October 2, 2024

New plastics consist of increasingly complex additive formulations and polymers. Can the recycling of mixed packaging plastics make new products safe at all or is the use of recyclates in consumer-related products even dangerous? In this episode of the DGAW podcast, Dr. Ines Oehme from the Federal Environment Agency and Prof. Dr. Uwe Lahl discuss this topic, moderated by Marvin Müller from Studio Grüner Ton. To the Podcast:

• DGAW: Ressourcen.Neu.Denken Podcast, Episode 41 (in German)

Further publications on this topic:

• Lahl U., Zeschmar-Lahl B. (2024): Material Recycling of Plastics—A Challenge for Sustainability. Sustainability 2024, 16, 6630. ONLINE
• Lahl U., Lechtenberg D., Zeschmar-Lahl B. (2024): Kunststoffe in der Abfallwirtschaft – closing the loop? Österr Wasser- und Abfallw (2024) 76, 7–8. ONLINE
• Lahl U., Lechtenberg D., Zeschmar-Lahl B. (2024): Kunststoffrecycling und gefährliche Stoffe – RISK CYCLE. Müll und Abfall 4, 195–204 – Article based on the initial publication in Abfallwirtschaft und Energie 1 (2024)
  • Müll und Abfall 4 (2024) ONLINE
  • Abfallwirtschaft und Energie 1 (2024) ONLINE

October 1, 2024

At the United Nations World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg in 2002, it was agreed to minimize the adverse effects of chemicals on humans and the environment by 2020. To implement this so-called ‘2020 target’, the ‘Strategic Approach to International Chemicals Management’ (SAICM) was established in 2006. As the mandate for SAICM ended in 2020, work on a successor framework began already in 2015. Due to the COVID pandemic, among other things, negotiations on the specific design were protracted. Finally, at the end of the 5th International Conference on Chemicals (ICCM5) on 30 September 2023 in Bonn under the German presidency, the ‘Global Framework on Chemicals’ (GFC) was adopted with the’ Bonn Declaration for a Planet Free of Harm from Chemicals and Waste’.

The GFC was also given the mandate to develop indicators for the goals and targets adopted by the conference. This task is now being tackled. The GFC can also draw on the results of our project on indicators for future global chemicals and waste management, which was commissioned by the Federal Environment Agency. In brief: The indicators combine the concept of sustainable chemistry with the requirements of sound management of chemicals and waste. A list of the 23 most important indicators from this project was recently submitted to the GFC by the German representative in the responsible working group, Dr. Christopher Blum (Federal Environment Agency). We are pleased that the indicators developed in this project now serve as a basis for the responsible GFC working group (Open-Ended Ad Hoc Group on Measurability and Indicators). We want to continue to support this important approach of the GFC and are therefore planning a scientific publication in which the indicators developed in the project will be presented in the context of the global chemical policy debate.

• UBA-Texte 79/2024 (English)
• UBA-Texte 78/2024 (German)

Further Links:

• UBA website on GFC
• GFC website
• GFC brochure with Bonn Declaration, GFC text and ICCM5 resolution (PDF)
• Open-Ended Ad Hoc Group on Measurability and Indicators

August 2, 2024

The complexity of plastic polymers and even more so of additives has increased enormously in recent years. This makes the material recycling of plastic waste considerably more difficult, especially in the case of mixed plastic waste. Some additives have now been strictly regulated or even completely banned for good reasons (‘legacy additives’). Material or mechanical recycling generally uses old plastics that still contain these substances. Consequently, products that are manufactured using such recyclates are contaminated with these harmful substances. This poses a major challenge for sustainability, as there is a conflict of objectives between protecting the health of consumers, especially vulnerable groups, conserving resources and recycling, keeping material cycles ‘clean’ and destroying pollutants, and transporting them to a safe final sink. With regard to the first objective, we recommend avoiding the use of contaminated recyclates for products with intensive contact with consumers (‘contact-sensitive products’) until further notice.

In our recent article “Material Recycling of Plastics—A Challenge for Sustainability” we also show that the climate policy challenges for the plastics (and chemical) industry necessitate defossilization (‘feedstock change’). This turnaround can only succeed if solely closed-loop recycling takes place in the future; recyclates should primarily replace virgin plastics. For material or mechanical recycling, this means that this can only work if used plastics with a high degree of homogeneity and known formulation are collected separately, as is already the case today with PET bottles. The objective of this article is to illustrate the increasing complexity of plastic polymers and additives, especially legacy additives, which will force a legislative readjustment of todays’ material recycling.

Lahl, U.; Zeschmar-Lahl, B. Material Recycling of Plastics—A Challenge for Sustainability. Sustainability 2024, 16, 6630. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16156630

July 29, 2024

The circular economy will be an important, if not the decisive source of raw materials for the European economy after 2030. This applies not only to the supply of metals, but also to non-fossil carbon. What about the fossil carbon in the stock (plastics)? Only if it is recycled will it not have a climate impact. However, there is currently no reliable data available on the substitution of virgin plastics with recyclates (closed loop recycling) for the relevant plastic application areas (packaging, construction products, waste electrical and electronic equipment, vehicles). In our opinion, the feedstock change (“defossilisation”) in the plastics and chemical industry that is necessary from a climate policy perspective can only succeed if physical and chemical recycling is focussed on substituting “virgin plastic” in the future. The additives contained in long-lasting plastic products pose a problem here. Many of these substances are now banned or strictly regulated (legacy additives). The additives are usually recycled together with the material during mechanical recycling. The data on the contamination of recyclates from used plastics with hazardous or banned substances is a cause for concern. Based on the data available and its toxicological assessment, we recommend a moratorium on the use of recyclates for products with a high “user proximity” (contact-sensitive products like food packaging, kitchen utensils, toys, textiles, indoor products). Recyclates from closed, monitored product cycles should not be subject to this moratorium. the article by Uwe Lahl, Dirk Lechtenberg and Barbara Zeschmar-Lahl was published today in the journal Österreichische Wasser- und Abfallwirtschaft (2024), 76, 7–8. 

July 2, 2024 The complexity of plastic polymers and even more so of additives has increased enormously in recent years. This makes the high-quality recycling of mixed plastic waste considerably more difficult. Some additives have now been strictly regulated or even completely banned for good reasons (“legacy additives”). Used plastics that still contain these substances are generally used for material or mechanical recycling. Consequently, products made from such recyclates are contaminated with these harmful substances. We therefore recommend, as already explained in our article in the journal Müll und Abfall “Kunststoffrecycling und gefährliche Stoffe – Risk Cycle”, avoiding the use of these recyclates for products with intensive contact with consumers until further notice. In our current article “Plastics Recycling and Hazardous Substances – Risk Cycle”, we also show that  the climate policy challenges for the plastics (and chemical) industry necessitate a defossilisation (‘feedstock change’). This turnaround can only succeed if solely high-quality recycling takes place in future; recyclates should primarily replace virgin plastics. This can only work if used plastics with a high degree of homogeneity and known formulation are collected separately, as is already the case today with PET bottles. In this context, we  would also like to point out inconsistencies in the current legislation on the European emissions trading system. The article by Prof. Dr. habil. Uwe Lahl and Dr. Barbara Zeschmar-Lahl is currently under review and can be viewed and commented on at preprints.org.

June 25, 2024

On June 18, 2024, the EU Commission opened the consultation procedure on its draft delegated act regarding the requirements for determining that greenhouse gases are permanently chemically bound in a product (COMMISSION DELEGATED REGULATION (EU) …/… of XXX supplementing Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the requirements for considering that greenhouse gases have become permanently chemically bound in a product). This is about Carbon Capture and Utilisation (CCU).

CCU could be an important way of not only not emitting CO2, but also incorporating carbon into products (and thus killing two birds with one stone). There is a consensus that the incorporation of carbon should be permanent. Chemically, the answer is simple at first glance: mineral carbonates meet this requirement. They are stable for centuries, perhaps even millennia.

But what about organic chemistry? It is indispensable for the future of society. So far, it has been based almost exclusively on fossil raw materials. In order to achieve the feedstock change (defossilisation) of the chemical industry, e.g. the plastics sector, we also need substances that are recycled and substances that are produced from sun, wind and CO2. However, according to the EU Commission, these substances are not ‘permanent’ simply because they can be incinerated. Therefore, cycles only make sense in terms of climate policy if we can imagine that they are permanent. If we do not have this imagination, there will be no regulation to bring this about. Within the framework of the Delegated Regulation on CCU, the Commission has the opportunity to develop this imagination.

Our statement on the EU Commission’s draft in this regard and the website for the consultation procedure can be found here:

June 13, 2024

Presentation by Prof. Dr. Uwe Lahl at the DGAW board meeting, 13 June 2024, Bremen: Sustainable circular economy must improve in two areas:

1. Recycling of plastics from cycles without a ‘closed and controlled chain’ ((EU) 2022/1616) leads to hazardous products. Products with or made from recycled materials must fulfil the same requirements as new products made from virgin plastic. A moratorium on the use of recyclates of unknown origin is therefore advisable for all plastic products that come into close contact with people (packaging, children’s toys, kitchen utensils, clothing, indoor products). Only recyclates from secure cycles should be used.

2. Open loop recycling, in which wood or cement rather than plastics are substituted, does not represent ecologically high-quality recycling. Quotas for open loop recycling therefore contribute nothing to the raw material transition in the plastics industry. This is why closed loop substitution quotas are being advocated, as provided for the first time by the new European Packaging Ordinance.

Prof. Dr. Uwe Lahl explained these proposals in more detail in his presentation at the DGAW board meeting on June 13, 2024 in Bremen. You can download his presentation via the link below.

June 7, 2024

The article by Prof. Dr. habil. Uwe Lahl and Dr. Barbara Zeschmar-Lahl on the topic “More than 30 Years of PVC Recycling in Europe — Need for Regulation” has been published in the Special Issue of Sustainability: Resources and Waste Management (Sustainability 2024, 16 (22), 4891).

As documented in our “Critical Inventory” (Sustainability 2024, 16 (9), 3854), the PVC industry’s track record to date of increasing the sustainability of PVC plastic is not convincing, although the industry takes a different view. The question, therefore, arises as to whether legislators should intervene in Europe or at national levels.

As we show in our paper, none of the waste disposal processes currently in use (mechanical recycling, energy recovery) have sufficient capabilities to absorb the additional quantities of PVC that will enter the waste management system from the existing stock in the future. Therefore, the only solution for today’s PVC waste, and especially the stock problem that is heading towards the waste management sector, is to collect and dispose of PVC separately. Chemical recycling and mono-incineration have the potential to solve the stock problem in the future. However, this will require the construction of separate collection and industrial plants, which, in the case of chemical recycling, will technically need two stages in order to separate the chlorine as HCl in advance.

The creation of a plant infrastructure with which PVC could be processed would relieve the other parts of the waste management sector of chlorine massively. VinylPlus/EuPC stated: “The European PVC manufacturers, converters and recyclers would be more than happy to process the waste if efficient logistic systems would exist to bring the waste to them”, and they “would welcome to make this separate collection mandatory.”

Now it’s Brussels’ turn.

Below you will find a link to download this and the previous article as well as the special edition with further interesting articles.