Potential Analysis of the Plastics Value Chain for Enhanced Recycling Rates: A Case Study in Iceland

Mager, Moritz; Traxler, Ines; Fischer, Joerg; Finger, David C.

doi:10.3390/recycling7050073

Cited by 8 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The EPR scheme implemented differs from those in other countries and is viewed as a valuable tool to enable higher recycling rates (Mager, Traxler, Fischer, & Finger, 2022). The system is set up so that producers and importers of speci ic products pay a recycling fee to the customs of ice, based on weight.…”

Section: Iceland Epr Implementationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Extended producer responsibility

Zehaie,

Paulsson,

Schöldtz

et al. 2024

TemaNord

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This report explores the Nordic countries' experience with Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR), an environmental policy approach that extends the responsibility of producers to include the environmental impact of a product. With a particular focus on EPR schemes for plastic products, the report aims to extract practical insights for the development and expansion of EPR schemes globally.The methodology involves a literature review and semi-structured interviews with authorities in Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, and Sweden. The information is then analyzed and discussed with focus on lessons learned in terms of challenges and success factors.A theoretical conceptualization and discussion of EPR is also laid out in the text and forms a basis for the analysis.In summary, the report notes very diverse implementations of EPR across the Nordics, ranging from more comprehensive schemes to more nascent efforts, with varying challenges and success factors. Mandatory EPR legislation/systems in the Nordic countries cover a diverse range of product categories such as packaging, electrical and electronic equipment, batteries, tires, end-of-life vehicles, pharmaceuticals, and single-use plastics, except for Denmark where mandatory EPR Schemes have only recently started to be implemented.The countries struggle with different issues related to EPR systems. Challenges include administrative burdens, unclear de initions and roles, and limited in luence on upstream conditions such as product design and waste generation. Obstacles to EPR implementation also include economic and informative responsibilities. The fee structure and reporting obligations differ between the Nordic countries, making compliance complicated and resource intensive for international producers.Harmonizing design requirements, reporting, and fees within the EU is recommended to streamline administration. Overall, collaboration between producers, municipalities, and ProducerResponsibility Organizations, coupled with transparent systems, all seem to be success factors for effective implementation of EPR schemes, as long as the responsibilities are clari ied, and economic models are negotiated and accepted by all parties. Key learnings also emphasize the ef icacy of single waste stream systems, such as the PET bottle return system. This seems to be true regardless of the systems being mandatory or voluntary, connected to less material complexity or their reliance on material quality standards such as rPET. Although it is not feasible to introduce separate systems for each packaging type, more stringent design requirements

show abstract

Section: Iceland Epr Implementationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These tariffs lack differentiation between sustainable and less sustainable resources. However, a signi icant fee modulation based on the products durability, reusability, dismantlability, and recyclability shall be implemented (Mager, Traxler, Fischer, & Finger, 2022).…”

Section: Barriers/success Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Extended producer responsibility

Zehaie,

Paulsson,

Schöldtz

et al. 2024

TemaNord

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, this type of waste collection only works for closed containers that are countable. 17 Polyolefin recyclates are currently often used for low-quality products. Some examples are listed in the literature.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This ensures a highly clean material fraction. However, this type of waste collection only works for closed containers that are countable 17 . Polyolefin recyclates are currently often used for low‐quality products.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Strategies for improving product properties of thermoformed multilayer cups with contents of post‐consumer polypropylene recyclates

Traxler

Laske²,

Fischer

2023

J of Applied Polymer Sci

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Thermoformed products bear great potential for the application of recycled materials when using multilayer structures for incorporating post‐consumer recyclates. For this study, four different commercially available polypropylene recyclates are selected as possible core layers for the processing of multilayer thermoformed products with top layers of virgin polypropylene. Tests are performed on material level as well as on product level. At the material level, recyclates exhibit different mechanical property profiles with lower stiffness but higher toughness values due to polyethylene contamination. At the product level, thermoformed cups with core layers of recyclate material show lower shrinkage than cups made from polypropylene virgin material only. Most cups with recycled content achieve lower top load than the control cup. Based on these results, three strategies for improving product performance are defined and tested. Namely, (i) the use of a higher share of top layers, (ii) the blending of the recyclate core layer with a polypropylene virgin material with higher stiffness, and (iii) the increase in overall film thickness. All the strategies to adjust the film structure achieve better results in terms of shrinkage behavior and top load. However, the strategy that focuses on increasing the overall film thickness is not economically feasible.

show abstract

“…The present study differs from case studies in existing literature by focusing on a speci c chemical recycling technology, namely MW-assisted pyrolysis, developed in a Spanish industrial setting, aiming to upcycle the pyrolysis oil produced into potential substitutes for chemical feedstock. Where the present study assesses environmental, technical, social and economic sustainability, previous studies involve assessing solely the environmental impacts of plastic recycling supply chains in the UK (Wong 2010), in Germany (Jeswani, et al 2021) and in Iceland (Mager, et al 2022). Furthermore, indicators have been applied to a circular value chain in Thailand, but the recycled product is not upcycled into a new one, which is the case in this investigation (Niyommaneerat, Suwanteep and Chavalparit 2023).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing sustainability of plastic recycling technologies through Key Performance Indicators from a value chain perspective

Flores,

Murillo,

Sangros

et al. 2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Circular economy initiatives aim to close material loops within an organization and between the different actors in a value chain. The approach of assessing environmental, economic and social impacts throughout different sectors in a value chain can become complex, but the use of life cycle thinking and the Triple Bottom Line approach help correctly evaluate sustainability. Furthermore, the complexity of technological innovations focused on improving the sustainability of value chains requires solutions that help measure, quantify, and evaluate their life cycle more dynamically and precisely. This paper proposes a sustainability assessment of such complex value chains for the circular economy, considering a set of Key Performance Indicators and a calculation platform that facilitates their validation and, thus, decision-making according to the sector's preferences. The case under study assesses the sustainability of a plastic waste value chain, which aims to apply a microwave-assisted pyrolysis recycling technology to improve its circularity. Firstly, a literature review on sustainability Key Performance Indicators is carried out, from which several are selected and prioritized through a multi-criteria decision-making methodology, allowing aggregation and combination of information. A prioritized selection of Key Performance Indicators is presented along with their formulas and indications for input into the calculation platform to anticipate issues such as data gaps that can arise from the different contributions from the plastic value chain actors involved.

show abstract

Potential Analysis of the Plastics Value Chain for Enhanced Recycling Rates: A Case Study in Iceland

Cited by 8 publications

References 27 publications

Extended producer responsibility

Extended producer responsibility

Strategies for improving product properties of thermoformed multilayer cups with contents of post‐consumer polypropylene recyclates

Assessing sustainability of plastic recycling technologies through Key Performance Indicators from a value chain perspective

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About