Greenpeace report details ‘failures' of plastics recycling

Most plastics packaging in the United States does not meet the federal government's legal definition of recyclable, and none of it meets the tougher criteria put forward by the Ellen MacArthur Foundation and its global network of plastic pacts, a new Greenpeace report is charging.

The Oct. 24 report, "Circular Claims Fall Flat Again," said that only PET and high density polyethylene bottles would be able to be labeled recyclable under the U.S. Federal Trade Commission and its Green Guides, which say that at least 60 percent of U.S. residents must have access to community collection programs for a material to be considered recyclable.

As well, none of the plastics packaging, including PET and HDPE bottles, meets the tougher guidelines from the MacArthur Foundation and its network of global plastics pacts, which require recycling rates above 30 percent "in practice and at scale" for a material to be considered recyclable.

The new Greenpeace report updates a 2020 survey it did of the 375 material recovery facilities in the U.S. that process recycled materials. The report concludes, as it did in 2020, that only PET and HDPE are "widely accepted" by MRFs.

Greenpeace said the report, prepared with the environmental group The Last Beach Cleanup, showed most plastics are not recyclable in practice and said society should move toward more reuse and refill packaging systems.

"Corporations like Coca-Cola, PepsiCo, Nestlé and Unilever have worked with industry front groups to promote plastic recycling as the solution to plastic waste for decades," said Lisa Ramsden, Greenpeace USA senior plastics campaigner. "But the data is clear: Practically speaking, most plastic is just not recyclable. The real solution is to switch to systems of reuse and refill."

Greenpeace said its data showed a 20.9 percent domestic reprocessing capacity for PET bottles and a 10.3 percent figure for HDPE bottles.

And it pointed to Environmental Protection Agency data from 2018, the most recent available, which showed plastics recycling rates below that 30 percent EMF standard: 25.5 percent for PET containers and packaging and 14.8 percent for HDPE.

Beyond those two materials, it pointed to EPA data showing lower rates. A 2.7 percent rate for polypropylene containers and packaging, 3.6 percent for polystyrene and 9.9 percent for low density PE.

The report said only PET and HDPE from recycling systems were accepted by 100 percent of the MRFs, while 52 percent accepted polypropylene tubs.

For other plastic packaging — including clamshells, PS foam, trays, cups, cutlery, wrappers and pouches and coffee pods — it was much, much lower: Between zero and 11 percent of MRFs accepted them.

Greenpeace said nonplastic materials can be recycled effectively, but plastics have too many challenges, including that they are hard to sort, particularly in mixed grades; that the toxicity of additives within plastics are increasingly problematic to recycling; and that the economics are tough.

"The high recycling rates of post-consumer paper, cardboard, and metals in the U.S. prove that recycling can be an effective way to reclaim valuable natural material resources," the report said. "Plastic recycling in particular has failed because the thousands of types of synthetic plastic materials produced are fundamentally not recyclable."

Groups representing the plastics and recycling sectors responded, for the most part, by saying they agreed recycling rates need to be higher but said it was unrealistic to advocate phasing out plastics. They took issue with Greenpeace claims that plastics recycling should be considered a failure.

"[The Association of Plastic Recyclers] agrees that this recycling number must be improved," said APR President Steve Alexander. "It is unfortunate that Greenpeace and other critics of plastics use are focused on attacking the one solution to the plastic packaging sustainability problem that works: recycling.

"There will always be plastic packaging, so it is essential that it is sustainable," Alexander said. "Recycling is the only vehicle to do this. If we want to be serious about tackling the plastic problem, we must be serious about strengthening recycling."

Similarly, the head of the Plastics Industry Association agreed that recycling needs to improve but said the Greenpeace report would hurt those efforts.

"There is no question that we as a society can and must recycle more," said Matt Seaholm, president and CEO of the group. "However, their assertions that recycling can't keep plastic materials within the circular economy is disingenuous and irresponsible. Recycling is real, and claims that it can't ever work, made in this document, will likely result in unnecessary waste and public reaction that could actually cause greater environmental harm."

APR said recycling rates for PET and HDPE bottles are higher than what Greenpeace claims. Industry data shows a 28 percent rate for PET and HDPE bottles in 2020 and a 17 percent rate for PP bottles.

Those rates, however, are still below the 30 percent threshold the Ellen MacArthur Foundation says is needed to prove  a material is being recycled in an effective way or, as the foundation says, "in practice and at scale."

The Greenpeace report estimates the overall plastics recycling rate in 2021 was 5-6 percent, down from a high of 9.5 percent in 2014 and 8.7 percent in 2018. The report said one factor could be China's decision to stop accepting plastic waste imports that the U.S. previously would count as recycled, even if some of it ultimately was burned or dumped.

Greenpeace said of the 51 million tons of plastic waste U.S. households generated in 2021, 2.4 million tons were recycled.

APR took issue with Greenpeace's 5 percent recycling rate estimate, saying it thought the Greenpeace study includes all plastic products, including durable goods, rather than just consumer-facing packaging.

But the Greenpeace report does include EPA data that seems to be limited to consumer packaging. The report noted an overall recycling rate for plastics in containers and packaging of 13.6 percent, citing EPA figures.

In its report, Greenpeace urged companies to phase out single-use plastics and move faster toward reusable or packaging-free systems.

It also said it was putting hopes in global plastic treaty negotiations, with the first formal negotiating session kicking off at the end of November in Uruguay.

Plastics groups believe investments being made now to improve plastics circularity will pay off.

The American Chemistry Council said Greenpeace's "extreme views are misleading, out of touch and misguided."

"America's plastic makers are on the cusp of a circularity revolution, ushered in by innovation and billions in investment in recycling technologies," said Joshua Baca, vice president of plastics at ACC. "Greenpeace and its allies are advocating for the elimination of plastic, a material that makes modern life possible, lowers carbon emissions compared to alternatives, keeps our food fresher and safer, enables renewable wind and solar energy, and reduces energy use in our homes and vehicles."

The Recycling Partnership, which includes many plastics companies and consumer brands as members and funders, also said plastics are here to stay.

But it also noted, in a statement reacting to Greenpeace, that recycling isn't the only answer and that reducing and reusing packaging should be priorities.

"We agree that plastic recycling isn't a panacea for plastics waste," said CEO Keefe Harrison. "However, the reality is that the world won't just stop making plastic tomorrow, so what do we do today? We must partner to do the hard but impactful work of building a better system; one that focuses on reducing, reusing, and then recycling all we can."