Department of Biosystems Engineering, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada.
J Environ Manage. 2023 Aug 15;340:117859. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2023.117859. Epub 2023 Apr 28.
In this article, we identify the problem of plastic proliferation, the consequent expansion of plastic waste in our society, the inadequacies of current attempts to recycle plastic, and the urgency to address this problem in the light of the microplastic threat. It details the problems with current efforts to recycle plastic and the particularly poor recycling rates in North America (NA) when compared to certain countries in the European Union (EU). The obstacles to plastic recycling are overlapping economic, physical and regulatory problems spanning fluctuating resale market prices, residue and polymer contamination and offshore export which often circumvents the entire process. The primary differences between the EU and NA are the costs of end-of-life disposal methods with most EU citizens paying much higher prices for both landfilling and Energy from Waste (incineration) costs compared with NA. At the time of writing, some EU states are either restricted from landfilling mixed plastic waste or the cost is significantly greater than in NA ($80 to 125 USD/t vs $55 USD/t). This makes recycling a favourable option in the EU, and, in turn, has led to more industrial processing and innovation, more recycled product uptake, and the structuring of collection and sorting methods that favour cleaner polymer streams. This is a self-re-enforcing cycle and is evident by EU technologies and industries that have emerged to process "problem plastics", such as mixed plastic film wastes, co-polymer films, thermosets, Polystyrene, (PS) Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC), and others. This is in contrast with NA recycling infrastructure, which has been tailored to shipping low-value mixed plastic waste abroad. Circularity is far from complete in any jurisdiction as export of plastic to developing countries is an opaque, but often used disposal method in the EU as it is in NA. Proposed restrictions on off-shore shipping and regulations requiring minimum recycled plastic content in new products will potentially increase plastic recycling by increasing both supply and demand for recycled product.
本文探讨了塑料污染问题,即塑料废弃物在我们社会中的不断扩张,以及当前塑料回收尝试的不足之处,尤其是考虑到微塑料的威胁,这一问题亟待解决。文中详细介绍了当前塑料回收面临的挑战,以及与欧盟部分国家相比,北美(NA)地区较差的塑料回收率。塑料回收面临的障碍是相互重叠的经济、物理和监管问题,包括波动的转售市场价格、残留物和聚合物污染以及海外出口等问题,这些问题常常使整个回收过程变得复杂。欧盟和北美在塑料回收方面的主要区别在于,垃圾末端处理方式的成本不同,与北美相比,大多数欧盟国家对垃圾填埋和能源回收(焚烧)的费用支付更高。在撰写本文时,一些欧盟国家要么限制混合塑料废物进行填埋,要么成本明显高于北美(80 至 125 美元/吨对 55 美元/吨)。这使得欧盟更倾向于回收,从而导致更多的工业加工和创新,更多的回收产品采用,以及更有利于清洁聚合物流的收集和分类方法的构建。这是一个自我强化的循环,欧盟的技术和产业已经显现出这一点,这些技术和产业旨在处理“问题塑料”,例如混合塑料薄膜废物、共聚物薄膜、热固性塑料、聚苯乙烯(PS)、聚氯乙烯(PVC)和其他塑料。相比之下,北美回收基础设施是为了将低价值的混合塑料废物运往国外而设计的。在任何司法管辖区,循环性都远未完全实现,因为向发展中国家出口塑料是欧盟和北美常用的一种不透明的处理方法。限制塑料向海外运输的提议以及要求新产品中最低回收塑料含量的法规,将通过增加对回收产品的供应和需求,潜在地增加塑料回收量。