As the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) considers changes to regulations that could reshape the landscape of plastic waste management, industry and environmental advocates are gearing up for a renewed debate. At the heart of the discussion is a process called pyrolysis, touted by some as a cutting-edge solution to recycling and by others as a problematic and polluting technology.
In February, Judith Enck, a former EPA official, observed a significant influx of chemical and plastics industry lobbyists at the agency’s headquarters. This led to speculation about potential regulatory shifts. The EPA has since taken steps that hint at reviving a proposal from the Trump era, aimed at relaxing Clean Air Act regulations tied to the chemical processing of plastic waste.
The EPA’s current approach involves soliciting public comments on “advanced recycling” through pyrolysis within a broader rulemaking process concerning waste incineration. This move has raised questions among environmental advocates about the agency’s intentions.
James Pew of Earthjustice criticized the recycling method, stating, “It’s not recycling,” while highlighting the environmental and health risks associated with pyrolysis. He expressed concerns that easing regulations could lead to increased production of single-use plastics, undermining efforts to address the global plastic waste crisis.
On the other hand, the American Chemistry Council, representing the chemical industry, supports policies that favor advanced recycling technologies. According to their website, they view these technologies as a means to produce “new virgin equivalent plastics and chemicals.”
Data from the United Nations Environment Programme underscores the urgency of the situation, revealing that the world generates 430 million metric tons of plastic annually, with a significant portion ending up as waste. With plastic production projected to triple by 2060 and recycling rates languishing below 9%, the environmental stakes are high.
Pyrolysis has been touted as a modern solution to recycling diverse plastic waste, yet it faces significant hurdles. A 2023 report by Beyond Plastics and the International Pollutants Elimination Network highlighted operational challenges and low output at chemical recycling facilities, questioning the viability of the technology.
The EPA’s recent actions, combined with an industry push for regulatory relief, have reignited the debate over pyrolysis. The American Chemistry Council praised the EPA’s move, arguing that pyrolysis should not be classified as incineration due to its oxygen-free process.
As the EPA weighs its options, the agency plans to hold a virtual public hearing on April 6 to gather further input. The outcome of this regulatory review could have far-reaching implications for the chemical recycling industry and the broader fight against plastic pollution.
Original Story at insideclimatenews.org