Is it really 100% recyclable?

We see “100% recyclable” labels everywhere – on yoghurt pots, containers, and plastic bags. But are they true to their promise? And how can we work to promote plastic recycling not just among individual consumers, but more widely in industry? Dr Chao Liu, Lecturer in Decentralised Finance and Blockchain at IFT, presents the issue and the Plastic Credit system he has devised.

Lightweight, cheap to produce and durable – plastic has become embedded in our daily lives and universally throughout industry. There are many types of plastic materials used across a range of products. PET is the most common material for clear plastic bottles, for example, and PP can be used for sealing film, packing tape, and single-use straws.

Manufacturers use a circular triangle with a number inside to identify plastic type as shown. Each type of plastic material is identified as widely recyclable, recyclable, or not recyclable. But what do “Recyclable” and “Widely Recyclable” actually mean? Is it 10%, 50%, or 90% recyclable? And what happens to non-recyclable material during processing?

By the end of 2015, approximately 6300 million tons of plastic waste had been generated globally. And despite plastic recycling guidance, less than 10% of that plastic was recycled. Plastic pollution is now fuelling the climate crisis, contributing significantly to urban and marine issues.

Since plastic recyclability varies so substantially, accessible and clear consumer information is paramount to tackling the plastic waste crisis. Our work takes on this challenge, to propose a uniform index to better inform customers about product recyclability if that product contains plastic material.

Technically speaking, the majority of plastic material can actually be recycled using a series of complex recycling methodologies. The barrier is the cost of recycling compared to the value of its recycled components. That’s why a lot of plastic products, even though marked as widely recyclable, still end up in landfill. Individual consumers can try their best, but their efforts are often quashed by higher level decisions about whether the cost of recycling is worth it.

We believe that the best way to combat plastic waste and environmental degradation is by bringing the power of markets to bear on the problem. So how do we make recycling both the right thing to do, and the affordable thing to do?

Introducing the Plastic Waste Credit System

We were inspired by the successful trading of carbon credit and Packaging Recovering Note (PRN) scheme, which offset producers’ waste obligations. If a similar trading mechanism was applied in the plastic industry with market participation, it could promote a more circular economy environment to increase the industry’s socially responsible use of plastic.

These markets, credit issuing, and circulation systems use centralised infrastructures where a trusted third party is needed to assess the quality and distribution of the credit. For example, the Kyoto Protocol makes it mandatory for commercial entities emitting above the permitted limit of carbon dioxide to either cut down their emissions or buy carbon credit certificates, where the carbon credit is measured by each ton of carbon dioxide or a corresponding amount of other greenhouse gasses. Then the funds can be invested in ecological projects on the planet. Similarly, in the plastic industry, Verra launched the Plastic Waste Reduction Standard to assess the plastic footprint, where plastic credits are issued and audited through the extent to which they can be recycled.

In the above centralised crediting systems, companies and organisations are responsible for the carbon/plastic they produce, use or sell. Meanwhile, the credits are issued by an accredited third party – a reprocessor – as evidence of receipt of a certain tonnage of plastic waste. However, centralised ecosystems also have significant drawbacks – they can be easily corrupted, which can cause issues with public trust if the information does not line up.

Moreover, the regulation and decision-making processes controlled by a single entity may restrict the development of plastic-related regulations and standards that are easy to fall behind the latest technological development or environmental issues, or even incur the monopolar effect to damage the whole ecosystem. Therefore, it is still challenging to meaningfully build up a large-scale plastic credit ecosystem that can attract more stakeholders to be involved and balance authorities of different roles in the ecosystem. This is a challenge that must still be addressed; with so many stakeholders involved in the process, it can be difficult for governments to develop a successful initiative.

If you are interested in finding out how we build a plastic system to combat plastic waste, please find the latest published paper “A Smart-Contract-Aided Plastic Credit System” on IEEE Systems Journal.