131st MAINE LEGISLATURE FIRST SPECIAL SESSION-2023

Legislative Document No. 1660 S.P. 665 In Senate, April 13, 2023 An Act to Provide That Advanced Recycling Facilities Are Subject to Solid Waste Regulation and That Advanced Recycling Does Not Constitute Recycling https://legislature.maine.gov/legis/bills/getPDF.asp?paper=SP0665&item=1&snum=131

‘CHEMICAL RECYCLING’ AND PLASTIC BURNING FAQ

Many so-called “chemical recycling” facilities–also called “advanced” or “molecular recycling” facilities–produce and release hazardous air pollutants and large amounts of hazardous waste that cause cancer, birth defects, reproductive problems, and damage to the brain, liver, and lungs. They are often located in communities where low income families and people of color live.1 These facilities, which convert plastic to fuels or other chemicals, actually recycle very little if any plastic and require continuous inputs of virgin plastic. The plastics industry wants people to think processes like pyrolysis, gasification, solvolysis and depolymerization are the solution to the plastic crisis, but “chemical recycling” is really just greenwashing to allow expansion of plastic production. Here we answer your questions about the problems of so-called “chemical recycling,” and provide information about real solutions to the plastics crisis.

THE BASICS What is “chemical recycling”?

So-called “chemical recycling” (also referred to as “advanced recycling,” “molecular recycling,” “chemical conversion,” and “plastics renewal”) is an umbrella term for processes that convert plastics into either fuel, other chemicals, or other plastics. These toxic technologies include pyrolysis, gasification, solvolysis, and depolymerization.

Pyrolysis uses high temperatures and low-oxygen conditions to degrade plastic into a liquid/oil that is then refined into fuels or used to create other chemicals or plastics. Pyrolysis plants are regulated as incinerators under the federal Clean Air Act.

Gasification uses high temperatures with air or steam to degrade plastic into a gas called “synthesis gas” or “syngas” that can then be made into fuels or other chemicals. Gasification plants are regulated as incinerators under the federal Clean Air Act.

Solvolysis uses solvents and other chemicals to dissolve plastics and separate polymers so they can be used to create new plastics.

Chemical depolymerization uses thermal and chemical reactions to break polymers down into individual units (monomers) that can be made into new plastics.

Is “chemical recycling” actually recycling much plastic?

No. The products that result from “chemical recycling” are often not turned into plastic again, as the term recycling implies.3,4 A recent US Department of Energy study found that pyrolysis and gasification had very low yields, with only 0.1% to 14% of the inputs turned into outputs that are suitable for reuse as plastic.5 An analysis conducted by the Natural Resources Defense Council shows that most of the eight so-called “chemical recycling” facilities in the US are not actually recycling any plastics.

In theory, both plastic-to-fuel and plastic-to-plastic processes could make new plastic from the liquid or gasses they produce.6 But plastic-to-plastic processes are currently not technically, economically, or commercially available.7,8 Therefore, in reality most of the so-called “chemical recycling” that is happening is largely just burning plastic.

For instance, Agilyx, a polystyrene pyrolysis plant in Oregon, is held up by the plastics industry as a prime example of commercial-scale “chemical recycling.” Agilyx takes waste polystyrene and uses pyrolysis to turn it back into styrene, which in theory would be used to make new polystyrene. However, this facility ships hundreds of thousands of pounds of styrene across the country to be burned instead of being converted into new plastic.

What kinds of toxic emissions does “chemical recycling” release?

“Chemical recycling” generates hazardous air pollution and large amounts of hazardous waste.10 As noted in a July, 2022 letter signed by 35 members of Congress, “Chemical recycling facilities emit highly toxic chemicals, including benzene, toluene, ethyl benzene, xylenes, and dioxins, many of which are linked to cancer, nervous system damage, and negative effects on reproduction and development.”11

Data from the Environmental Protection Agency analyzed by NRDC shows that in 2019 one facility alone generated nearly 500,000 pounds of hazardous waste that was then burned in six communities in the US.12 The main component of this waste was benzene, a known carcinogen which harms reproduction and the developing fetus, as well as other harmful chemicals such as lead, cadmium and chromium.13,1

What kinds of toxic emissions does “chemical recycling” release?

How is it possible to burn plastic (during pyrolysis/gasification) without a flame or oxygen?

Combustion does not require a visible flame (according to the Clean Air Act an incinerator is any facility that combusts solid waste material, regardless of a flame). Combustion is a chemical reaction in which carbon and oxygen combine, creating carbon dioxide and releasing energy. As for the notion that there is no oxygen present in pyrolysis and gasification units, it is simply false.

In the first stage of pyrolysis and gasification, where plastic wastes are heated to high temperatures in a low oxygen environment, it is impossible to exclude oxygen entirely, and thus some combustion occurs at this stage. The waste gasses created in the first stage of the pyrolysis/gasification process are vented to a second chamber, where they are burned in a normally oxygenated environment. For this reason, the U.S. EPA has recognized pyrolysis and gasification units to be incinerators since 1995.15

Are pyrolysis and gasification units considered incinerators?

Yes. As the name “pyro” implies, pyrolysis is combustion and the Clean Air Act defines an incinerator as any facility that combusts any solid waste material, regardless of whether it is part of a manufacturing process. Because pyrolysis and gasification units combust at least some of the waste that is fed into them, they are incinerators under the Clean Air Act. In fact, the EPA has already recognized that pyrolysis and gasification units are “two chamber incinerators,” as the first chamber heats waste to high temperatures and the second completes the combustion process.

Source: https://ceh.org/chemical-recycling-and-plastic-burning-faq/

Inside Indiana’s ‘Advanced’ Plastics Recycling Plant: Dangerous Vapors, Oil Spills and Life-Threatening Fires

The Brightmark "plastics renewal” plant can’t get past the startup phase, as former employees raise environmental, health and safety concerns. By James Bruggers June 16, 2023

ASHLEY, Ind.—Two years ago on a Friday evening in May, Kory Kistler was getting ready to leave work at a recycling plant marketed by its owners as being on the front line in a global war against plastic waste.

Then all hell broke loose. Flammable, 700-degree vapors began spewing from a valve on a pump at the plant.

“All of a sudden my operators on the ground started screaming over the radio,” recalled Kistler, a former Marine and a resident of Fort Wayne, 35 miles to the south. “It was hard to understand anything they were saying. So I was like, ‘I’ll go down, check it out and see what’s going on.’ And as soon as I walk outside, I see clouds of vapor in the sky.”

Then, he recalls, the vapors ignited, setting off an uncontrolled fire that was also fed by a type of oil made from plastic waste in a heated, pressurized chamber. As a black cloud of smoke billowed into the sky, local firefighters raced to the plant, set among farm fields and grain silos in Steuben County along Interstate Highway 69 in northeast Indiana, just west of Ashley, population 1,000.

The plant’s owner is San Francisco-based Brightmark, a company that also works with dairy farmers to capture methane from manure. The plan here, though, is to store, shred and chop plastic waste and extrude it into pellets inside a cavernous building. Those pellets are then fed into pressurized “pyrolysis” chambers—the plant has six of them—that use extreme heat to produce a synthetic gas and a dirty “pyrolysis oil,” in what the chemical industry markets as a type of “advanced recycling.”

Another chemical recycling plant closure offers ‘flashing red light’ to nascent industry

Fulcrum BioFuels’ shuttered “sustainable aviation fuel” plant is the latest facility to run into technical and financial challenges.

Ben Seal Jun 27, 2024 5 min read BY EHN

For the second time this year, a chemical recycling plant built to turn waste into usable products has closed, casting further doubt on the viability of an upstart industry that has been plagued by financial and technical challenges in its effort to scale up.

Fulcrum BioFuels launched its Sierra plant outside Reno, Nevada, in 2022 with the goal of converting municipal solid waste into “sustainable aviation fuel.” But in May of this year the company suddenly laid off its roughly 100 employees and shuttered its website, as Bloomberg first reported. The decision came just as the plant was ready to reopen after a series of technical challenges had forced it offline, continuing a trend of delays and setbacks for a facility that had initially been slated to open in 2010.

Kenyan siblings tackle plastic pollution in Lake Victoria

Fulcrum representatives did not respond to emails and phone calls and little is yet clear about the company’s future, while its plans to build a larger plant in Gary, Indiana, appear to be hanging on by a thread following bond defaults. Carolyn McCrady, a co-founder of Gary Advocates for Responsible Development, which formed in 2021 to oppose Fulcrum’s plans, said her organization is still challenging Fulcrum’s air permit to build a plant in the city as it waits to learn more about the company’s next steps.

“We feel vindicated and that we were right all along,” McCrady told EHN. “We think all communities should put on their critical thinking hats when people like these come to town and offer something that’s too good to be true.”

Read full article!

Canada’s National Observer

Shell quietly backs away from pledge to increase ‘advanced recycling’ of plastics

By Dharna Noor | News | July 24th 2024

Click here to go to story.

A view of the Shell oil refinery in Deer Park, Texas, on the Houston Ship Channel. Photo by Roger W/Flickr (CC BY-SA 2.0)

SOLUTIONS Activism Works By Jill Neimark

You CAN take on a behemoth. When a polluter came courting our town, here’s how we fought back.

A Pyrolysis plant was defeated in April 2022 in Macon Georgia by resident opposition.

Community Groups Announce Opposition to Plastics Pyrolysis Plant as Proposed in Follansbee, West Virginia

Groups Vow to Fight for the Health of the Community for as Long as It Takes

For Immediate Release: December 12, 2023

Contacts: Jessica Conard, Beyond Plastics — jessicaconard@beyondplastics.org, (614) 905-7254

Dr. Yuri Gorby, FreshWater Accountability Project — (858) 232-9688

FOLLANSBEE, W.V. — Today, community groups will hold a news conference at 5:15 p.m. prior to a public information session in Follansbee, West Virginia (Brooke County), where the private company Empire Diversified Energy presented plans to operate a new plastic pyrolysis facility.

"No community deserves the public health threats posed by pyrolysis facilities like the one proposed by Empire Diversified Energy in Follansbee,” said Jess Conard, Appalachia director for Beyond Plastics. “Companies like this one often quietly settle in vulnerable communities that are unaware of the environmental and health consequences until it's too late. Let’s not let Follanbee become a victim of industrial pollution. It’s critical that both residents and local officials here rally against this proposal."

In its early stages, Empire began construction on the pyrolysis facility to process medical waste. However, after robust community opposition, it has applied for an air quality permit modification to process plastic resin Nos. 1 through 7. The company says that it will convert plastic waste to syngas to generate electricity. Pyrolysis is a process where plastics are melted, vaporized, and turned into a synthetic fuel. Unfortunately, this process will be detrimental to the environment and to the health and safety of the surrounding communities.

"This kind of industry should not be encouraged in the valley! We finally see an improvement in air quality that will be lost because of industries like Empire that bring in noxious waste and create even more hazardous waste and toxic pollutants,” said Dr. Yuri Gorby, lead scientist at the FreshWater Accountability Project. “Residents in this valley deserve better than what they have been offered."

The community groups are attending the public meeting and posing the following questions for the company to address publicly:

Where would the plastic be imported from and how much?

How many diesel trucks will enter the facility, and which days and what hours?

What types of plastic will they be exposing to high heat?

What additional local, state, and federal permits are needed to address the air pollution, water pollution, and soil pollution?

How will the pyrolysis outputs be tested to prevent contamination in the final product?

Who is financing the full project? Will public subsidies be pursued?

“The pyrolysis facility proposed in Follansbee by Empire Diversified to burn plastic waste would emit very harmful pollutants such as dioxins, PFAS, and other dangerous chemicals. This harmful air pollution could impact the entire community, especially children whose lungs and brains are still developing, increasing the risk of cancer, birth defects, developmental harm, respiratory and neurological problems,” said Rachel Meyer, Ohio River Valley field organizer at Moms Clean Air Force. “Children in Follansbee deserve to breathe clean air where they live, learn, and play.”

There are serious concerns related to plastic pyrolysis facilities as outlined in the recent report from Beyond Plastics and the International Pollutants Elimination Network (IPEN), “Chemical Recycling: A Dangerous Deception: Why Chemical Recycling Won’t Solve the Plastic Pollution Problem.” To view the report, key findings, and other materials, please visit https://www.beyondplastics.org/publications/chemical-recycling

The Truth About “Advanced Recycling” Systems

There’s nothing “advanced” about burning toxic waste and polluting our air and water

JULY 11, 2022 | OLIVIA SYNORACKI

Advanced recycling. Sounds promising, right? As though some newfangled technology will finally fix our failing recycling system. At least, that’s what big oil, chemical, and beverage companies want us to think.

But so-called “advanced recycling” is a ruse. The term is part of a larger disinformation – or greenwashing – campaign. That campaign’s goal: to distract lawmakers and the public from real solutions to the world’s plastic crisis.

Here’s the truth. Big oil, chemical, and beverage companies make loads of money off plastic production. And they’ll do anything in their power to keep it that way. That includes spending big to undermine new laws that aim to regulate plastic production and fix recycling.

When corporate polluters exploit the plastic crisis for their own benefit, they put the health of people and our climate on the line. That’s why we oppose Big Plastic’s so-called “advanced recycling” technology. We support real solutions that work – and that are good for public health and the environment.

Dangerous “Advanced Recycling” Facilities Pollute Our Air and Climate

Corporate polluters tout “advanced recycling” as a solution to our plastic crisis. But this industry-coined term refers to technologies that burn plastics using high heat. Big Plastic says these technologies, which include gasification and pyrolysis, are safe for people and the environment. They also claim this technology generates renewable energy, making it a climate solution.

But these claims are false.

Nothing about turning plastic into fuel is clean, safe, or renewable. In fact, most of these facilities use an energy-intensive process. They also spew the same dangerous pollutants as “conventional” trash incineration. And the dirty fuels they produce release climate-damaging emissions when burned.

What’s more, developers often build these polluting facilities in neighborhoods already overburdened by pollution and other environmental harms – at the expense of our environment, the climate, and public health. Read more ——> https://www.clf.org/blog/the-truth-about-advanced-recycling-systems/

Inside Climate News Fossil Fuels

A New Plant in Indiana Uses a Process Called ‘Pyrolysis’ to Recycle Plastic Waste. Critics Say It’s Really Just Incineration

After two years, Brightmark Energy has yet to get the factory up and running. Environmentalists say pyrolysis requires too much energy, emits greenhouse gases and pollutants, and turns plastic waste into new, dirty fossil fuels.

By James Bruggers September 11, 2022 Read full article!

https://impact-investor.com/clean-seas-seeks-green-bond-investment-to-expand-plastics-processing/

https://actionnetwork.org/user_files/user_files/000/073/419/original/PUB_069_-_How_to_Deal_With_a_Proposed_Facility.pdf

https://ecori.org/bill-to-ban-advanced-plastic-recycling-makes-another-appearance/