Rhode Island kills chemical recycling bill, ACC cites 'misinformation'

Rhode Island legislators on June 21 killed a plastics industry-backed plan to ease the approval path for chemical recycling facilities after the proposal picked up significant opposition from environmental groups and state regulators.

But a plastics industry group, the American Chemistry Council, said lawmakers were missing a chance to attract investment that could help clean up plastic waste and had been taken in a by a "misinformation campaign" from opponents.

The surprise announcement that killed the plan, in the form of a statement from two powerful Democrats in the state House, came after the state Senate had given its approval to the proposal earlier this month

The two senior Democrats who killed the plan, House Speaker Joseph Shekarchi and House Majority Leader Chris Blazejewski, issued a joint statement June 21 that their colleagues had significant questions.

"We are a member-driven body and our members have spoken to us loudly and clearly that they have serious unresolved questions about this bill," they said.

The statement did not detail those questions, but the proposal has drawn significant opposition from environmental groups and the state's Department of Environmental Management, which fears it would curb its ability to properly regulate the facilities.

"Our interpretation is that if this legislation were to pass, DEM would not have authority to require permitted activities or otherwise regulate these facilities under our solid waste regulations," DEM spokesman Michael Healey said. "Also, how much these facilities would be regulated under our air pollution control regulations is unclear."

The bill would have changed the regulatory requirements for permitting advanced recycling, as chemical recycling is also called. It passed the state Senate on a 19-14 vote June 7.

The ACC's plastics division and other industry groups have been pushing bills in state legislatures around the country that would classify the facilities as manufacturing plants rather than waste disposal operations.

They say that change is needed to clear up regulatory uncertainty and accelerate investment in technologies to increase plastics recycling rates.

But opponents argue that chemical recycling is largely untested at commercial scale for turning waste plastic back into new plastic, and they contend that since much of it may go into fuels, it amounts to little more than burning plastics.

ACC has made a significant push in New England for the legislation this year, and has scored one victory.

The state government in New Hampshire became the 19th state to adopt such a law on June 17, when Gov. Chris Sununu signed legislation.

"Fewer plastic in landfills is a good thing and I commend the legislature for supporting this commonsense environmental initiative," Sununu said in a statement.

With New Hampshire's decision, at least four states this year have adopted legislation favored by the industry, including Mississippi, West Virginia and Kentucky.

But the industry's regulatory agenda has also run into concerns from lawmakers in Michigan and skepticism in other state governments, including among a recycling advisory body set up by the California legislature.

In Rhode Island, environmental groups argued that the state should focus on reducing single-use plastics.

In a June 7 statement when the state Senate passed the legislation, the Conservation Law Foundation criticized the Senate's action and said the technologies at issue, like pyrolysis and gasification, use high-heat processes to make waste plastic into toxic chemicals and "dirty, plastic-derived fuels."

"While the industry claims that these materials are used to make new plastics, there is no evidence to support that claim," said CLF Senior Attorney Kevin Budris. "Instead, these materials are burned, creating climate-damaging emissions and air pollution."

But the ACC argues that the technology is being commercialized in some plastic-to-plastic applications and could make it possible to recycle materials that are not practical to recover today.

"By not advancing [the legislation], Rhode Island's lawmakers missed an opportunity to attract advanced recycling facilities that would create a cleaner environment and bring jobs to the Ocean State," said Joshua Baca, vice president of plastics at ACC. "We are on the cusp of a recycling revolution, made possible by innovation in advanced recycling technologies that have been optimized to remake plastics."

Baca said opponents are misstating the question about burning plastics waste.

"Advanced recycling is not 'burning plastics,'" he said. "The recycling process happens in a low or no oxygen environment making incineration thermodynamically impossible. Emissions are so low that facilities typically do not even meet the thresholds that would necessitate permitting by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency."

Baca said the Rhode Island legislation would not have allowed the facilities to skirt environmental regulations and pointed to a study that estimated that such advanced recycling technologies could double the plastics packaging recycling rate in the U.S. and Canada by 2030.

He said the facilities should be regulated as manufacturing plants because they're producing plastics or other chemicals, rather than handling solid waste disposal.

But Rhode Island's environmental regulatory agency, the DEM, said the bill would have weakened its authority and given improper exemptions for the technology.

"DEM believes that it sets a bad precedent to provide regulatory exemptions to a specific technology," Healey said in a June 22 email.

In an April 26 letter to state legislators, DEM Acting Director Terrence Gray said the legislation would weaken licensing requirements that help facilitate public participation and debate.

"Given the environmental impacts that the processes taking place at such facilities could potentially have, DEM believes that the current licensing requirements should remain in effect for these facilities," Gray said.

Separate from the chemical recycling provision, Rhode Island lawmakers passed a plastic bag ban June 21.

In a 60-7 vote, with eight lawmakers not voting, the state House passed the Senate's version of a bag ban.

The legislation, if signed by Gov. Dan McKee, would prohibit retailers from giving out single-use plastic checkout bags. It would allow recyclable paper bags.