic waste in rural areas needs innovative solutions to address the challenge. There needs to be a development of plastic waste management in order to stop unsafe and hazardous methods to dispose plastic waste. Through this document MoDWS aims to create an action plan and way forward for Plastic Waste Management and bring forward various policy frameworks, technologies for rural areas. If implemented, it could make an important contribution towards transforming this important sector of the country’s economy.

Concrete and game-changing steps have to be taken for Plastic waste management to achieve the goals we anchored in this document. MoDWS would like to thank wholeheartedly the support, objectives and comprehensive action plan / way forward provided by various intellectuals, organizations, departments and institutions for plastic waste management in Rural India. We would like to thank Mr. Ritesh Kumar (Joint Secretary, MoEF), Mr. Manoj Kumar (Director, MoEF), Dr. Thallada Bhaskar (Professor, CSIR), Mr. Haren Sanghavi (Immediate Past President, AIPMA), Prof. K. K. Pant (IIT Delhi), Prof. S. N. Naik (IIT Delhi), Mr. Dharmesh Shah(GAIA Technologies), Dr. Kaveri Gill (Professor, Shiv Nadar University), Ms. Divya Tiwari (Saahas), Ms. Richa Chaturvedi (Karo Sambhav) and Ms. Lakshmi Narayan(SWaCH). The Ministry would also like to acknowledge KPMG and Dalberg who were principally involved in framing this document.

Disclaimer and Notice to Reader The information provided in this book is designed to provide helpful information on the subject discussed. The comments received during consultation will be considered during the final preparation of the thematic resource book. The content, structure, form and wording of the consultation draft are subject to change as a result of the consultation process and as a result of review, editing and correction by MDWS.

The information contained herein is subject to change and does not commit MDWS for any factual error.

Managing Plastics Waste in Rural India 4

CONTEXT 4 PRODUCTION OF PLASTICS 8 CURRENT DISPOSAL AND TREATMENT PRACTICES 9 NEED FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLASTICS WASTE MANAGEMENT IN RURAL INDIA 10 POLICY BACKGROUND 11 NATIONAL RULES AND GUIDELINES ON PLASTIC WASTE MANAGEMENT 11 STATE LEGISLATION BANNING THE USE OF PLASTIC BAGS 12 POLICIES ON EXTENDED PRODUCER RESPONSIBILITY (EPR) 13 POLICY APPROACHES FROM THE INTERNATIONAL CONTEXT 14 TECHNICAL OPTIONS 17 TECHNICAL RECOMMENDATIONS IN CURRENT POLICY 19 IMPLEMENTING PLASTIC WASTE MANAGEMENT IN STATES & DISTRICTS 22 I. GUIDING PRINCIPLES 22 CASE STUDIES 24

MANAGING PLASTICS WASTE IN RURAL INDIA

CONTEXT

More than 15,000 tonnes of plastic waste are generated across India every day. An increasing fraction of this plastic waste is found in rural areas, as the reach of retail corporations and commercial organizations grows, and also as SMEs for plastic production increase in number.

In spite of a paucity of reliable data on the volume and mix of plastic waste in rural areas, it is becoming increasingly clear that plastics are posing significant environmental and health challenges in rural communities. Plastics are disturbing local ecological balances and show up in water and land as micro-plastics. In their macro-form, they act as physical barriers, degrade soil quality, and get ingested by livestock and also other fauna, lead to blockages in drains and streams.

Plastic waste disposal methods in rural India are often basic and uninformed and further exacerbate the challenge. The open burning of plastics generates toxic emissions such as carbon monoxide, dioxins, and nitrides. Low-quality plastics, common in rural India, also leach out toxic additives.

Plastics waste management has been looked at through the policy lens for at least two decades. Most policy measures have focused on segregation, collection, and in certain cases banning the use of certain categories of plastics altogether. However, most of this had traditionally been focused on urban India.

IN 2016, THE PLASTIC WASTE RULES WERE EXTENDED FOR RURAL AREAS FOR THE FIRST TIME, WITH SPECIFIC DUTIES DEMARCATED FOR GRAM PANCHAYATS.

While some States and local bodies have made guidelines compliant with these rules, there are challenges with their acceptance and implementation.

The lack of segregation of plastics waste, the absence of organized systems of collection and efficient aggregation, poor economic value in low-grade (thin) plastics, and the livelihoods associated with plastics production have been the key categories of challenges.

This Plastics Waste Management Implementation Framework for Rural India is meant to provide actionable guidance to States & Districts in implementing a well-considered approach to managing plastics waste in their regions. The document is structured into six parts focusing on the profile of plastic waste in rural areas, existing policy landscape, technologies that can be adopted, and implementation frameworks for state mission directors for SBM and district collectors across the country.

There are more than 15,000 tons of plastic waste generated in India daily; more than 40% of this quantity is disposed unsafely

Profile of Plastic Waste

Summary of this section:

- Plastic waste is not homogenous. Different types of plastics demand special attention from a waste management point of view.

- Most commonly found plastics in rural areas (polythene bags, bottles, etc.) are thermoplastics. They are relatively easy to recycle but difficult to collect viably at scale given the low density in rural areas.

- Plastics found in electrical and cooking appliances are mixture of thermos/thermosetting plastics. They are technically challenging to recycle at scale, but also not very common in rural areas.

- Plastics in India are produced by over 30,000 units, 90-95% of them being small-scale informal entities. This proves it challenging to enforce quality standards and recycling processes.

- 60%1 of all plastics produced in India are currently recycled. PET bottles have a recycling rate of 90%. There is a strong network of informal scrap dealers who recycle plastics but they are susceptible to macroeconomic shocks and taxation policies.

- Plastics continue to threaten the quality of our land, water and air. Unsafe disposal of plastics in rural areas is becoming prevalent and will come at massive costs to the rural ecology and economy.

- Some kinds of plastic do not decompose at all, others could take up to 450 years to break down, leaving a vexing problem to address.

There are several types of plastics in circulation across India, found in a variety of consumer products and they vary on whether they can be recycled and if so, is the recycling process economically feasible. Seen through this lens, plastics can be classified into three categories:

1. Plastics that are not recyclable from a technical standpoint: These are plastics found in electrical and cooking appliances for instance ; laminate packaging such as Chips and Biscuit packaging and PVC pipes etc.

2. Plastics that are recyclable but the recycling process is not economically viable: Low quality plastic bags that are technically easy to recycle but are far too scattered to be collected efficiently fall within this category; polyester clothing along with bags and foot wear made from plastic are not economically recyclable.

3. Plastics that can be recycled in economically viable ways: Plastics such as PET bottles that are both technically recyclable and also viably collected fall within this category.

Technically, plastics get divided into two categories:

- Thermoplastics are those that do not undergo changes in their chemical composition when exposed to heat, and thus can be moulded repeatedly.

1 Https://Economictimes.Indiatimes.Com/Industry/Indl-Goods/Svs/Paper-/-Wood-/-Glass/-Plastic/-Marbles/India-Wants-To-Double-Consumption-Of-Cheap-Material-In-5-Yrs-What-About-Its-Plastic-Waste/Articleshow/59301057.Cms

The mix of plastics in a District will determine the recycling pathways that are viable options

- Thermosetting plastics can melt and only be shaped once. They are challenging to recycle at scale given existing technologies.

Figure 1: Categories of plastic waste and illustrative examples

Across the country, 80% of post-consumer plastic waste is thermoplastics, the remaining being thermosetting. Naturally, thermal treatment methods can only be performed on thermoplastics. Thermosetting plastics are harder to recycle, but can be broken down using chemical and mechanical processes.

Within thermoplastics, there is a wide variety of materials that are found in most common products. Some prominent examples are shown in the figure above, and summarized as follows:

- Polyethylene (PE): most inexpensive plastic products contain polyethylenes. They are of three sub-types: o High density polyethylene (HDPE) is found most commonly in toiletry bottles, plastic

cases and plastic bags o Low density polyethylene (LDPE) is found in furniture, tiles and curtains o Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) is found in disposable drinks’ bottles, food jars,

plastic films, etc. There is over 900,000 tonnes of PET produced in India annually. - Polyvinyl chloride (PVC): primarily found in electrical casing, irrigation/ plumbing pipes and

flooring - Polystyrene (PS): disposable cups, plates and packaging material - Polyesters (PES): fibres and textiles - Acrylics and Nylons: fibres, toothbrush bristles, casing of electronic equipment

Thermosetting plastics are found more commonly in products with specialist uses. Some examples are:

- Polyurethanes (PU): cushioning foams, plastic materials found in cars - Fibre Reinforced Plastics: storage tanks, septic tanks, building material, etc. - Bakelite: insulating parts in electrical fixtures, laminated products - Polyester resins: sheet moulding compounds, toners, etc. - Vulcanized rubber: buffer material used in shoes and tyres, among other things

The e-waste and MHM have not been considered in this resource book in detail and are being deal separately.

PRODUCTION OF PLASTICS

The production of plastic materials is done in more than 30,0002 units across India that are estimated to employ 4 million people. Approximately 90% of these units are small and medium-sized enterprises, often producing low-grade plastics in unorganized and informal ways. It is particularly difficult to monitor and regulate production of plastics in these enterprises.

35% of plastic consumption is in packaging, and 23% is in building and construction. Other relevant categories are transport (8%), electronics (8%) and agriculture (7%). Consumption of plastics in consumer goods is growing at an alarming rate, and much of this growth is likely to be rooted in rural areas.

INDIA’S PLASTIC CONSUMPTION IS GROWING, BUT REMAINS LOWER THAN MOST OTHER DEVELOPING AND DEVELOPED COUNTRIES3.

This comparison is presented in the figure below.

2 HTTP://FICCI.IN/SPDOCUMENT/20690/PLASTIC-PACKAGING-REPORT.PDF 3 AIPMA, Plastindia, TATA Strategic Analysis; 2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

USA Europe China Brazil India GlobalAverage

Consumption of Plastics per capita (kg/person)

Indian packaging industry is valued at over USD 32 Bn and

offers employment to more than 10 lakh people across the country through

~10,000 firms

35% of plastic consumption is in

packaging.

CURRENT DISPOSAL AND TREATMENT PRACTICES

Only 9,205 tonnes of plastics, which correspond to approximately 60% of the total quantity generated, are recycled4 daily.

6,000 TONNES OF PLASTICS IS EITHER DISCARDED OR BURNT IN UNSAFE WAYS.

Discarded PET bottles in India are typically collected by scrap dealers for INR. 14-15/kg. 90% of all PET bottles are recycled in India. They are shredded, washed and sold as ‘flakes’, and used to make upholstery and apparel. There are more than 40 large manufacturers who use recycled PET as raw material. Flakes are sold to them for Rs. 50-100/kg. The mechanical recycling business for PET alone is estimated to be worth Rs. 3,000-4,000 Cr annually5.

CPCB has issued guidelines on co-processing plastic waste in cement kilns. They direct municipal authorities to set up collection and storage arrangements, as well as signing MoUs with cement kilns. The cement plants are directed to use plastic waste as an alternative fuel and raw material and monitor emissions as per standards6. These arrangements are currently active in around 15 cement plants across the country.

A thriving informal market for recycling plastics in India has emerged, mostly concentrated in urban India. This industry, however, is susceptible to economic fluctuations. For instance, scrap dealers in India have seen the price of their products fall substantially in the last year owing to two main reasons: taxation and drops in global oil prices. There was a GST rate of 12-18% on scrap material which was eventually dropped to 5% in October 2017, which drastically dropped tonnage in circulation in this market. Additionally, the drops in crude oil prices globally have made virgin plastics available more cheaply, reducing prices in the scrap market even more.

4 CPCB 2013 report 5 CSIR NCLI resources (www.petrecycling.in) 6 CPCB Guidelines on Co-processing of Plastic Waste in Cement Kilns 2017

PET bottle recycling is Rs 3,000 – 4,000 crore INR business annually.

NEED FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLASTICS WASTE MANAGEMENT IN RURAL INDIA

The prevalence of plastics in the rural waste mix presents unique and persistent challenges:

- Their non-biodegradability threatens permanent effects on the rural ecology: plastics have been shown to severely contaminate land and water bodies as they attract and sustain other pollutants.

- They regularly block drainage channels: both natural channels like streams and small water bodies, and artificial channels like UGDs and open drains. Choked drains are breeding grounds for disease-causing pathogens and cause waterlogging.

- Their current disposal methods reinforce environmental harm: for their disposal, plastics are either burned indiscriminately in landfills or used as fuel cakes; both practices release toxic pollutants into the immediate environment and have the potential to cause grave illnesses.

SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNOLOGICAL INTERVENTIONS FOR SOUND PLASTIC WASTE MANAGEMENT AND RECYCLING IS ESSENTIAL SO IT IS TREATED AS A RESOURCE IN RURAL AREAS ALSO.

The next section looks at the policy landscape that has governed plastics waste management in India over the years.

Plastic bags in the soil can take up to

1000 years to decompose

POLICY BACKGROUND

Summary of this section:

- The Plastic Waste Rules 2016 offer directives to Gram Panchayats on segregation, collection, transportation, processing and disposal of plastic waste in their areas of jurisdiction.

- They also place liabilities on the producers of plastic waste to contribute to collection and disposal. These have proven challenging to enforce, since rules do not establish clear targets, and most producers are small and informal.

- Several states have followed from these rules to ban plastic bags below 50 microns in thickness, but these bans have faced several hurdles in implementation.

- There are various lessons we can learn from the international context: Sweden has invested in aggregation centres that make plastic collection feasible, France has placed bans on plastic bags and suggested alternatives, Rwanda has carried out a strict enforcement of their ban on plastics, and China recently stopped importing plastic waste from other countries to protect its air quality.

Policies pertaining to plastic waste management have traditionally been crafted through the solid waste management perspective, with some guidelines on plastics recovery and recycling methods.

NATIONAL RULES AND GUIDELINES ON PLASTIC WASTE MANAGEMENT

The Plastic Waste (Management and Handling) Rules 2016, released by the MoEF in 2016, offer a series of directives to all urban and rural local bodies (Gram Panchayats).

THE PLASTIC WASTE (MANAGEMENT AND HANDLING) RULES 2016 STATE THAT “EVERY LOCAL BODY SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR DEVELOPMENT AND SETTING UP OF INFRASTRUCTURE FOR SEGREGATION, COLLECTION, STORAGE, TRANSPORTATION, PROCESSING AND DISPOSAL OF THE PLASTIC WASTE EITHER ON ITS OWN OR BY ENGAGING AGENCIES OR PRODUCERS.”

Specifically, for gram panchayats, the rules say that “every GP either on its own or by engaging an agency shall set up, operationalise and co-ordinate for waste management in the rural area under their control and for performing the following functions:

- Ensuring segregation, collection, storage, transportation of plastic waste and channelization of recyclable plastic waste fraction to recyclers having valid registration; ensuring that no damage is caused to the environment in the process

- Creating awareness among all stakeholders about their responsibilities - Ensuring that open burning of plastic waste doesn’t take place” - Some of the roles of other Stakeholders in PWM,2016 are also described

below in chart below:

Role of key stakeholders as per PWM, 2016

Additionally, the Guidelines on SLWM in Rural India, released in 2014, encourage Gram Panchayats to push for segregation at source and centralized collection. These guidelines establish a multi-tiered model, with distinct responsibilities for the state, district, block and GP levels. Broadly speaking, states, districts and blocks are asked to issue standards for best practices and institutional support for capacity building, while GPs are asked to be the implementing agency. This policy document quotes earlier guidelines wherein Panchayati Raj Institutions (PRIs) are asked to establish mechanisms for refuse collection and disposal. For instance, it refers the Rural Sanitation and Hygiene Strategy 2012-2022, which indicated that “a GP will view SLWM as an obligation”7.

The SBM (G) guidelines reinforce the role of GP as the primary agency responsible for “design, implementation, operation and maintenance” of SLWM systems.

Older national-level guidelines 8 call for SHG-linked models that can provide employment to locals. Once the GP is able to aggregate plastic waste from households, SHGs can be organized into manufacturing collectives that create articles like ropes and bags out of shredded plastic.

STATE LEGISLATION BANNING THE USE OF PLASTIC BAGS

There have been several policy initiatives banning specific plastic products by state and central governments in India. 17 states have passed legislations banning the manufacture, stock, sale and use of plastic bags. Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Jharkhand, Meghalaya, Nagaland, Rajasthan, Sikkim, Tripura, Delhi and Chandigarh have enacted total bans on plastic bags. Gujarat, Kerala, Madhya Pradesh, Odisha, Uttar Pradesh and West Bengal have enacted bans in some

7 GoI 2011 document 8 Technical Note for Solid and Liquid Waste Management in Rural India, Ministry of Rural Development, Department of Drinking Water and Sanitation, and UNICEF - 2010

Producer Retailer

1. Only registered shopkeepers or street vendor shall be eligible to provide plastic carry bags for dispensing commodities

2. Plastic bags or multilayered packaging which are not labelled in accordance with rules shall be liable to pay fines as per local byelaws

3. Registered shopkeepers or street vendors to pay plastic waste management fee of minimum 48000 @ Rs4000/Month to local body

1. Responsibility towards waste collection based on EPR

2. Establish a system for collecting back the plastic waste generated

3. Obtain registration from SPCB

4. Sales to registered processors

5. Phasing out of MLF

Generator

1. Waste generator includes institutional generators, event organizer shall take steps to minimize generation of plastic waste

2. No litter plastic waste3. Segregate waste and

handover to authorized agency

4. Pay user fee as prescribed by bye laws of the Local Body.

Rural Local Bodies

1. Setting up of infrastructure for segregation, collection , storage, transportation , processing and disposal of plastic waste

2. Create awareness among stakeholders about their responsibilities

3. Seek assistance of producers and such system while setting up system for plastic waste management.

The SBM (G) guidelines reinforce the role of GPs are the primary agency responsible for the design, implementation, operation, and maintenance of SLWM systems.

areas within their states. Most of these bans have been in place since the mid-2000s.

Additionally, the 2016 guidelines have raised the minimum thickness of plastic bags from 40 microns to 50 microns. Street vendors and retailers providing plastic bags in both rural and urban areas are mandated to pay a waste management fee of Rs. 4000 per month. The National Green Tribunal also placed a ban on plastic cutlery in 2017, but it is yet to be implemented in earnest.

Several manifestations of bans these have been attempted across the country over the last ten years. Delhi, for instance, has seen versions of bans on plastic bags in 2009, 2012 and most recently, in 2017. Both the Delhi government and the National Green Tribunal have directed these bans. A rigid ban on the use of polythene bags below 40 microns was enacted in Uttarakhand complying with the 2012 solid waste management rules. The state still saw copious amounts of plastic bags infiltrating from neighbouring states. The mobility of plastic waste makes state-wise bans particularly challenging to implement.

POLICIES ON EXTENDED PRODUCER RESPONSIBILITY (EPR)

Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) is a concept where manufacturers and importers of products bear a significant degree of responsibility for the environmental impacts of their products throughout the product life-cycle, including upstream impacts inherent in the selection of materials for the products, impacts from manufacturers’ production process itself, and downstream impacts from the use and disposal of the products.

Extended producer responsibilities have a rich history in the West across different industries and product categories.

IN EUROPE, THERE IS PRECEDENCE FOR PLASTIC-GENERATING CORPORATIONS TO ESTABLISH PRODUCER RESPONSIBILITY ORGANISATIONS (PRO) WHICH COME TOGETHER TO TAKE BACK WASTE FROM THE CONSUMERS.

LONG-TERM AGREEMENTS WITH PRO CAN ESTABLISH MARKETS FOR COLLECTION, GUARANTEED BY SECURED REIMBURSEMENTS FROM BRANDS WHO ARE LIABLE TO PAY FOR COLLECTION AS PER THE POLICY.

The Indian 2016 Plastic Waste Management Rules also address the question of extended producer responsibility (EPR).

They mandate plastic producers, importers and brand owners to contribute to the collection of plastic waste that is introduced by them. However, the rules do not lay out specific targets that have to be adopted by these entities. The EPR guidelines for e-waste have been made much more explicit, with fixed targets for producers and distributors of electronics.

Plastic bans have been announced in 17 States but have seen limited success.

Pilot EPR schemes have been implemented but need greater clarity on roles and also establishment of penalties.

However, progress has been less certain: at present, EPR obligations are largely being met on a sporadic and scattered basis under CSR. Certain companies are establishing contracts with agencies and NGOs to fund the collection and storage of plastic waste from mostly urban areas. These partners then supply this plastic waste to recyclers or cement kilns, typically. To make these processes more systematic and regular, there is a need to clarify the role of brands and producers and establish their liabilities. Targets must be issued by central or state bodies for plastic producers and manufacturers to collect and reintroduce minimum proportions of their contributed waste. A natural place to start the implementation of this policy would be among non-food grade plastic manufacturers.

Implementation of EPR in rural management areas:

The key difference in the rural and urban areas wrt Waste Management is that urban areas are densely populated while rural are dispersed and per capita waste generation is also less. Most waste processing and recycling facilities are also located in urban pockets.

Challenges:

• Mostly smaller SKUs are consumed in rural areas that add to primary collection cost • Lesser consumption of high value packaging like PET, Paper, Card Board etc. as a result there is no cross –subsidisation for low/no value items. • Cost of secondary collection and transportation to Recycling facilities (mostly located in urban areas) is high as villages generate smaller quantity, are dispersed and remote. • Producers and PROs would meet mandatory EPR targets from urban centres as there are no regional targets. • The unbranded and fake products would add to the ‘free rider’ phenomenon and increase cost. • Program visibility is higher in urban areas hence brands would like to do the programs in urban areas to improve their image among the consumers and government authorities.

Opportunities:

• Block level aggregation would address many of the above challenges and provide the bulk quantity required to attract waste management and recycling facilities. • Bringing in Bonus points for collection from rural areas can pull producers to rural areas. • Getting support from fertilizer and seed companies etc. as rural areas are their key customers. • Opportunity to setup things from scratch, as there is no legacy infrastructure.

POLICY APPROACHES FROM THE INTERNATIONAL CONTEXT

Plastics waste management systems within Sweden, France, Rwanda, & China are particularly worth attention.

• Sweden has perhaps the most robust waste management system in the world, with less than 1% of its household waste ending up in the landfill. The success of their plastics waste management system is rooted in the following factors:

o The omnipresence of recycling stations, that are no more than 300 m away from any residential area

o Strict segregation at the household level into recyclable and biodegradable waste

o Application of high environmental standards. Even as 50% of the household waste is burnt in energy recovery systems to generate electricity, the smoke from these plants is said to be 99.9% non-toxic, and is filtered through dry filters and water

• France is one of the few countries to have placed a blanket ban on all

disposable daily-use plastics including cutlery and bags. The law was passed in 2016 and prescribes a phase-out for these plastic goods by 2020, suggesting replacements for these products made of biologically sourced materials.

• Rwanda instituted a zero-tolerance policy toward plastic bags. This has

largely resulted in ostensible cleanliness in even the most densely populated urban areas. The success of this policy is rooted in three factors:

o Extremely high fine structures, particularly for businesses that sell produce in plastic waste. This eats into their revenues substantially. Additionally, citizens can be imprisoned for the use of plastic bags.

o Behaviour change campaigns that involve the entire communities to raise civic cleanliness standards.

o Political will in Rwanda allows for sweeping legislation to be implemented effectively.

But this policy comes with some challenges. There has been a growth in illegal and underground trade of plastic bags, as a result of this rigid zero-tolerance policy.

• China, in 2008, made it illegal for vendors to give out plastic bags for free.

o This reportedly led to a drop in their usage by roughly 50% in two years.

o Additionally, China had built its waste to energy capabilities over the years. - Between mid-2000s, until late 2017, China was importing

around 50 mn tonnes of waste annually, including plastics, paper and textiles.

- These were primarily from the US and European countries. 85% of the plastics collected and sorted by the EU were exported to China annually.

Well-designed bans and a proximate network of collection centers are the two ingredients of success in the international context.

- This was typically done on ships that would transport consumer goods from China to these countries, and otherwise return empty.

- However, burning of this waste to convert to energy was severely affecting the air quality in China. This is likely due to insufficient quality of filters and scrubbers in these plants.

- Consequently, China has called for a ban on import of waste from EU nations and the US, which is currently in effect.

TECHNICAL OPTIONS

Summary of this section:

- There are four pathways for the management of plastic waste: re-extrusion (entering waste into manufacturing cycles for the same product), mechanical recycling (physical processes like shredding that make plastic waste manageable), chemical and thermal recycling (altering the structure of plastics and extracting valuable products) and energy recovery (pyrolysis/gasification to generate energy)

- There are benefits and challenges of all approaches, but they all hinge on effective segregation and collection of plastic waste.

- The 2016 Plastic Waste management rules encourage the use of plastics in road construction and in energy recovery. These processes are promising, but are yet to be accepted as mainstream disposal methods.

- This section provides a menu of technical options that can be used to build strategic plastic waste management systems.

There are, essentially, four pathways to manage plastics waste.

Figure 2: Pathways of plastic waste management

Figure 2 represents the various technological pathways for solid plastics waste management.

• Re-extrusion: This category of management systems involves the introduction of clean scrap of single types of plastics that can be re-entered into manufacturing processes to produce similar materials. This is typically difficult because scrap plastic, particularly in rural India, is not segregated by type and is not clean enough to re-enter manufacturing as it is.

• Mechanical Recycling: This category includes the variety of mechanical processes performed on plastic waste, before it is introduced in manufacturing processes. It is primarily performed on simpler, single-polymer plastics like polyethylene. There are several types of mechanical processes, and they typically involve the following steps: cutting/shredding,

ATTERO RECYCLING is now collecting and processing about 1,000 metric tons a of e-waste a month from over 500 cities includes plastic waste in India, and extracting precious metals like platinum, gold and selenium from the trash.

separation of contaminants, milling, washing and drying, extrusion and quenching with water. Some prominent examples of mechanical recycling are:

o PET, found in disposable bottles, commonly undergoes shredding and extrusion at scale to produce carpets, apparel and bottles in the US and Europe. The landscape for this recycling in India has been explained in previous sections.

o This technique can also be used to manufacture sheets, pipes, buckets and other household items with the addition of additives.

o Road construction through plastics involves mixing of bitumen with plastic materials that have undergone mechanical processes. Details on this technical process are presented in the following section.

o The success of these processes is made challenging by requirements of homogenous plastic types that necessitate segregation by type.

• Chemical and Thermal Recycling: Chemical recycling uses advanced technical processes that convert plastic materials into smaller constituent molecules which can then be used as feedstock for the production of petrochemicals and plastics. Thermal processes involve heating plastics under controlled temperatures with/without catalysts. Depending on the conditions created for these treatments, they are categorized into three categories: pyrolysis, gasification and hydrogenation. The output of these processes are typically either gases with high calorific content or oils. There are several advantages associated with chemical and thermal processes:

o They typically don’t require segregation by plastic type, and are able to treat heterogeneous mixes

o They can supply useful and valuable feedstock to the petrochemical industry; these materials have a variety of uses, ranging from heat and electricity to specific chemical products, and thus have organized markets in place

However, there are also some environmental concerns, since some of the other by-products like chars can be particularly harmful. Thermal processes could also require external sources of heat and energy, making them expensive and potentially unviable. There are some examples of plastics-to-fuel plants in India, explained in the following section.

• Energy Recovery: The various methods under this category burn plastic to produce energy in the form of heat, steam and electricity. Experts believe that these processes should only be performed if other recovery processes fail. Plastics like polyethylene and polypropylene have a higher calorific value than kerosene and gas oils. There are several environmental concerns associated with these processes due to the emission of carbon dioxide, as well as some carcinogenic pollutants. In India, this process is commonly used to provide energy to cement kilns.

TECHNICAL RECOMMENDATIONS IN CURRENT POLICY

The 2016 rules on plastic waste management discuss two particular pathways for treatment covering mechanical as well as the energy recovery option:

PLASTICS FOR ROAD CONSTRUCTION (MECHANIC RECYCLING)

The Central and State Governments have endorsed the construction of roads that supplement bitumen with plastics. The 2016 Solid Waste Management Rules require local bodies to dispose plastics such that they can be integrated into road construction as per guidelines issued by the Indian Roads Congress. Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadak Yojana (PMGSY) guidelines on the use of plastics in roads have also been issued.

THE PROCESS TO INTEGRATE DISCARDED LOW-GRADE PLASTICS (GENERALLY WITH A MAXIMUM THICKNESS OF 60 MICRONS) WAS DEVELOPED BY DR. VASUDEVAN AT THE THIGARAJAR COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING AT MADURAI.

Exploiting the binding properties of plastics, his design substitutes some of the bitumen and saves 8% of the cost of road construction on average. Approximately 1 million plastic bags are shredded, dried and mixed with bitumen to lay 1 kilometre of a new road9. Plastic roads save one tonne bitumen for every kilometre laid (bitumen costs ₹50,000/tonne) while net saving in the plastic road would be ~Rs. 30,000/km of constructed road.

These roads have been tested to be stronger and more durable than their regular counterparts.

ONE IMPORTANT ADDITIONAL BENEFIT OF ADOPTING THIS PROCESS AT A LARGE SCALE IS THE GENERATION OF COTTAGE INDUSTRIES AND LOCAL EMPLOYMENT IN PLASTIC COLLECTION AND SHREDDING.

As this technology gained traction, Tamil Nadu’s government was able to organize women into small businesses that would collect and shred plastics, after receiving subsidies to buy and operate shredding machines10. The women were then able to sell shredded plastic to authorities and contractors for a small profit. If assisted with the right policies and safeguards against the interests of corporations, this can lead to sustainable job creation in rural areas.

Till date, however, the technology is far from becoming mainstream. It has been pioneered by some states and cities, but has not been able to find broad-based applicability. Tamil Nadu has built over 1000 km of new rural roads per year from 2012-2015 using some component of plastics. Jamshedpur has been able to direct its plastic waste to aid construction of roads as well.

9 Report from The Guardian 10 https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/madurai/Women-take-up-the-cause-of-tackling-plastic-menace/articleshow/15115749.cms

Road developers across the country have been mandated to use plastics as per PWM rules 2016

VVeerbhadhra Street, Erode

More than 1200 kms of plastic waste mixed roads in rural areas have been laid by DRDA, Tamil Nadu, distributing a min of 40 Kms for each district.

This is likely due to one or more of the following reasons:

- Poor segregation and collection. Chennai’s plans to collect plastic bags and shred them at scale to supply for road construction were halted after just one year (in 2014) due to a shortage of plastic. Lack of formal supply chains in the collection and delivery of large quantities of plastic bags precludes this process from becoming a stable and viable alternative to regular roads.

- Environmental concerns. While roads built through this process are believed to be of better quality, there are concerns that with gradual wear and tear, they are likely to shed polymer fragments into the air and soil.

PLASTICS WASTE TO ENERGY

Both SBM and MoEF guidelines encourage the implementation of waste to energy plants. The CSIR- Indian Institute of Petroleum developed, in 2014, a process of converting polyethylene and polypropylene to gasoline or diesel. These plastics account for approximately 60% of all plastic waste11.

Another encouraging example of this technology in action is in Pune, where Rudra Environmental Solutions collects waste from 15,000 households every day and is able to produce fuel at the rate of 600 litres/tonne of plastic12.

There is a successful waste to fuel plant in Sriperumbudur in Tamil Nadu run by Paterson Energy. The plant sources plastic waste from nearby automobile industries and paper manufacturers to run a plant at a capacity of 7.5 tonnes/day. The oil generated as a result of these processes is sold at Rs. 40/litre on average. This model generates 500 litres of oil for each tonne of plastic waste and is being scaled up with the technical assistance of IITs, CIPET, and viability gap funding.

Despite the potential they offer, there are several barriers to upscaling plastics to fuel plants. Apart from administrative inefficiencies, there are three main challenges to mainstreaming plastics-to-fuel plants:

- Nature of waste mix. Lack of waste segregation results in plastic waste being too wet and unsuitable for use in these processes. They require energy to be dried before use, and this often renders processes unviable.

- Poor systems of collection. Despite the ~15,000 tons of plastic waste generated in India daily13, most waste-to-energy plants had to curtail operations or shut down completely14 due to a shortage of trash to use as inputs, indicating failures in plastics value chains.

11 NDTV “Recycling Plastic Waste in India” 12 NDTV 13 CPCB Plastic Waste Management Report 2013 14 NY Times, “Why India’s Waste-to-Energy Industry Won’t Catch Fire”

Poor supply of plastics waste has been the key reason why several waste-to-energy plants have shut-down in India.

- Lack of financial viability. Even after subsidies for land and collection are given, the operational expenditure of these plants remains high. The technology used requires regular up keeping. As a result, the end-products (fuel or electricity) can’t compete with other sources of generation are often priced out of the market.

- Environmental concerns. As discussed before, thermal and energy recovery processes carry environmental risks as there are hazardous by-products involved at most stages. Emission standards and guidelines need to be issued and enforced to ensure there is no damage to the environment.

IMPLEMENTING PLASTIC WASTE MANAGEMENT IN STATES & DISTRICTS

Summary of this section:

- In the implementation section of this document, there are three components: a set of guiding principles to motivate decision-making around plastic waste management, high-level guidelines for state SBM directors, and a detailed framework for district collectors to implement

- As guiding principles, there is an urgent need to reconsider strategy around bans. They need to be enforced with strong IEC modules and stricter enforcement, as will as viable alternatives for plastic products.

- Subsidy-driven models should be replaced with output focused models. MoUs should be signed with companies to accept plastics as inputs, and bulk purchasing can be undertaken by governments. This can sustain market-driven cycles of plastic waste management.

- Collection of plastic waste should be formalized and local entrepreneurs should be supported financially and institutionally.

- EPRs should be leveraged to place burdens on large producers for collection of plastic waste. - There should be strong IEC and monitoring across the value chain to ensure that systems are

working optimally.

This section of the document outlines guidelines for plastic waste management at three levels:

1. Guiding principles. At the outset, this document establishes key features around which specific interventions can be built.

2. High-level guidelines for State SBM directors. This part of the document provides a template for state SBM directors to follow such that constituent districts and GPs can attain a sustainable plastic waste management system.

3. Implementation framework for District Collectors. A detailed implementation framework covers the sequence of steps district administrators need to take, and assists them with the various considerations they will have to make.

I. GUIDING PRINCIPLES

Given the challenges and key policy gaps that exist in rural plastic waste management, States should adopt policies that lead to the creation of a sustainable ecosystem across the value chain. While specific policy interventions might vary depending on the context within the State, these key design principles should be generally applied:

• Bans should be carefully defined and strategically enforced: Not all plastic is bad and this should be kept in mind while developing a plastics-ban approach in different States. Low-thickness plastic bags are usually best banned and several States have already banned the production of plastics bags. Such bans should be considered by other states as well and efforts made to implement them through a strong system of monitoring and penalties. So far, State bans have not been unsuccessful

in part because they don’t account for porous state boundaries and also the absence of viable alternatives to plastic bags. Policies enforcing bans should have the following features:

o Bans need to be paired with strong IEC modules that reinforce a sense of ownership across communities. Administrators should ensure that strong IEC campaigns are in place to make bans successful.

o Alternatives for plastic products should be suggested as part of these bans.

o Administrators at decentralized levels should be empowered to enforce policies.

• Moving from capital subsidies to output arrangements. Existing government schemes are built around capital subsidies and have several requirements on mechanical inputs that make projects unviable. Additionally, an upfront subsidy can lead to construction cost inflation and suboptimal use of technologies. Buyback arrangements of outputs after establishing clear quality standards will be a better model. These can be negotiated with O&G PSUs, private corporations in the petrochemical industry as well as large construction contractors. For low-value plastics that will not be viably picked up due to market dynamics, the government can institute bulk purchasing from collectors at fixed rates, similar to MSPs for crops.

• Formalize collection through entrepreneurs in rural areas. States must encourage individual or SHG oriented last-mile entrepreneurs for plastics waste collection and provide them with formal contracts at the village or GP level as well as connecting them to plastics aggregation points. This can follow models similar to the ‘Surya Mitra’ scheme launched for solar energy. Access to credit, training and other enabling mechanisms to local entrepreneurs should be provided as well as establishing links with technologies that can use plastics as inputs. Additionally, collection and aggregation centres should be established in rural areas. GPs should be linked to existing and upcoming aggregation centres. This will systematically reduce transport costs and make collection viable for local entrepreneurs.

• Leveraging EPRs and placing the burden on producers. Through a combination of extended producer responsibility (EPR) levers (which can only be feasibly activated with large manufacturers), as well as strict monitoring of informal and unorganized producers of plastics, governments should place the burden of sourcing plastic waste for recycling on rural areas on the producers. States should fix proportionate targets for recycling to be executed by brands and producers within areas of their administration. This is likely to be extremely important in the face of increasing rural penetration of formally produced goods.

Formalizing the waste plastics collection chain, linking GPs to points of aggregation, and supporting local entrepreneurs is key.

CASE STUDIES

1. Case Study for Effective IEC to implement plastic bans:

Sikkim became the first Indian state to ban plastic bags in 1998. Discarded plastic bags were believed to be the main cause of chokes in drainage systems that resulted in landslides. Since the ban, the state has been at the forefront of IEC and behaviour change campaigns, propagating the use of sustainable materials in consumer products. There is a very high rate of consumer awareness on the perils of plastic bags, bottles, etc. and several initiatives such as “Plastic Free Days” are undertaken to maintain the low tolerance for this waste.

2. Case Study for collection and segregation

Producers and importers of plastics in Sweden are mandated to create recycling stations at optimal locations so that effective collection of plastic waste can take place. This contributes to a near-perfect collection and disposal rate across the country.

There are some new online waste collection services in India (www.thekabadiwala.com and www.junkart.in) that offer door-to-door collection services for recyclables. They buy waste on pre-determined rates and sell it onwards to vendors who recycle, upcycle or refurbish waste.

The Ambikapur district in Chhattisgarh has implemented the successful collection and segregation at source and which is further segregated at secondary & tertiary segregation SLRM centres with the help of SHGs. This requires building infrastructure in the form of SLRM centres and IEC from general public including youth and students.

3. Case Study on EPR implementation

Saahas Waste Management Pvt. Ltd. Has established MoUs with large producers of plastics like Britannia and HUL. They collect post-consumer waste through aggregation centers and supply the collected scrap to either mechanical recycling centers or cement kilns for energy recovery.

4. Case study on usage of plastics in Road construction

The Chhattisgarh state government in 2015 passed an order prohibiting the production and use of plastic bags in the state. In Ambikapur district, all existing plastic and polythene waste is being proposed to be used in construction of local roads