Plastics recycling is good for the climate
Fri, 13 November 2009
Every consumer who puts plastic packages in the Yellow Bin is making an important contribution towards climate protection. That’s the result of a study conducted by the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research (ifeu) in Heidelberg, presented under the aegis of an event hosted by the German Nature and Biodiversity Conservation Union (NABU) and Duales System Deutschland GmbH (DSD) in Berlin. Every ton of plastic packaging that is collected separately instead of being burned with the residual waste in refuse incineration plants (RIPs), says the study, saves 1.26 tons of climatologically deleterious greenhouse gases. “Burning plastics in an average refuse incineration plant, by contrast, produces more carbon dioxide than it saves”, explains Stefan Schreiter, DSD’s CEO.
The research institute compared various scenarios for handling plastic waste. “High-quality recovery processes for converting plastic into regranulates and new plastic products like automobile components, buckets or also new pack-ages, make a significant contribution towards reducing environmental impact”, summarises Dr.-Ing. Michael Heyde, Head of Engineering and Sys-tems Development at DSD.
Where mechanical recycling of the plastics concerned is not possible or not commercially viable, high-quality energy recovery as a substitute fuel for power plants or cement factories constitutes an alternative. “Incineration with energy recovery in RIPs is not worthwhile, because their efficiency levels are too low”, says Heyde.
The advantages of mechanical recycling will be even greater in the future, is Heyde’s firm conviction: “There is still definite potential for improving plastics recycling still further. The options for technical advances are far from exhausted.” Moreover, mechanical recycling is also commercially viable, at least when it comes to films and homogeneous plastics. “If the plastic concerned is burned in a refuse incineration plant, it enters the atmosphere as carbon dioxide. That’s neither cost-efficient nor environmentally sensible”, emphasised Heyde.
