The U.S. Plastics Pact recommends prioritizing mechanical recycling over chemical recycling to promote plastic circularity with less environmental impact. Learn about the industry’s position, regulatory challenges, and best practices for hard-to-recycle plastics.
Chemical recycling has grabbed headlines in the last decade as one of the most promising technologies for achieving plastic circularity. Now, however, the U.S. Plastics Pact argues that traditional mechanical recycling should be prioritized over chemical processes because, it asserts, it has a lower environmental impact.
The initiative, which aims to formulate industry-led policies and develop best practices, published a document on Wednesday outlining its position on methods for reusing plastic waste.
“Too often, these technologies are discussed in extreme terms, either as a miracle cure or as something to be completely discarded,” said Jonathan Quinn, president and CEO of the Pact. The executive emphasized that the group seeks to create a pre-competitive space to analyze practical, data-driven solutions.
Complementary, not a substitute, ecosystem
The document underscores that physical and chemical recycling technologies can play a strategic role as long as they complement, and do not replace, the priority actions of reduction, reuse, and mechanical recycling.
Furthermore, both technologies contribute to reducing dependence on virgin resins and creating new applications for complex materials that would otherwise end up in landfills or incineration.
The Pact supports the EPA’s Waste Management Hierarchy, which prioritizes reduction and reuse, followed by mechanical recycling, and then chemical or physical recycling for hard-to-recycle plastics.
Key Differences Between Physical and Chemical Recycling
The document clarifies concepts to avoid confusion in the industry:
| Type of Technology | How it Works | Results | Key Applications |
|---|---|---|---|
| Physical Recycling | Dissolution/purification without altering the polymer structure | Maintains the original polymer | Specialty packaging, industrial applications |
| Chemical Recycling | Pyrolysis or depolymerization using heat or reagents | Produces virgin-quality monomers or hydrocarbons | Medical packaging, food contact, automotive safety |
“These technologies can be essential for processing plastics that mechanical recycling cannot handle,” said Tamsin Ettefagh, VP of Sustainability at PureCycle Technologies. “But they must be applied under responsible parameters.”
However, the Pact excludes processes that convert waste into energy or fuel from the definition of recycling, a position aligned with various industry and environmental groups.
The Urgency of Standardized Terminology
The Pact warns that the indiscriminate use of terms such as advanced recycling or molecular recycling generates confusion and hinders decision-making.
Therefore, it adopts the ISO/CD 15270-1.3 framework, which classifies technologies as:
- Mechanical
- Physical
- Chemical
- Organic/Biological
A unified classification will allow for more transparent, evidence-based, and comparable assessments across technologies.
The group also emphasizes the need for stricter standards to ensure rigorous emissions control and greater operational safety, third-party verifiable life cycle assessments, protection for communities near facilities, and financial accountability models to prevent environmental impacts.
A Call for Informed Decisions
During the drafting of the document, the Pact analyzed scientific literature, existing regulations, environmental assessments, and feedback from stakeholders across the entire value chain.
“We want policymakers, businesses, and communities to make decisions backed by science, transparency, and shared responsibility,” said Crystal Bayliss, strategy director of the U.S. Plastics Pact.