플라스틱 재활용 Plastic Recycling Doesn’t Work and Will Never Work / The Atlantic

 

 

 

 

 

미국인들은 재활용을 지지합니다. 우리도 마찬가지입니다. 그러나 일부 재료는 효과적으로 재활용되고 재활용 된 내용물로 안전하게 만들 수 있지만 플라스틱은 재활용 할 수 없습니다. 플라스틱 재활용은 작동하지 않으며 결코 작동하지 않습니다. 2021년 미국은 소비자 후 플라스틱 폐기물의 재활용률이 약 5%로 2014년 최고치인 9.5%에서 감소했는데, 당시 미국은 수백만 톤의 플라스틱 폐기물을 중국에 수출하고 재활용된 것으로 간주했다.

일반적으로 재활용은 천연 재료 자원을 회수하는 효과적인 방법이 될 수 있습니다. 미국의 높은 종이 재활용률 인 68 %는이 점을 증명합니다. 플라스틱 재활용의 문제는 개념이나 공정이 아니라 재료 자체에 있습니다.



첫 번째 문제는 수천 개의 다른 플라스틱이 있으며 각각 고유 한 구성과 특성을 가지고 있다는 것입니다. 그들은 모두 함께 재활용 할 수없는 다양한 화학 첨가제와 착색제를 포함하므로 수조 개의 플라스틱 조각을 가공을 위해 별도의 유형으로 분류하는 것은 불가능합니다. 예를 들어, 폴리에틸렌 테레프탈레이트(PET#1) 병은 다른 PET#1 소재인 PET#1 조개껍질로 재활용할 수 없으며, 녹색 PET#1 병은 투명한 PET#1 병으로 재활용할 수 없습니다(한국이 유색 PET#1 병을 불법화한 이유). 재활용을 위해 고밀도 폴리에틸렌(HDPE#2), 폴리염화비닐(PVC#3), 저밀도 폴리에틸렌(LDPE#4), 폴리프로필렌(PP#5) 및 폴리스티렌(PS#6)을 모두 분리해야 합니다.

단 하나의 패스트 푸드 식사에는 PET # 1, HDPE # 2, LDPE # 4, PP # 5 및 PS # 6 컵, 뚜껑, 조개 껍질, 트레이, 가방 및 칼 붙이를 포함한 다양한 유형의 일회용 플라스틱이 포함될 수 있으며 함께 재활용 할 수 없습니다. 이것은 플라스틱 패스트 푸드 서비스 품목이 미국에서 재활용 가능하다고 합법적으로 주장 할 수없는 몇 가지 이유 중 하나입니다.

또 다른 문제는 가능한 경우 플라스틱 폐기물의 재 처리가 낭비적이라는 것입니다. 플라스틱은 가연성이며, 플라스틱 재활용 시설에서 화재의 위험은 이웃 지역 사회에 영향을 미치며, 그 중 많은 부분이 저소득층 공동체 또는 유색 지역 사회에 위치하고 있습니다.

금속과 유리와 달리 플라스틱은 불활성이 아닙니다. 플라스틱 제품은 독성 첨가제를 포함하고 화학 물질을 흡수 할 수 있으며 일반적으로 플라스틱 살충제 용기와 같은 위험한 물질로 채워진 연석 쓰레기통에 수집됩니다. 캐나다 정부가 발표 한 보고서에 따르면 재활용 플라스틱의 독성 위험은 "생산 된 플라스틱 제품 및 포장재의 대다수"가 식품 등급 포장재로 재활용되는 것을 금지합니다.



또 다른 문제는 플라스틱 재활용이 단순히 경제적이지 않다는 것입니다. 재활용 플라스틱은 플라스틱 폐기물을 수집, 분류, 운송 및 재처리하는 것이 엄청나게 비싸기 때문에 새로운 플라스틱보다 비용이 많이 듭니다. 석유 화학 산업은 빠르게 확장되고 있으며, 이는 새로운 플라스틱 비용을 더욱 낮출 것입니다.

이러한 뚜렷한 실패에도 불구하고, 플라스틱 산업은 재료가 재활용 가능하다는 신화를 영속시키기 위해 수십 년 동안 캠페인을 벌여왔다. 이 캠페인은 여과 된 담배가 여과되지 않은 담배보다 건강하다는 것을 흡연자에게 납득시키려는 담배 업계의 노력을 연상케합니다.



플라스틱 폐기물을 분쇄하고 녹이는 기존의 기계 재활용은 수십 년 동안 사용되어 왔습니다. 이제 플라스틱 산업은 플라스틱 폐기물이 고열 이상의 화학 물질을 사용하여 분해되어 품질이 낮은 화석 연료로 변하는 소위 화학 재활용의 이점을 선전하고 있습니다.



2018년 다우 케미칼은 솔트레이크시티의 재생 화학 재활용 공장이 "Hefty EnergyBag" 프로그램을 통해 아이다호 주 보이즈 가정의 혼합 플라스틱 폐기물을 재처리하여 디젤 연료로 전환할 수 있었다고 주장했다. 그러나 로이터 통신이 2021 년 조사에서 노출 한 바와 같이, 모든 다른 유형의 플라스틱 폐기물은 열분해 과정을 오염시켰다. 오늘날 Boise는 혼합 플라스틱 폐기물을 시멘트 가마에 태워 기후 온난화 탄소 배출을 초래합니다. 이 잘 문서화 된 Renewlogy 실패는 플라스틱 산업이 화학 재활용이 "혼합 플라스틱"에 효과적이라고 계속 주장하는 것을 멈추지 않았습니다.



화학 물질 재활용은 실행 가능하지 않습니다. 그것은 실패했으며 플라스틱의 전통적인 기계적 재활용이 지속적으로 실패했다는 것과 동일한 현실 세계의 이유로 계속 실패 할 것입니다. 더 나쁜 것은 독성 배출이 우리의 환경, 기후 및 건강에 새로운 해를 끼칠 수 있다는 것입니다.



우리는 절망에 대한 사례를 만들지 않습니다. 그 반대입니다. 우리는 개인과 정책 입안자가 구체적인 행동을 취할 수 있도록 사실이 필요합니다. 미국의 플라스틱 폐기물 및 오염 문제에 대한 입증 된 해결책이 존재하며 전국에 신속하게 복제 될 수 있습니다. 이러한 솔루션에는 일회용 비닐 봉지 및 재활용 할 수없는 일회용 플라스틱 식품 서비스 제품에 대한 금지 조치, 물 보충 스테이션에 대한 광범위한 접근 보장, 학생들이 일회용 플라스틱이 아닌 실제 요리로 음식을 먹을 수 있도록 학교에 식기 세척 장비를 설치하는 것, 일회용에서 재사용 가능한 식기 세척기로 식사 및 기타 식사 배달 프로그램을 전환하는 것이 포함됩니다.



플라스틱 산업이 담배 산업의 플레이 북을 따르고 있다면 플라스틱 재활용의 실패를 결코 인정하지 않을 것입니다. 비록 우리가 그들이 우리를 속이려는 시도를 막을 수는 없을지라도, 우리는 진정한 진전을 이루기 위해 효과적인 법률을 통과시킬 수 있습니다. 일회용 플라스틱 금지는 폐기물을 줄이고, 납세자가 폐기 및 청소에 지출하는 비용을 절약하며, 환경의 플라스틱 오염을 줄입니다.



소비자는 일회용 플라스틱으로 매장 선반을 채우는 것을 중단하고 대신 재사용 가능한 제품과 제품을 더 나은 포장으로 선택함으로써 회사에 압력을 가할 수 있습니다. 그리고 우리 모두는 종이, 상자, 캔 및 유리를 재활용해야합니다.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

---

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Plastic Recycling Doesn’t Work and Will Never Work

mericans support recycling. We do too. But although some materials can be effectively recycled and safely made from recycled content, plastics cannot. Plastic recycling does not work and will never work. The United States in 2021 had a dismal recycling rate of about 5 percent for post-consumer plastic waste, down from a high of 9.5 percent in 2014, when the U.S. exported millions of tons of plastic waste to China and counted it as recycled—even though much of it wasn’t.

Recycling in general can be an effective way to reclaim natural material resources. The U.S.’s high recycling rate of paper, 68 percent, proves this point. The problem with recycling plastic lies not with the concept or process but with the material itself.

 

The first problem is that there are thousands of different plastics, each with its own composition and characteristics. They all include different chemical additives and colorants that cannot be recycled together, making it impossible to sort the trillions of pieces of plastics into separate types for processing. For example, polyethylene terephthalate (PET#1) bottles cannot be recycled with PET#1 clamshells, which are a different PET#1 material, and green PET#1 bottles cannot be recycled with clear PET#1 bottles (which is why South Korea has outlawed colored PET#1 bottles.) High-density polyethylene (HDPE#2), polyvinyl chloride (PVC#3), low-density polyethylene (LDPE#4), polypropylene (PP#5), and polystyrene (PS#6) all must be separated for recycling.

Just one fast-food meal can involve many different types of single-use plastic, including PET#1, HDPE#2, LDPE#4, PP#5, and PS#6 cups, lids, clamshells, trays, bags, and cutlery, which cannot be recycled together. This is one of several reasons why plastic fast-food service items cannot be legitimately claimed as recyclable in the U.S.

Another problem is that the reprocessing of plastic waste—when possible at all—is wasteful. Plastic is flammable, and the risk of fires at plastic-recycling facilities affects neighboring communities—many of which are located in low-income communities or communities of color.

Unlike metal and glass, plastics are not inert. Plastic products can include toxic additives and absorb chemicals, and are generally collected in curbside bins filled with possibly dangerous materials such as plastic pesticide containers. According to a report published by the Canadian government, toxicity risks in recycled plastic prohibit “the vast majority of plastic products and packaging produced” from being recycled into food-grade packaging.

 

Yet another problem is that plastic recycling is simply not economical. Recycled plastic costs more than new plastic because collecting, sorting, transporting, and reprocessing plastic waste is exorbitantly expensive. The petrochemical industry is rapidly expanding, which will further lower the cost of new plastic.

Despite this stark failure, the plastics industry has waged a decades-long campaign to perpetuate the myth that the material is recyclable. This campaign is reminiscent of the tobacco industry’s efforts to convince smokers that filtered cigarettes are healthier than unfiltered cigarettes.

 

Conventional mechanical recycling, in which plastic waste is ground up and melted, has been around for many decades. Now the plastics industry is touting the benefits of so-called chemical recycling— in which plastic waste is broken down using high heat or more chemicals and turned into a low-quality fossil fuel.

In 2018, Dow Chemical claimed that the Renewlogy chemical-recycling plant in Salt Lake City was able to reprocess mixed plastic waste from Boise, Idaho, households through the “Hefty EnergyBag” program and turn it into diesel fuel. As Reuters exposed in a 2021 investigation, however,  all the different types of plastic waste contaminated the pyrolysis process. Today, Boise burns its mixed plastic waste in cement kilns, resulting in climate-warming carbon emissions. This well-documented Renewlogy failure has not stopped the plastics industry from continuing to claim that chemical recycling works for “mixed plastics.”

Chemical recycling is not viable. It has failed and will continue to fail for the same down-to-earth, real-world reasons that the conventional mechanical recycling of plastics has consistently failed. Worse yet, its toxic emissions could cause new harm to our environment, climate, and health.

 

We’re not making a case for despair. Just the opposite. We need the facts so that individuals and policy makers can take concrete action. Proven solutions to the U.S.’s plastic-waste and pollution problems exist and can be quickly replicated across the country. These solutions include enacting bans on single-use plastic bags and unrecyclable single-use plastic food-service products, ensuring widespread access to water-refilling stations, installing dishwashing equipment in schools to allow students to eat food on real dishes rather than single-use plastics, and switching Meals on Wheels and other meal-delivery programs from disposables to reusable dishware.

 

If the plastics industry is following the tobacco industry’s playbook, it may never admit to the failure of plastics recycling. Although we may not be able to stop them from trying to fool us, we can pass effective laws to make real progress. Single-use-plastic bans reduce waste, save taxpayer money spent on disposal and cleanup, and reduce plastic pollution in the environment.

Consumers can put pressure on companies to stop filling store shelves with single-use plastics by not buying them and instead choosing reusables and products in better packaging. And we should all keep recycling our paper, boxes, cans, and glass, because that actually works.

 

 

---