The plastic industry has long touted recycling as a solution to the plastic pollution crisis. However, recent research and investigations have revealed that traditional recycling methods are not as effective as advertised. Only 9 percent of plastic waste globally is actually recycled, with the rest ending up in landfills, incinerated, or littered.
To combat this issue, many companies have turned to “advanced recycling,” also known as “chemical recycling.” This process involves breaking down plastic into its chemical building blocks using heat and pressure, which can then be used to create new plastic products. Proponents of advanced recycling claim that it will create a circular economy for plastics, allowing for infinite recyclability and reducing environmental impacts.
Despite these promises, a new report from the Center for Climate Integrity suggests that chemical recycling may not be the silver bullet that the industry claims it to be. The report highlights the discrepancy between public statements made by fossil fuel and plastics companies and their internal communications, indicating that chemical recycling processes are costlier and more challenging than portrayed.
In fact, chemical recycling is not a new concept, as the technologies it encompasses were first patented 70 years ago. While there was initial excitement around chemical recycling in the 1970s and 1980s, many ventures were ultimately abandoned due to economic challenges. Recent analyses by consulting firms have also cast doubt on the feasibility of scaling up chemical recycling to meet industry targets, warning that it may not be economically feasible or suitable for sustainability goals in the near future.
Exxon Mobil’s own struggles with chemical recycling serve as a stark example of these challenges. Despite operating chemical recycling facilities for three years, the company has only managed to process 70 million pounds of plastic waste. This discrepancy between industry marketing and reality underscores the need for a more critical examination of the effectiveness of advanced recycling methods. A recent report has shed light on the underwhelming progress of chemical recycling in the plastics industry. Despite claims that chemical recycling can handle items that are typically difficult to recycle through mechanical methods, such as potato chip bags, motor oil bottles, and diapers, the reality seems to be more complex. Industry insiders have acknowledged that mixed plastics introduce contaminants that lead to lower yields, lower-quality products, and additional expenses.
Exxon Mobil, a major player in the industry, has internally acknowledged that not all post-use plastics are suitable for chemical recycling. This revelation comes from internal documents uncovered in a lawsuit filed by the California attorney general’s office. The company had previously claimed it would be able to process 1 billion pounds of plastic annually by the end of 2026, but in reality, they only processed 7 percent of that amount over three years.
Contrary to the industry’s claims that chemical recycling can enable circularity and produce fully circular outputs, analysts and industry groups have expressed skepticism. Only a small fraction of the plastic processed through chemical recycling can actually be turned back into plastic, with the rest being converted into fuel. This practice does not help close the plastics loop, according to consulting firm reports.
When reached out for comments, industry groups and petrochemical companies mentioned in the report had mixed responses. Some criticized the report as the work of an “activist” group and defended the progress made in chemical recycling technologies. However, the National Recycling Coalition expressed agreement with the report, stating that processes converting plastics into fuels do not meet their definition of recycling and can harm the environment.
Andrew Rollinson, an independent chemical engineering consultant, labeled chemical recycling as a fraud, citing its high energy use and contamination issues. He believes that the technology has not progressed significantly in the past 50 years and is unlikely to improve in the future.
Overall, the report serves as a resource for organizations taking legal action against fossil fuel and plastics companies. It highlights the discrepancies between industry claims and the actual outcomes of chemical recycling, urging a more critical examination of the technology’s effectiveness. There have been many debates over the years about the benefits and drawbacks of social media in our society. While some argue that social media has improved communication and connectedness, others believe it has led to increased loneliness and isolation. However, recent studies have shown that the impact of social media on mental health is more complex than previously thought.
One of the main arguments against social media is that it can lead to feelings of loneliness and depression. This is often attributed to the fact that people tend to compare themselves to others on social media, leading to feelings of inadequacy and low self-esteem. However, recent research has shown that this may not be entirely accurate.
A study conducted by researchers at the University of Pennsylvania found that limiting social media use to 30 minutes a day can actually reduce feelings of loneliness and depression. The study, which involved over 140 participants, found that those who limited their social media use reported significantly lower levels of loneliness and depression compared to those who used social media as usual.
Furthermore, other studies have shown that social media can actually have positive effects on mental health. For example, a study published in the journal Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking found that using social media to connect with others can lead to increased feelings of social support and well-being. This suggests that social media can be a valuable tool for staying connected with friends and family, particularly during times of isolation.
Additionally, social media can also serve as a platform for sharing and receiving support during difficult times. For example, many people use social media to connect with others who are going through similar challenges, such as mental health issues or chronic illnesses. This can provide a sense of community and understanding that may not be readily available in offline settings.
Overall, the impact of social media on mental health is multifaceted and may vary depending on how it is used. While excessive use of social media can lead to negative outcomes, such as feelings of loneliness and depression, it can also have positive effects on mental health when used in moderation and for connecting with others. As with any form of technology, it is important to be mindful of how we use social media and to prioritize our mental well-being.
