SSBE’S

Institute Of Technonogy and Management

VIP Rd, Nanded, Mahashtra 431802
Department of Computer Science

Submited By

Gangaprasad Prabhakar Boddawar

Class :- BCA 3rd Year
Roll No.:-17 Batch :-A

A Synopsis on

Recycle of Plastic

Guided By

MR. B.B. SHINDE

 Institute Of Technonogy and Management

INDEX
SL NO TOPICS PAGE

1 Acknowledgement

2 Introduction

3 Aim

4 Objectives

5 Hypothesis

6 Bibliography
 Acknowledgement

The project on “Recycle of Plastic” has been presented as per the guidelines. It covers all the
important aspects related to Sustainable Development.

I would like to express my gratitude and thank to my Environmental teacher Mr. B.B. Shinde who
gave me the brilliant chance to research on this wonderful project which helped me to think about
numerous new things.

I also thank all the members who always boosted my moral and encouraged me during the suggestion
period of this project.

Date:-

Place:-

Gangaprasad Prabhakar Boddawar

Class :- BCA 3rd Year
 Recycle of plastic

Introduction :
Plastic recycling is the reprocessing of plastic waste into new products. When
performed correctly, this can reduce dependence on landfill, conserve resources and
protect the environment from plastic pollution and greenhouse gas emissions.Although
recycling rates are increasing, they lag behind those of other recoverable materials, such
as aluminium, glass and paper. The global recycling rate in 2015 was 9%, while 12% was
incinerated and the remaining 79% disposed of to landfill or to the environment
including the sea. Since the beginning of plastic production in the 20th century, until
2015, the world has produced some 6.3 billion tonnes of plastic waste, only 9% of which
has been recycled, and only ~1% has been recycled more than once.
Recycling is necessary because almost all plastic is non-biodegradable and thus builds-
up in the environment, where it can cause harm. For example, approximately 8 million
tons of waste plastic enter the Earth's oceans every year, causing damage to the aquatic
ecosystem and forming large ocean garbage patches.
Presently, almost all recycling is performed by remelting and reforming used plastic into
new items; so-called mechanical recycling. This can cause polymer degradation at a
chemical level, and also requires that waste be sorted by both colour and polymer type
before being reprocessed, which is complicated and expensive. Failures in this can lead
to material with inconsistent properties, rendering it unappealing to industry. In an
alternative approach known as feedstock recycling, waste plastic is converted back into
its starting chemicals, which can then be reprocessed back into fresh plastic. This offers
the hope of greater recycling but suffers from higher energy and capital costs. Waste
plastic can also be burnt in place of fossil fuels as part of energy recovery. This is a
controversial practice, but is nonetheless performed on a large scale. In some countries,
it is the dominant form of plastic waste disposal, particularly where landfill diversion
policies are in place.
Plastic recycling sits quite low in the waste hierarchy as a means of reducing plastic
waste. It has been advocated since the early 1970s, but due to severe economic and
technical challenges, did not impact plastic waste to any significant extent until the late
1980s. The plastics industry has been criticised for lobbying for the expansion of
recycling programs, even while industry research showed that most plastic could not be
economically recycled and simultaneously increasing the amount of virgin plastic, or
plastic that has not been recycled, being produced.
Aim
 Awareness about the hazards created by discarded plastics; the team defines ‘awareness’
as behavioural change of plastics consumption (plastics consumption to be reduced).

 The objective of recycling plastic is to reduce high rates of plastic pollution while
putting less pressure on fresh materials to produce brand new plastic products.
Plastic Recycling Plant will help preserve resources and divert plastics from
landfills or unintended destinations such as ocean

 Available Alternatives to the Disposable Plastics would be highlighted through

various activities involving citizens and enforcement agencies. Cloth bags, paper
bags, and steel items to be available and promoted.

 Collection and Proper Handling of Plastic Waste, Recycling Process & Production
of New plastic Items.

Contents:
1 History
Plastic industry lobbying
Global recycling trade
2 Production and recycling rates
2.1 Regional data
3 Identification codes
4 Plastic waste composition
5 Collecting and sorting
5.1 Manual separation
5.2 Density separation
5.3 Electrostatic separation
5.4 Sensor based separation
5.5 Plastic scrap
6 Mechanical recycling
6.1 Closed-loop recycling
6.2 Open-loop recycling
6.3 Thermosets
7 Feedstock recycling
7.1 Thermal depolymerisation
7.2 Chemical depolymerisation
8 Energy recovery
8.1 Waste-to-fuel
9 Other processes
9.1 Construction and concrete applications

Plastic industry lobbying:

As the threat of more regulation from the environmental movement grew, the plastics
industry responded with lobbying to preserve their business interests. In the U.S., the
Resource Recovery Act, passed in 1970, directed the nation towards recycling and
energy recovery. By 1976, there had been more than a thousand attempts to pass
legislation to ban or tax packaging, including plastics. The plastics industry responded by
lobbying for plastic to be recycled. This involved a $50 million per year campaign
through organisations such as Keep America Beautiful with the message that plastic
could and would be recycled, as well as lobbying for the establishment of curbside
recycling collections.
However, petrochemical industry leaders understood plastic could not be economically
recycled using the technology of the time. For example, an April 1973 report written by
industry scientists for industry executive states that, "There is no recovery from
obsolete products" and that, "A degradation of resin properties and performance occurs
during the initial fabrication, through aging, and in any reclamation process." The report
concluded that sorting the plastic is "infeasible". The scientific community also knew
this, with contemporary reports highlighting numerous technical barriers.

Globally, plastic waste was almost entirely disposed of via landfill until the start of the
1980s when rates of incineration increased. Although better technology was known,
these early incinerators often lacked advanced combustors or emission-control systems,
leading to the release of dioxins and dioxin-like compounds.The replacement or
 upgrading of these facilities to cleaner ones with waste-to-energy recovery has been
gradual.

It was not until the late 1980s that plastic recycling began in earnest. In 1988 the U.S.
Society of the Plastics Industry created the Council for Solid Waste Solutions as a trade
association to sell the idea of plastic recycling to the public.The association lobbied
American municipalities to launch or expand plastic waste collection programs and to
lobby U.S. states to require the labelling of plastic containers and products with
recycling symbols. This coincided with their introduction of resin identification codes in
1988, which provided a standard system for the identification of various polymer types
at materials recovery facilities, where plastic sorting was still largely performed by hand.

Global recycling trade:

Increasing globalisation during the 1990's allowed the export of plastic waste from
advanced economies to developing and middle-income ones, where it could be sorted and
recycled more inexpensively. This formed part of a growing global waste trade, which saw the
annual trade in plastic waste increase rapidly from 1993 onwards.

Many governments count items as recycled if they have been exported for that purpose, however
the practice has been accused of being environmental dumping, as environmental laws and their
enforcement are generally weaker in less developed economies and the exported plastic waste
can be mishandled, allowing it to enter the environment as plastic pollution. By 2016 about 14
Mt of all plastic waste intended for recycling was exported, with China taking around half of it
(7.35 million tonnes). However, much of this was low quality mixed plastic which was hard to
sort and recycle and ended up accumulating in landfills and at recyclers, or being dumped.
Recycled plastic has been used extensively in manufacturing in China, and imported plastic
waste was predominantly processed in an informal sector that provided low-technology
processing services. High-income countries such as Germany, Japan, the United Kingdom and
the United States were the top plastic waste exporters.

In 2017, China began restricting waste plastics imports in Operation National Sword. Europe and
North America suffered from extreme waste stream backlogs, and waste plastic ended up being
exported to other countries mostly in South East Asia like Vietnam and Malaysia, but also to
places like Turkey and India with less stringent environmental regulations. Governments
including those of Indonesia, Malaysia and Thailand reacted swiftly to curtail illegal plastic
waste imports by reinforcing border controls. With increased control of imports, repatriation of
illegal containers is occurring although this remains a long and challenging process.
Consequently, plastic waste containers accumulated in ports in Southeast Asia.

With global trading in waste becoming more difficult, attention has returned to solutions at a
local level. Extended producer responsibility schemes have been proposed which would tax
plastic producers in order to subsidise recyclers.

In 2019, international trade in plastic waste became regulated under the Basel Convention. Under
the Convention, any Party can decide to prohibit imports of hazardous plastic waste and, since 1
January 2021, of some mixed plastic wastes. Parties to the Convention are required to make
arrangements to ensure environmentally sound management of their wastes either through
alternative importers or by increasing their own capacity.

Production and recycling rates :

The total amount of plastic ever produced worldwide, until 2015, is estimated to be 8.3
billion tonnes. Approximately 6.3 billion tonnes of this has been discarded as waste, of
 which around 79% has accumulated in landfills or the natural environment, 12% was
incinerated, and 9% has been recycled, although only ~1% of all plastic has ever been
recycled more than once.

By 2015 global production had reached some 381 Mt per year,greater than the combined weight
of everyone on Earth.The recycling rate in that year was 19.5%, while 25.5% was incinerated
and the remaining 55% disposed of, largely to landfill. These rates lag far behind those of other
recyclables, such as paper, metal and glass. Although the percentage of material being recycled
or incinerated is increasing each year, the tonnage of waste left-over also continues to rise. This
is because global plastic production is still increasing year-on-year. Left unchecked, production
could reach ~800 Mt per year by 2040, although implementing all feasible interventions could
reduce plastic pollution by 40% from 2016 rates.

A focus on global averages can disguise the fact that recycling rates also vary between types of
plastic. Several types are in common use, each having distinct chemical and physical properties.
This leads to differences in the ease with which they can be sorted and reprocessed; which
effects the value and market size for recovered materials. PET and HDPE have the highest
recycling rates, whereas polystyrene and polyurethane are often barely recycled at all.

One of the reasons for low levels of plastic recycling is weak demand from manufactures, who
fear that recycled plastics will have poor or inconsistent mechanical properties. The percentage
of plastic that can be fully recycled, rather than downcycled or go to waste, can be increased
when manufacturers of packaged goods minimise mixing of packaging materials and eliminate
contaminants. The Association of Plastics Recyclers has issued a "Design Guide for
Recyclability".

The most commonly produced plastic consumer products include packaging made from LDPE
(e.g. bags, containers, food packaging film), containers made from HDPE (e.g. milk bottles,
shampoo bottles, ice cream tubs), and PET (e.g. bottles for water and other drinks). Together
these products account for around 36% of plastics use in the world. Most of them (e.g.
disposable cups, plates, cutlery, takeaway containers, carrier bags) are used for only a short
period, many for less than a day. The use of plastics in building and construction, textiles,
transportation and electrical equipment also accounts for a substantial share of the plastics
market. Plastic items used for such purposes generally have longer life spans than, for example,
plastic packaging. They may be in use for periods ranging from around five years (e.g. textiles
and electrical equipment) to more than 20 years (e.g. construction materials, industrial
machinery)

Regional data :
 Plastic consumption differs among countries and communities, with some form of plastic
having made its way into most people’s lives. North American countries (NAFTA)
account for 21% of global plastic consumption, closely followed by China (20%) and
Western Europe (18%). In North America and Europe there is high per capita plastic
consumption (94 kg and 85 kg/capita/year, respectively). In China there is lower per
capita consumption (58 kg/capita/year), but high consumption nationally because of its
large population.

The recycling activities of the largest produces of plastic waste have the greatest effect on
global averages. These are a mix of advanced economies and large developing nations,
however, not all of these publish official statistics on their plastic recycling rates. Others
may release partial data, usually limited to population centres. This makes it difficult to
draw accurate comparisons, especially as the published recycling rates vary hugely

Identification codes :
Many plastic items bear symbols identifying the type of polymer from which they are
made. These resin identification codes, often abbreviated RICs, are used internationally, and
were originally developed in 1988 by the Society of the Plastics Industry (now the Plastics
Industry Association) in the United States, but since 2008 have been administered by ASTM
International, a standards organisation.
RICs are not mandatory in all countries, but many producers voluntarily mark their products.
More than half of U.S. states have enacted laws that require plastic products beidentifiable.There
are seven codes in all, six for the most common commodity plastics and one as a catch-all for
everything else. The EU maintains a similar nine-code list which also includes ABS and
polyamides. RICs are clearly based on the recycling symbol and have drawn criticism for
causing consumer confusion, as it implies the item will always be recyclable when this is not
necessarily the case.

RICs are not particularly important for single-stream recycling, as these operations are
increasingly automated. However, in some countries citizens are required to separate their plastic
waste according to polymer type before refuse collection and for this RICs are very useful. For
instance, in Japan PET bottles are collected separately for recycling.

Plastic waste composition :

 Plastic waste consists of various polymer types, its exact
composition will vary, but the estimated global average is shown below. Polyolefins make up
nearly 50% of all plastic waste and more than 90% of waste is made of thermosoftening
polymers, which can be remelted.

Collecting and sorting :

Recycling begins with the collection and sorting of waste. Curbside collection operates in many
counties, with the collections being sent to a materials recovery facility or MBT plant where the
plastic is separated, cleaned and sorted for sale. Anything not deemed suitable for recycling will
then be sent for landfill or incineration. These operations account for a large proportion of the
financial and energy costs associated with recycling.
 Bales of colour sorted PET bottles (blues, clear and greens) Olomouc, the Czech Republic.

Sorting plastic is more complicated than any other recyclable material because it comes in a
greater range of forms. For example, glass is separated into three streams (clear, green and
amber), metals are usually either steel or aluminum and can be separated using magnets or eddy
current separators, and paper is usually sorted into a single stream. By comparison, about six
types of commodity polymer account for about 75% of plastics waste, with the remaining 25%
consisting of a myriad of polymer types, including polyurethanes and synthetic fibers which can
have a range of chemical structures. Different polymers are generally incompatible with each
other when recycled, but even items made from the same type of polymer may be incompatible
depending on what additives they contain. Additives are compounds blended into plastics to
enhance performance and include stabilisers, fillers and, most significantly, dyes. Clear plastics
hold the highest value as they may yet be dyed, while black or strongly coloured plastic is much
less valuable, as their inclusion can give discoloured products. Thus, plastic normally needs to be
sorted by both polymer type and colour to give a material suitable for recycling.

Various approaches and technologies have been developed to sort plastic, which can be
combined in different ways. As different polymer types can be incompatible with one another,
accurate sorting is essential, although in practice no approach is 100% efficient. The accuracy of
sorting therefore varies between recyclers, producing a market where products are often not well
standardised. This inconsistency in quality can act as a barrier to recycling. Bioplastics and
biodegradable plastics currently account for only a small share of household waste but their
increasing popularity may yet further complicate waste plastic sorting.

Manual separation :
Sorting through waste by hand is the oldest and simplest method of separating plastic. In
developing countries this may be done by waste pickers, while in a recycling center workers pick
items off a conveyor-belt. It requires low levels of technology and investment, but can have high
relative operating costs due to the need for a large workforce. Although many plastic items have
identification codes workers rarely have time to look for them, so there are problems of
inefficiency and inconsistency in the sorting process. Regardless, even advanced facilities retain
manual pickers to troubleshoot and correct sorting errors by equipment. Globally, the process
focuses on those materials which are most valuable, such as clear PET bottles, with a significant
amount of the waste continuing on to landfill. Working conditions can be unsanitary.

Density separation :
Plastics can be separated by exploiting differences in their densities. In this approach the plastic
is first ground into flakes of a similar size, washed and subjected to gravity separation.[ This can
be achieved using either an air classifier or hydrocyclone, or via wet float-sink method.These
approaches only allow partial sorting, as some polymers have similar density ranges.
Polypropylene (PP) and polyethylene (PE) will remain together as will polyethylene
terephthalate (PET), polystyrene (PS), and PVC. In addition, if the plastic contains a high
percentage of fillers, this may affect its density. The lighter PP and PE fraction is known as
mixed polyolefin (MPO) and can be sold as a low-value product, the heavier mixed plastics
fraction is usually unrecyclable

Electrostatic separation :
In electrostatic separators, the triboelectric effect is used to charge plastic particles electrically;
with different polymers being charged to different extents. They are then blown through an
applied electric field, which deflects them depending on their charge, directing them into
appropriate collectors. As with density separation, the particles need to be dry, have a close size
distribution and be uniform in shape.[ Electrostatic separation can be complementary to density
separation, allowing full separation of polymers, however, these will still be of mixed colours.
Sensor based separation:
This approach can be highly automated and involves various types of sensors linked to a
computer, which analyses items and directs them into appropriate chutes or belts. Near-infrared
spectroscopy can be used to distinguish between polymer types, although it can struggle with
black or strongly coloured plastics, as well as composite materials like plastic-coated paper and
multilayered packaging, which can give misleading readings. Optical sorting such as colour
sorters or hyperspectral imaging can then further organise the plastics by colour. Sensor based
separation is more expensive to install but has the best recovery rates and produces more high-
quality products.
Plastic scrap:
Plastic waste can be broadly divided into two categories; industrial scrap (sometimes referred to
as post industrial resin) and post-consumer waste. Scrap is generated during the production of
plastic items and is usually handled completely differently to post-consumer waste. It can include
flashings, trimmings, sprues and rejects. As it is collected at the point of manufacture it will be
clean, and of a known type and grade of material, and is usually of high quality and value. As
scrap is mostly traded company-to-company rather than via municipal facilities, it is often not
included in official statistics

An advanced recycling plant using optical separation

Mechanical recycling :
The majority of plastic waste is made of thermosoftening polymers, which can be re-melted and
reformed into new items in a practice known as mechanical recycling. Globally, this is by far the
most common form of recycling and in many countries it is effectively the only type practised.
This predominance is due to it being the simplest and most economical form of recycling, in
addition to it having a lower carbon footprint than most other processes. However, several
factors can lead to the quality of the polymer being reduced when it is recycled this way, which
limits its applicability and effectiveness. Thus, the limits of mechanical recycling are in practise
often the current limits of plastic recycling overall.

Plastics are reprocessed at anywhere between 150–320 °C (300–610 °F), depending on the
polymer type, and this is sufficient to cause unwanted chemical reactions which result in
polymer degradation.[ This reduces the physical properties and overall quality of the plastic and
can produce volatile, low-molecular weight compounds, which may impart undesirable taste or
odour, as well as causing thermal discolouration. Additives present within the plastic can
accelerate this degradation. For instance, oxo-biodegradable additives, intended to improve the
biodegradability of plastic, also increase the degree of thermal degradation. Similarly, flame
retardants can have unwanted effects.[ The quality of the product also depends strongly on how
well the plastic was sorted. Many polymers are immiscible with one another when molten and
will phase separate (like oil and water) during reprocessing. Products made from such blends
contain many boundaries between the different polymer types and cohesion across these
boundaries is weak, leading to poor mechanical properties. In more extreme cases the polymers
may degrade one another, this is often the case with PVC, as it can generate hydrogen chloride
which strongly affects condensation polymers such as PET.

Many of these problems have technological solutions, though they bear a financial cost.
Advanced polymer stabilisers and can be used to protect plastics from the rigours of thermal
reprocessing. Volatile degradation products can be removed by a range of devolatilisation
techniques. Flame retardants can be removed by chemical treatment,[ while damaging metallic
additives can be rendered inert with deactivators. Finally, the properties of mixed plastics can be
improved by using compatibilisers. These are compounds which improve miscibility between
polymer types to give a more homogeneous product, with better internal cohesion and improved
mechanical properties. They act at the boundary between different polymers and are small-
molecules possessing two different chemical regions, each of which is compatible with a certain
polymer. This allows them to act like molecular-nails or screws, anchoring the areas of different
polymer to one another. As a result, compatibilisers are normally limited to systems dominated
by two particular types of plastic and are not a cost-effective option for unsorted mixtures of
various polymer types. There is no one-size-fits-all compatibiliser for all plastic combinations.
Even with these technologies, it is particularly challenging to recycle plastic so that it can meet
food contact standards.

6. Mechanical recycling :
The majority of plastic waste is made of thermosoftening polymers, which can be re-melted and
reformed into new items in a practice known as mechanical recycling. Globally, this is by far the
most common form of recycling and in many countries it is effectively the only type practised.
This predominance is due to it being the simplest and most economical form of recycling, in
addition to it having a lower carbon footprint than most other processes. However, several
factors can lead to the quality of the polymer being reduced when it is recycled this way, which
limits its applicability and effectiveness. Thus, the limits of mechanical recycling are in practise
often the current limits of plastic recycling overall.
Plastics are reprocessed at anywhere between 150–320 °C (300–610 °F), depending on the
polymer type, and this is sufficient to cause unwanted chemical reactions which result in
polymer degradation. This reduces the physical properties and overall quality of the plastic and
can produce volatile, low-molecular weight compounds, which may impart undesirable taste or
odour, as well as causing thermal discolouration. Additives present within the plastic can
accelerate this degradation. For instance, oxo-biodegradable additives, intended to improve the
biodegradability of plastic, also increase the degree of thermal degradation.[ Similarly, flame
retardants can have unwanted effects. The quality of the product also depends strongly on how
well the plastic was sorted. Many polymers are immiscible with one another when molten and
will phase separate (like oil and water) during reprocessing. Products made from such blends
contain many boundaries between the different polymer types and cohesion across these
boundaries is weak, leading to poor mechanical properties. In more extreme cases the polymers
may degrade one another, this is often the case with PVC, as it can generate hydrogen chloride
which strongly affects condensation polymers such as PET.

Polymer compatibilisation
Plastics are reprocessed at anywhere between 150–320 °C (300–610 °F), depending on the
polymer type, and this is sufficient to cause unwanted chemical reactions which result in
polymer degradation. This reduces the physical properties and overall quality of the plastic and
can produce volatile, low-molecular weight compounds, which may impart undesirable taste or
odour, as well as causing thermal discolouration. Additives present within the plastic can
accelerate this degradation. For instance, oxo-biodegradable additives, intended to improve the
biodegradability of plastic, also increase the degree of thermal degradation.[ Similarly, flame
retardants can have unwanted effects. The quality of the product also depends strongly on how
well the plastic was sorted. Many polymers are immiscible with one another when molten and
will phase separate (like oil and water) during reprocessing. Products made from such blends
contain many boundaries between the different polymer types and cohesion across these
boundaries is weak, leading to poor mechanical properties. In more extreme cases the polymers
may degrade one another, this is often the case with PVC, as it can generate hydrogen chloride
which strongly affects condensation polymers such as PET.
Many of these problems have technological solutions, though they bear a financial cost.
Advanced polymer stabilisers and can be used to protect plastics from the rigours of thermal
reprocessing. Volatile degradation products can be removed by a range of devolatilisation
techniques. Flame retardants can be removed by chemical treatment, while damaging metallic
additives can be rendered inert with deactivators. Finally, the properties of mixed plastics can be
improved by using compatibilisers. These are compounds which improve miscibility between
polymer types to give a more homogeneous product, with better internal cohesion and improved
mechanical properties. They act at the boundary between different polymers and are small-
molecules possessing two different chemical regions, each of which is compatible with a certain
polymer. This allows them to act like molecular-nails or screws, anchoring the areas of different
polymer to one another. As a result, compatibilisers are normally limited to systems dominated
by two particular types of plastic and are not a cost-effective option for unsorted mixtures of
various polymer types. There is no one-size-fits-all compatibiliser for all plastic combinations.
Even with these technologies, it is particularly challenging to recycle plastic so that it can meet
food contact standards.
Closed-loop recycling :
In closed-loop, or primary recycling, used plastic is endlessly recycled back into new items of
the same quality and sort. For instance, turning drinks bottles back into drinks bottles. It can be
considered an example of a circular economy. The continual mechanical recycling of plastic
without reduction in quality is very challenging due to cumulative polymer degradation, and risk
of contaminant build-up. In 2013 only 2% of plastic packaging was recycled in a closed loop.
Although closed-loop recycling has been investigated for many polymers, to-date the only
industrial successes have been with PET bottle recycling. The reason for this is that polymer
degradation in PET is often repairable. PET's polymer chains tend to cleave at their ester groups
and the alcohol and carboxyl groups left by this can be joined back together by the use of
chemical agents called chain extenders. Pyromellitic dianhydride is one such compound.
Open-loop recycling :

In open-loop recycling, also known as secondary recycling, or downcycling, the quality of the
plastic is reduced eachtime it is recycled, so that the material is not recycledindefinitely and
eventually becomes waste. It is the most common type of plastic recycling. The recycling of PET
bottles into fleece or other fibres is a common example, and accounts for the majority of PET
recycling. Although this approach only delays material from heading to landfill or incineration,
life-cycle assessment shows it to be of ecological benefit. Environmentally successful recycling
displaces demand for fresh plastic production and if open-loop recycling achieves this then its
benefits are indistinguishable from closed-loop recycling. If instead, it is used to produce new
cheap and low-quality items which would not otherwise have been made, then it is not displacing
current production and is of little or no benefit to the environment.

This re-usable carrier bag has been made from recycled plastic bottles. It is an
example of open-loop recycling

The reduction in polymer quality can be offset by mixing recycled plastic with virgin material
when making a new product. Compatibilised plastics can be used as a replacement for virgin
material, as it is possible to produce them with the right melt flow index needed for good
processing. Low quality mixed plastics can also be recycled in an open-loop, although there is
limited demand for such products, as in addition to poor mechanical properties, incompletely
sorted waste often contains a wide range of dyes and colourants. When these are mixed during
reprocessing the result is usually a dark-brown product which is unappealing for many
applications. These blends find use as outdoor furniture or plastic lumber. As the material is
weak, but of low cost it is produced in thick planks so as to be sturdy.
Thermosets :
Although thermoset polymers do not melt, technologies have been developed for their
mechanical recycling. This usually involves breaking the material down to a crumb, which can
then be mixed with some sort of binding agent to form a new composite material. For instance,
polyurethanes can be recycled as reconstituted crumb foam. Tire recycling similarly produces
crumb rubber, which can be used as aggregate. Various devulcanisation technologies have also
been developed to allow the recycling of rubber wastes, though few of these are commercially
important.

Feedstock recycling

In feedstock recycling, also called chemical recycling or tertiary recycling, polymers are reduced to their
chemical building-blocks (monomers), which can then be polymerised back into fresh plastics.[99][100]
[101] In theory, this allows for near infinite recycling; as impurities, additives, dyes and chemical defects
are completely removed with each cycle.[102][103] In practice, chemical recycling is far less common
than mechanical recycling. Implementation is limited because technologies do not yet exist to
depolymerise all polymers reliably on an industrial scale and also because the equipment and operating
costs are much higher. In 2018 Japan had one of the highest rates in the world at ~4%, compared to 23%
mechanical recycling,[104] in the same period Germany, another major recycler, reported a feedstock
recycling rate of 0.2%.[105] Depolymerising, purifying and re-polymerising the plastic can also be energy
intensive, leading to the carbon footprint of feedstock recycling normally being higher than that of
mechanical recycling.[77] PET, PU and PS are depolymerised commercially to varying extents,[102] but
the feedstock recycling of polyolefins, which make-up nearly half of all plastics, is much more limited.
[103]

Thermal depolymerisation

Certain polymers like PTFE, polystyrene, nylon 6, and polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) undergo thermal
depolymerisation when heated to sufficiently high temperatures.[106] The reactions are sensitive to
impurities and require clean and well sorted waste to produce a good product. Even then, not all
depolymerisation reactions are completely efficient and some competitive pyrolysis is often observed;
the monomers, therefore, require purification before reuse. The feedstock recycling of polystyrene has
been commercialised,[103] but global capacity remains fairly limited.

Chemical depolymerisation

Condensation polymers bearing cleavable groups such as esters and amides can be completely
depolymerised by hydrolysis or solvolysis. This can be a purely chemical process but may also be
promoted by enzymes, like PETase, which is able to breakdown PET.[107][108] Such technologies have
lower energy costs that thermal depolymerisation but are more limited in terms of the polymers they
can be applied to. Thus far polyethylene terephthalate has been the most heavily studied polymer,[109]
with commercial scale feedstock recycling being performed by several companies.

Feedstock recycling :
In feedstock recycling, also called chemical recycling or tertiary recycling, polymers are reduced
to their chemical building-blocks (monomers), which can then be polymerised back into fresh
plastics.[99][100][101] In theory, this allows for near infinite recycling; as impurities, additives,
dyes and chemical defects are completely removed with each cycle.[102][103] In practice,
chemical recycling is far less common than mechanical recycling. Implementation is limited
because technologies do not yet exist to depolymerise all polymers reliably on an industrial scale
and also because the equipment and operating costs are much higher. In 2018 Japan had one of
the highest rates in the world at ~4%, compared to 23% mechanical recycling,[104] in the same
period Germany, another major recycler, reported a feedstock recycling rate of 0.2%.[105]
Depolymerising, purifying and re-polymerising the plastic can also be energy intensive, leading
to the carbon footprint of feedstock recycling normally being higher than that of mechanical
recycling.[77] PET, PU and PS are depolymerised commercially to varying extents,[102] but the
feedstock recycling of polyolefins, which make-up nearly half of all plastics, is much more
limited.[103]

Thermal depolymerisation
Certain polymers like PTFE, polystyrene, nylon 6, and polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA)
undergo thermal depolymerisation when heated to sufficiently high temperatures.[106] The
reactions are sensitive to impurities and require clean and well sorted waste to produce a good
product. Even then, not all depolymerisation reactions are completely efficient and some
competitive pyrolysis is often observed; the monomers, therefore, require purification before
reuse. The feedstock recycling of polystyrene has been commercialised,[103] but global capacity
remains fairly limited.

Chemical depolymerisation
Condensation polymers bearing cleavable groups such as esters and amides can be completely
depolymerised by hydrolysis or solvolysis. This can be a purely chemical process but may also
be promoted by enzymes, like PETase, which is able to breakdown PET.[107][108] Such
technologies have lower energy costs that thermal depolymerisation but are more limited in
terms of the polymers they can be applied to. Thus far polyethylene terephthalate has been the
most heavily studied polymer,[109] with commercial scale feedstock recycling being performed
by several companies.

Energy recovery :

Energy recovery, also called energy recycling or quaternary recycling, involves burning waste plastic in
place of fossil fuels for energy production. Its inclusion as a type of recycling can be controversial, but it
is nonetheless included in the recycling rates reported by many countries, although it is not considered
recycling by the EU. Care should be taken not to conflate it with incineration without energy recovery,
which is historically more common, but which does not offset either future plastic production or fossil
fuel use.

Energy recovery is often the default waste management method of last resort, a position previously held
by landfill. In urban areas a lack of suitable sites for new landfills can drive this, but it is also a result of
regulation, such as the EU's Landfill Directive or other landfill diversion policies. Compared to the other
recycling options its appeal is largely economic. If the correct technologies are used then the plastics do
not need to be separated from one another, or from other forms of municipal solid waste (garbage),
which greatly reduces costs. Compared to the sometimes variable market for recyclates, demand for
electricity is universal and better understood, reducing the perceived financial risk of operations. As a
means of waste management, it is highly effective, reducing the volume of waste by about 90%, with the
residues sent to landfill or used to make cinder block. Although its CO2 emissions are obviously high,
comparing its overall ecological desirability to other recycling technologies is difficult. For instance, while
recycling greatly reduces greenhouse gas emissions compared to incineration, it is an expensive way of
achieving these reductions when compared to investing in renewable energy.

Plastic waste may be simply burnt as refuse-derived fuel (RDF) in a waste-to-energy process, or it may
be chemically converted to a synthetic fuel first. In either approach PVC must be excluded or
compensated for by installing dichlorination technologies, as it generates large amounts of hydrogen
chloride (HCl) when burnt. This can corrode equipment and cause undesirable chlorination of the fuel
products. The burning of plastics has long been associated with the release of harmful dioxins and
dioxin-like compounds, however these hazards can be abated by the use of advanced combustors and
emission control systems. Incineration with energy recovery remains the most common method, with
more advanced waste-to-fuel technologies, such as pyrolysis, being hindered by technical and cost
hurdles.

Waste-to-fuel

Mixed plastic waste can be depolymerised to give a synthetic fuel. This has a higher heating value than
the starting plastic and can be burnt more efficiently, although it remains less efficient than fossil fuels.
Various conversion technologies have been investigated, of which pyrolysis is the most common.
Conversion can take place as part of incineration in an IGC cycle, but often the aim is to collect the fuel
so that it may be sold. Pyrolysis of mixed plastics can give a fairly broad mix of chemical products
(between about 1 and 15 carbon atoms) including gases and aromatic liquids. Catalysts can give a better
defined product with a higher value. The liquid products can be used as synthetic diesel fuel,[128] with
some commercial production taking place in several countries. Life-cycle analysis shows that plastic-to-
fuel can displace the production of fossil fuels and result in lower net greenhouse gas emissions (~15%
reduction).

Compared to the widespread use of incineration, plastic-to-fuel technologies have historically struggled
to be economically viable because of the costs of collecting and sorting the plastic and the relatively low
value of the fuel produced. Large plants are seen as being more economical than smaller ones but
require more investment to build.

Other processes :

Millions of tonnes of plastic waste are generated annually, and this has led to numerous
solutions being developed, many of which operate at a considerable scale. A process has been
developed in which many kinds of plastic can be used as a carbon source (in place of coke) in the
recycling of scrap steel, with roughly 200,000 tons of waste plastics being processed this way
each year in Japan.
Construction and concrete applications:
The use of recovered plastics in engineering materials is being researched and is gaining
ground.Ground plastic may be used as a construction aggregate or filler material in certain
applications. While it is generally unsuitable in structural concrete, its inclusion in asphalt
concrete, (forming rubberised asphalt), subbase and recycled insulation can be beneficial. An
example of this is the construction of plastic roads. These are rarely made entirely of plastic but
can incorporate significant amounts of plastic waste in their design. The practice is popular in
India, which by 2021 had constructed some 700 km (435 miles) of highways. However, the
practise has also come in for criticism, in-part over uncertainties over the leaching of plastic
additives into the environment. Research is ongoing to use plastics in various forms in
cementitious materials such as concrete. Densifying plastic materials such as PET and plastic
bags and then using them to partially replace aggregate and depolymerizing PET to use as a
polymeric binder to enhance concrete are actively being studied.

Economics of plastics processing :

The economics of plastics processing is determined by the type of process. Plastics can be
processed with the following methods: machining, compression molding, transfer molding,
injection molding, extrusion, rotational molding, blow molding, thermoforming, casting, forging,
and foam molding. Processing methods are selected based on equipment cost, production rate,
tooling cost, and build volume. High equipment and tooling cost methods are typically used for
large production volumes whereas low - medium equipment cost and tooling cost methods are
used for low production volumes. Compression molding, transfer molding, injection molding,
forging, and foam molding have high equipment and tooling cost. Lower cost processes are
machining, extruding, rotational molding, blow molding, thermoforming, and casting. A
summary of each process and its cost is displayed in figure 1.
Figure 1: Comparative Costs and Production Volumes For Processing of
Plastics

Aspects of plastic processing =-0

Degradable plastics
Oxo-degradable plastics: these are petroleum-based plastics with additives such as transition
metals and metals salts that promote the process of fragmentation of the plastic when exposed to
a particular environment, such as high temperature or oxygen rich one, for a prolonged period of
time. Fragmentation exposes a larger surface area of the plastic to colonies of bacteria that
eventually decompose the polymer into its lower energy state components: carbon dioxide and
water.

Some aspects to take into account regarding this method to dispose of end-of-life
plastics are:
 The type of polymer: experiments conducted by Chiellini et al. confirmed that bacteria
are only able to decompose low molecular weight polymers (at least at a rate that can be
appreciated).
 Environmental conditions: the time for fragmentation/degradation varies according to
conditions which aren’t always controllable.
 Material’s potential to be recycled: this characteristic will be compromised, since the
polymer’s durability or strength will be affected by the additives that accelerate
fragmentation.
Classifying a polymer as bio-degradable requires specifications regarding these aspects.
Important economic aspects that need to be considered when disposing of degradable polymers
include:
 Waste landfill costs: if plastics represent a significant percentage of waste in a particular
region, manufacturing plastics with bio-degradable properties may be more profitable and
ecologically friendly than merely disposing of a non-degradable plastic. By using
degradable polymers, costs due to waste transportation, landfill maintenance, new landfill
excavation and environmental hazard control can be avoided.
 Lost end-of-life plastic potential: processes such as energy recovery of the plastic by
incineration or biological treatment and material recovery by recycling have to be taken
into account when assessing the feasibility of manufacturing degradable polymers.

Reusable plastic containers

The implementation of reusable plastic containers arises as a consequence of concerns with

sustainability and environmental impact. Use of recyclable plastic packages is beneficial
environmentally but is more expensive. The adoption of reusable plastic containers will amount
to an approximate annual increase of 0.058 euros/kg of delivered goods.[6] The cost associated
with reusable plastic containers are packaging purchasing costs, transportation costs,
labor/handling costs, management costs, and costs resulting from losses.[6] Packaging
purchasing costs encompasses the cost of the containers as well as any associated service costs.
This cost is reoccurring but is only relevant once every 50 cycles, which is the typical lifetime of
reusable plastic containers. One cycle consists of the initial stages of processing plastic
containers all the way to the use and recycling of these containers by the consumers.
Transportation costs are slightly higher for reusable plastic containers as compared to traditional
use and throwaway plastic containers in that these reusable containers need additional
transportation to recycling facilities. Reusable plastic containers also require work loading and
unloading from trucks as well as quality inspection, this adds additional labor costs.[6]
Management costs exists because reusable plastic container stock count needs to be managed.
The final cost of reusable plastic containers is the cost incurred when packages are lost or there
are errors within the management system. Figure 2 provides a detailed summary of the costs
associated with adopting reusable plastic containers.

Incineration of plastics

Recycling plastics presents the difficulty of handling mixed plastics, as unmixed plastics are
usually necessary to maintain desirable properties. Mixing many plastics results in diminished
material properties, with even just a few percent of polypropylene mixed with polyethylene
producing a plastic with significantly reduced tensile strength.[7] An alternative to recycling of
these plastics and those which can’t be easily recycled such as thermosets is to use degradation to
break the polymers down into monomers of low molecular weight. The products of this process
can be used to make high quality polymers however energy stored in the polymer bonds is lost
during this process.[7]
An alternative to economically dispose of plastics is to burn them in an incinerator. Incinerators
capable of cleanly burning polymers exist and while they require significant capital investment,
the energy produced offsets the economic impact.[8] Since most plastics are produced from
petroleum, their molecules consist exclusively or primarily of carbon, oxygen, and hydrogen
atoms. With proper design, an incinerator can completely combust these plastics allowing the
recovery of energy stored in the original petroleum feedstock which would otherwise escape
during processes such as degradation. Some polymers contain chlorine or nitrogen which can
result in undesirable combustion products however the use of scrubbers can remove such
products. The end result is that many polymers burn more cleanly than coal and as clean as most
oils.

Bibliography

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plastic_recycling

 West, Larry. "Recyclable Plastic: Why are So Few Food Containers Made of Recyclable
Plastic?". About.com. Retrieved 4 May 2009.

 ISF's Plastics Recovery Manual