A Circular Solution

to Plastic Waste
Boston Consulting Group partners with leaders in business and society to tackle their most
important challenges and capture their greatest opportunities. BCG was the pioneer in business
strategy when it was founded in 1963. Today, we help clients with total transformation—inspiring
complex change, enabling organizations to grow, building competitive advantage, and driving
bottom-line impact.

To succeed, organizations must blend digital and human capabilities. Our diverse, global teams
bring deep industry and functional expertise and a range of perspectives to spark change. BCG
delivers solutions through leading-edge management consulting along with technology and
design, corporate and digital ventures—and business purpose. We work in a uniquely
collaborative model across the firm and throughout all levels of the client organization,
generating results that allow our clients to thrive.
A CIRCULAR SOLUTION
TO PLASTIC WASTE

HOLGER RUBEL

UDO JUNG

CLINT FOLLETTE

ALEXANDER MEYER ZUM FELDE

SANTOSH APPATHURAI

MIRIAM BENEDI DÍAZ

July 2019 | Boston Consulting Group

CONTENTS

3 INTRODUCTION
A Big and Growing Problem
New Circular Technologies
The Business Case for Pyrolysis

7 A CHALLENGE OF INCREASING SCALE AND COMPLEXITY

9 THE HIERARCHY OF WASTE

Prevention and Reduction
Reuse
Mechanical Recycling
Chemical Recycling or Plastics Regeneration
Incineration and Landfilling—Big Steps Down

1 4 PLASTICS REGENERATION FILLS THE GAP

1 6 THE ECONOMICS OF PYROLYSIS

Mature: Singapore and Seine-Maritime—the Challenges of
Volume and Market Structure
Moderately Developed: The US Gulf Coast—Sufficient Quantities,
Low Costs
Nascent: Guangdong and Zhejiang—High Volumes, High Costs
The Environmental Impact of Pyrolysis
Additional Challenges

2 2 ACHIEVING PYROLYSIS AT SCALE

Industry
Government Regulations

2 4 A VIABLE SOLUTION—NOW AND INTO THE FUTURE

2 5 FOR FURTHER READING

2 6 NOTE TO THE READER

2 | A Circular Solution to Plastic Waste

 INTRODUCTION

“We have met the enemy and he is us!”

W alt Kelly’s memorable poster of Pogo standing at the

mouth of a trash-filled Okefenokee Swamp marked the first
Earth Day in 1970. The world’s use of, and dependence on, plastics to
simplify and enable modern lives has only increased in the 50 years
since. And so inevitably has the amount of plastic waste—by some
estimates, it’s now ten times higher. Our methods to manage this
waste have not keep pace, however. Today, we have the opportunity
to turn the tide through circular-economy solutions that expand the
scope of recycling methods, but doing so requires support from
industry participants across the plastics value chain.

Plastics have become indispensable products that are both essential

to modern life and a leading example of the complications that can
be created by linear—make-use-dispose—economies. Plastics provide
safe drinks, reduce food waste, and enable the storage and transport
of medicines. They are essential for medical implants. Their light
weight and durability aid in reducing carbon footprints along complex
global-logistics value chains. We produce some 350 million tons of
plastics every year. The problem is that about 250 million end up in
landfills or the environment and 10 million in oceans.

A Big and Growing Problem

Environmentalists and NGOs have long warned about the impact of
plastic waste on land, water, and air. Today, regulators, industries, and
society alike recognize the need to limit plastic waste and identify
new solutions to the problem. Many countries—some 60 so far,
according to the UN—have responded with steps to constrain plastics
consumption and environmentally detrimental means of disposal.
Policymakers are increasingly restricting, and in some cases banning,
single-use and flexible plastic products, such as shopping bags. They
are also limiting disposal of plastic waste in landfills. Consumer
companies, including restaurants and airlines, are cutting back on or
entirely abandoning the use of plastic straws, plates, and cutlery.
Although these actions have yet to materially reduce the volume of
waste, they have sent a clear signal that the status quo can shift
rapidly.

Reuse and recycling have proved effective at mitigating some types of

plastic waste. Mechanical recycling (recovering plastic waste through
mechanical processes) is common in some markets, but current tech-
nologies require a well-developed supply chain, including strong sort-

Boston Consulting Group | 3

 ing, washing, and grinding capabilities. In addition, mechanical recy-
cling cannot handle some of the most commonly used plastics or
many advanced polymers designed to be resource efficient and miti-
gate climate change. Stronger efforts are needed to promote materials
that are designed for recyclability, but current mechanical-recycling
technologies will eventually reach their limits.

New Circular Technologies

Recent years have seen heightened interest in the potential of circular
technologies to break, or at least mitigate the adverse effects of, the
make-use-dispose model. Chemical recycling, in a couple of forms, has
emerged as a feasible solution to provide decentralized and more
broadly applicable recycling systems. One technique involves decom-
position, or monomer recycling, in which a polymer is chemically con-
verted back into its constituent monomers, making it a perfectly circu-
lar option that reverses the original polymerization process. The
related process of conversion, or plastic-to-fuel (PTF) recycling, con-
verts plastics into the equivalent of crude oil or petrochemical feed-
stock that can be fed into refineries or chemical plants, respectively.

Both of these chemical-recycling processes can be more fully de-

scribed as plastics regeneration in circular-economy terms. (See Ex-
hibit 1.) Several methods of both monomer recycling and PTF have
been demonstrated at the lab scale, from pyrolysis to newer technol-
ogies such as hydrothermal liquefaction.1,2

The lower costs and ease of application of PTF technology provide a

viable alternative for treating plastic waste until we are capable of
fully closing the loop on all plastic materials. The most common PTF
technology, pyrolysis, has the potential to fill a significant gap on the
plastics disposal-reuse spectrum and provide a means of repurposing
many types of plastic waste for which no feasible mechanical-
recycling options currently exist. Moreover, as we describe in this

Exhibit 1 | An Overview of Chemical Recycling

PLASTICS REGENERATION
Decomposition or Conversion or plastic-to-fuel
monomer recycling (PTF) recycling
• Chemolysis • Pyrolysis
• Hydrolysis • Fluid catalytic cracking
• Methanolysis • Hydrogen technologies
• Glycolysis • KDV1 process
• Aminolysis • Gasification
• Other methods • Hydrothermal liquefaction2
• Other methods

Some outputs of PTF recycling may be

reconverted into monomers

Source: BCG analysis.

1
German acronym for Katalytische Drucklose Verölung, or catalytic pressure-free conversion to oil.
2
“Use of super-critical water for the liquefaction of polypropylene into water,” Chen et al., ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng.,
2019:7;3749–58.

4 | A Circular Solution to Plastic Waste

 report, pyrolysis presents a promising business case, especially for
chemical companies, which can adopt a new technology that is close
to their core capabilities while simultaneously helping to develop
smarter solutions for managing plastic waste.

The Business Case for Pyrolysis

BCG recently completed several comprehensive analyses of global
waste markets, collection systems, recycling regulations, and business
cases for mechanical recycling, as well as the economic viability of a
number of conversion technologies. We chose pyrolysis as one exam-
ple for further detailing, including the business cases and financial in-
centives for companies to invest in, build, and operate pyrolysis facili-
ties. We examined the PTF value chain, the costs of the pyrolysis
process, and its market potential. As part of the assessment, we
looked at the environmental impact of pyrolysis, as well as its chal-
lenges, and studied how various factors and trends play out in three
types of markets common around the world, ranging from those that
are largely unregulated and immature with respect to plastics collec-
tion to those that are highly regulated with well-developed collection
chains.

The analysis was reviewed with experts from the chemical industry,
waste management companies, circular-economy organizations, and
academia. (See the sidebar “Our Thanks to the Experts.”)

Our main conclusion is that while the financial and business challeng-
es vary, conversion technologies such as pyrolysis are economically vi-
able in all the market types we studied. In some, pyrolysis can have
an immediate and substantial impact—it has the potential to treat up

OUR THANKS TO THE EXPERTS

The authors are very grateful for the Marc de Wit, CFO, Circle Economy
support they received in producing this
report. Their special thanks go to the Maria Mendiluce, managing director
following experts who provided invaluable climate and energy, WBCSD
insight and expertise:
Niko Kopar, circular-economy expert,
Brendan Edgerton, director circular Circular Change
economy, WBCSD
Nien-Hwa Linda Wang, Maxine Spencer
Craig Halgreen, director sustainability Nichols professor of chemical engineering,
and public affairs, Borealis Purdue University

Harald Friedl, CEO, Circle Economy The authors also thank the chemical
companies from across the world, global
Ladeja Godina Kosir, executive director, waste management companies, consumer
Circular Change industry companies, and environmental
NGOs that contributed invaluable input
Lars Krejberg Petersen, CEO and without wanting to be referenced by name.
administrative director, Dansk Retursystem

Boston Consulting Group | 5

 to two-thirds of the plastic waste generated in Jakarta, for example. In
others, the business case is feasible only if governments act to make
inexpensive and environmentally detrimental means of disposal—
principally landfills—less financially attractive.

Within the current hierarchy of solutions, pyrolysis can play an im-

portant role in mitigating the environmental impact of plastics in the
near to medium term. The more companies, governments, and institu-
tions invest in or support conversion technologies such as pyrolysis,
the greater their ability to contribute to solving this global environ-
mental problem.

Notes
1. “Chemical recycling of waste plastics for new materials production,” Rahimi and
Garcia, Nature Reviews Chemistry, 2017:1;0046.
2. “Use of super-critical water for the liquefaction of polypropylene into water,” Chen
et al., ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng., 2019:7;3749–58.

6 | A Circular Solution to Plastic Waste

 A CHALLENGE OF
INCREASING SCALE AND
COMPLEXITY

T he problem is vast, global, and com-

plex. Some estimates indicate that
humans have manufactured more than 9
tives and adhesives make recycling even
more challenging. Among plastics that are
designed for disposal, the impact of a plastic
billion tons of plastics in the past century, material type depends on its time in use—
most of it since the 1950s. In recent decades, some are made for single use while others
the rising middle class in emerging markets are designed for longer-lasting applications,
has sent production soaring; half of history’s increasing their life cycle and reducing their
plastics have been produced in the past 15 environmental impact when considered
years. The top 20 countries account for 75% over time.
to 90% of the total global plastics consump-
tion, most of it in the form of packaging. (See Flexible packaging is one example of a single-
Exhibit 2.) Of the 9 billion tons of plastics use plastic that is typically disposed of after a
produced, almost 7 billion have become short time. This material accounts for about
waste. The UN predicts that under current 50% of all plastics consumption—and also for
consumption rates and waste management half of the total plastic litter in the ocean.
practices, approximately 12 billion tons of Much of the flexible and mixed-layer plastic
plastic waste will be dumped into landfills used in packaging is not suitable for
and leaked into the environment by 2050. mechanical recycling.

Additionally, because of behaviors and hab-

Flexible packaging accounts its, as well as the absence of a well-developed
sorting and recovery infrastructure and pro-
for about 50% of all plastics cess, various types of plastic end up mixed to-
gether in municipal solid waste (MSW). These
consumption. factors complicate existing mechanical-
recycling efforts and often result in some
waste being disposed of through a combina-
Plastics exist in at least seven major forms, tion of industrial, commercial, and informal
each with its own chemical composition and means and other waste accumulating in land-
purpose. (See Exhibit 3.) Plastic types vary in fills or escaping collection systems entirely
their ability to be recycled. PET and HDPE, and leaking into the environment.
for example, lend themselves to reuse and
mechanical recycling, whereas other plastics
are disposed of after their intended use. Addi-

Boston Consulting Group | 7

 Exhibit 2 | The Problem: High Consumption and Low Recycling and Recovery Rates
% %
Estimated plastics consumption by country, 2017 (kt) Recycled Incinerated

China 88,132 10 40

US 30,834 10 15

India 14,958 N/A 1

2

Japan 8,571 21 59

Brazil 8,015 2 5

Germany 7,856 38 61

Turkey 6,958 10 0

Russia 6,949 4 02

South Korea 6,926 59 25

Mexico 5,884 10 14

Italy 5,671 27 33

Indonesia 5,019 2 5

Thailand 4,683 20 25

France 4,527 21 42

Iran 4,330 9 N/A

UK 3,431 29 31

Vietnam 3,332 8 20

Saudi Arabia 3,189 10 0

Spain 3,110 34 16

Canada 3,052 25 3

Poland 2,882 26 19

0 20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 100,000

(kt)
Packaging Automotive Construction Electrical Others

Sources: EPA; Plastics Europe; press search; VDMA; BCG analysis.

Note: Global plastics consumption was estimated at 250–350 million tons in 2017. Plastics comprise thermoplastics such as PVC, PE (HD-PE, LD-
PE, LLD-PE), PP, PS (GP and HI), ABS, SAN, PET resin, PA (PA6 and PA66), as well as PC. Different countries use varying reporting criteria, so the
numbers indicate the average of different types of plastic. Official recycling numbers are often overstated and are adjusted where possible.
N/A = not available.
1
Official sources vary (15–60%); actual treatment is probably lower.
2
The government plans to build five incineration plants by 2025.

Exhibit 3 | Plastic Types Have Different Uses and Makeups

Plastic cutlery, CD
Milk bottles; Squeeze bottles, and video cases,
shampoo, chemical, other cling wrap, hot-drink cups,
and detergent bottles rubbish bags protective packaging

PET PVC PP Other

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

HDPE LDPE EPS/PS

Water bottles, Cosmetic containers, Microwave dishes, Mixed-use
food containers commercial cling wrap potato chip bags plastics

# PET and PVC are not optimal feedstock for a pyrolysis unit.

Source: The New Plastics Economy: Rethinking the Future of Plastics, World Economic Forum, 2016.

8 | A Circular Solution to Plastic Waste

THE HIERARCHY OF WASTE

W e use a pyramid of plastic waste

management to describe the many
ways of managing the plastic waste that we
ate concern is to avoid plastics entering the
environment, especially the oceans. For
regions with established collection systems,
generate. (See Exhibit 4.) Outside of reducing an intermediate target is to find ways to
the amount of waste generated, reusing reduce the use of landfills and incineration,
plastics is the best alternative. Leakage of which amplifies the critical role of reduction,
plastic waste into the environment is the reuse, recycling, and regeneration.
least desirable, and disposal in landfills is
only marginally preferable. Various stake- While the hierarchy of plastic waste manage-
holder groups are actively pursuing initiatives ment provides high-level guidance on which
to push waste management practices toward type of recycling is preferable, local specifica-
the upper end of the hierarchy. The immedi- tions need to be considered on a case-by-case

Exhibit 4 | The Pyramid of Plastic Waste Management

• Prevention of plastic use where unnecessary

Prevention and reduction • Reduction of single-use and unnecessary plastics and packaging

• Production of reusable-plastic containers

Reuse • Design for long life and increased utilization

Conventional
Mechanical recycling mechanical recycling • Closing the loop of high-value materials (e.g., PET, PP, HDPE)
(designed for recyclability) Purification process • Requirement for sorting technologies or separated collection systems

Decomposition or
Chemical recycling or monomer recycling • Recycling of low-value materials (e.g., foils, blends)
plastics regeneration Conversion or PTF • Value proposition in remote areas for decentralized solutions

• Energy recovery through burning of waste

Incineration • Only favorable as a last resource because possible only for one
additional cycle

• Indefinite loss of raw material, which should be avoided

Landfilling • Disposal in landfills or environment of about 250 million tons of the
350 million tons of plastics produced annually

Leakage into • Worst-case scenario with waste leakage into the environment and
the environment eventually into the ocean

Source: BCG.

Boston Consulting Group | 9

 basis using thorough environmental- and tions. Restaurants are promoting refillable
societal-impact evaluations. In addition, a cups and turning to renewable, recycled, or
full life cycle assessment of the materials degradable materials for plates, cups, and
sometimes conveys surprising results. For cutlery, for example.
example, materials that improve the environ-
mental performance of a product, such as These are significant steps, but it is not
lightweight plastic for airplanes, may appear realistic to expect near- or medium-term
ecofriendly at first but are less so when ana- miracles. Plastics are too cheap and conven-
lyzed in full because they are not extractable ient, and the waste problem has yet to work
or recyclable. For materials such as these, a its way to the top of the priority list in many
near-term solution is needed to effectively jurisdictions. Moreover, even in the long term,
manage plastic waste. too many plastics are used for crucial appli-
cations—such as health, safety, and sanita-
tion—that are central to our sustained
Too many plastics are used development and progress.

for applications that are

Reuse
central to sustained After reducing consumption, reuse is the next
development. best alternative. Reuse maintains the integri-
ty and purpose of the product and has mini-
mal environmental impact because washing
In early 2018, China upended the global recy- is typically the only processing required. Man-
cling business when it stopped accepting im- ufacturers are producing an increasing num-
ports of low-quality or highly polluting post- ber of reusable containers that are designed
consumer plastic waste, citing purity issues. expressly for long life and increased utiliza-
For years, China had taken up to 45% of the tion. But the application of reuse is limited,
world’s plastic waste imports for recycling, in- especially for containers that hold food,
cineration, and landfilling. The ramifications drinks, and chemical or toxic substances. Cer-
of this decision are still being felt in markets tain refillable hard plastic bottle systems are
worldwide. in use, but especially for applications such as
food grade packaging, reusability is difficult
to apply. A few countries are even witnessing
Prevention and Reduction a reverse trend: reuse is losing out to mechan-
Single-use flexible plastics have simplified ical recycling.
our lives considerably, especially in the devel-
oping world, but they are also the most prob-
lematic aspect of plastic waste generation Mechanical Recycling
and management. Most single-use plastics are A pillar of the circular economy, mechanical
discarded after their first use, and far too recycling provides both a viable business case
many mar roadsides, forests, rivers, and seas. for companies and significant societal and en-
vironmental benefits by reducing the amount
The most effective solution is to reduce con- of virgin plastics used and driving greater cir-
sumption. More than 50 governments have cularity. During mechanical recycling, waste
banned at least some types of single-use plas- is recycled into secondary raw materials with-
tics. India and several other countries have out changing the basic structure of the mate-
imposed levies and taxes on the manufacture rial. Mechanical processes, including grinding,
of such products. Governments can be ex- washing, separating, drying, regranulating,
pected to further incorporate sustainability and compounding of used plastics, often cre-
considerations into their purchasing con- ate a closed-loop system. (See Exhibit 5.)
tracts. Industry players, led by consumer-
facing companies, are starting to take steps to Demand for recycled materials has risen rap-
eliminate the use of plastic shopping bags idly over the past few years, driven, among
and to develop other more sustainable solu- other factors, by consumer goods and other

10 | A Circular Solution to Plastic Waste

 Exhibit 5 | A Closed Mechanical-Recycling Loop

Bottle producers and Consumers

beverage makers Purchase and return the bottles and cans
Fill new bottles and cans with
beer and soft drinks

Reprocessors Shops and restaurants

Recycle used cans and Sell and handle the empty
bottles into new ones bottles and cans

Collection and fee-handling companies

Register new products, handle fees and refunds,
collect and sort the used bottles and cans

Sources: Dansk Retursystem; BCG analysis.

types of companies that have committed to diversify their recycling portfolios and adapt
using a certain share of recycled raw materi- more plastics to mechanical recycling.
als. In fact, for some high-value plastics—such
as PP, PET, and HDPE—the demand for recy- As recycling and the use of recyclable materi-
cled resin has been greater at times than the als become more important, an increasing
current supply, and recycling has become a number of companies, such as Borealis, are
lucrative business. The profit margins for re- putting greater emphasis on designing for re-
cycling used plastics for higher-value applica- cyclability. But this process involves signifi-
tions can reach 30% to 50%, depending on the cant technical challenges. Mechanical recy-
type and color of the plastic; this presents a cling cannot process blended materials, for
viable business model often linked with ex- example. Consequently, during the product
tended product responsibility (EPR) or depos- design phase, the use of additives (such as
it schemes, according to several examples we glue) needs to be considered carefully. For
have seen. some products, such as beverage containers
and food grade packaging, design and materi-
Many consumer goods companies have made al standardization has become the norm, but
recycling commitments. Evian water bottles other types of plastics applications still lack
will be manufactured with 100% recycled explicit design standards for recyclability,
plastics by 2025. Unilever has pledged to which prevents mechanical recycling from
make 100% of its plastic packaging recyclable achieving its full potential.
by the same year. Walmart has announced
that, by 2025, 100% of the packaging for its Newer technologies, such as purification, that
private-label products will be recyclable. Con- go beyond conventional mechanical recycling
currently, testing and product development are gaining traction. They work by dissolving
efforts are under way at chemical companies plastics into solvents and separating the
to improve the recyclability of materials. blends to purify the plastics through the ex-
traction of additives and dyes, leaving a de-
Multiple large recycling systems or compa- contaminated polymer. These technologies
nies (including Veolia and Suez, founded in focus on the same materials as conventional
France and active globally; the DSD system in mechanical recycling, such as PET, HD, and
Germany; Renewi in Belgium, the Nether- PP, but they are still nascent technologies that
lands, and Luxembourg; and Reliance in In- have yet to see large-scale implementation.
dia) have built strong businesses around recy- Outside of such material limitations, other
cling HDPE, PP, or PET products. Chemical factors also restrict the use of these new tech-
companies are also increasing their efforts to nologies. In the US, for example, the FDA

Boston Consulting Group | 11

 must approve any postconsumer recycled by regulators or cross-financed by licensing
HDPE and PP plastics that come into direct systems or environmental pricing-reform
contact with cosmetics or food, which compli- schemes. Given the low demand and poor
cates further use of recycled material for prices for these products in developed mar-
containers. kets, it is unlikely that recycling programs in
emerging markets can sustainably target
Despite the many admirable efforts to these materials.
improve mechanical-recycling processes, an
effective mechanical-recycling system also Additionally, because some materials degrade
requires an efficient collection system. The when heated, such plastics can be recycled
best collection systems separate waste at the only once or twice before the next option is
source, which reduces cleaning requirements “downcycling”—the conversion into a lower-
and saves water and energy. Industrial-sized value material use. Business solutions for this
sorting systems and mechanical-recovery problem require cross-industry collaborations
facilities (MRFs) are increasing in efficiency that are not common today. But keep in mind
and separating capability. But putting such a that even basic recycling is preferable to oth-
system in place takes time, investment, and er options: one study in Italy found that each
often a fundamental change in consumer kilogram of recycled PET saved about 1,370
behavior. grams of crude oil, 430 grams of gas, and 390
grams of coal.

Pyrolysis feedstocks are types Chemical Recycling or Plastics

of plastic that have no value Regeneration
Beyond mechanical recycling, several new
for present-day recycling chemical-recycling technologies are emerging
operations. that address limitations in material composi-
tion as well as the complexity of mechanical-
recycling processes. These new methods can
A further shortcoming of mechanical recy- be broadly referred to as plastics regenera-
cling is that not all materials can be efficient- tion. Monomer recycling is generally seen as
ly or economically recycled. For example, lit- a particularly circular method because it re-
tle demand exists for recycled pouches, foil, verses the chemical composition of the plas-
and other low-density plastic materials be- tics, transforming them back into stable
cause they can rarely be recycled at a quality monomer molecules that can then be com-
level similar to that of the original products. bined to create the same grade and type of
This is a serious problem, given that these plastic as the original waste. Conversion into
mixed- or special-plastic materials provide fuels or petrochemical feedstock is realized
crucial functionality but are difficult and ex- through a variety of technologies, the most
tremely resource intensive to split apart for common of which is pyrolysis.
mechanical recycling—if the technologies ex-
ist to do so. The combination of cleaning, Pyrolysis is based on the natural geological
washing, recycling, and transportation costs process that produces fossil fuels and uses
often erases the economic and ecological via- heat to decompose materials in an oxygen-
bility of mechanical recycling. free (or oxygen-starved) environment, there-
fore emitting little greenhouse-promoting
The best case for these products frequently is carbon dioxide. The outputs are synthetic
that they are recycled into construction mate- oil and gas, which have greater energy
rials for roads and buildings or are used as value than coal and can be put to a variety
fuel in industrial plants. They are typically of uses.
loss makers for recycling companies, and
these losses are expected to increase over One big attraction of pyrolysis is that its feed-
time. Consequently, in some situations, these stocks are types of plastic that have no value
plastics are processed only when mandated for present-day recycling operations, includ-

12 | A Circular Solution to Plastic Waste

ing shopping bags, product wrappers, and high cost, or a complete ban, on landfilling
packing materials, which commonly end up waste.
in landfills or incinerators or—in the worst
case—are just thrown away. (Note that PTF Because of low financial costs—especially in
through pyrolysis is a single-generation solu- areas where space is plentiful—landfills re-
tion, however; we discuss its shortcomings main popular, even if visually and environ-
later in this report.) mentally injurious. According to an estimate
in Science Advances in 2017, almost 80% of the
plastic waste produced to date is now in land-
Incineration and Landfilling—Big fills, dumps, or the environment. About 12%
Steps Down has been incinerated, while the rest has been
The steps down to the next levels of the plas- recycled or remains in use.
tic waste management hierarchy are steep,
with significant environmental ramifications. Despite the severe environmental limitations
While recycling has some adverse environ- of incineration and landfilling, these solu-
mental impacts—related mainly to emissions tions are still preferable to the absolute
and water use—these pale beside incinera- worst-case scenario, where plastic waste
tion and landfilling. escapes collection, ends up as litter on the
ground, and eventually makes its way into
Incineration is a low-efficiency method of rivers and the ocean.
producing energy that comes with high envi-
ronmental costs, including airborne particu-
lates and greenhouse gas emissions. And not
all incineration produces energy; some waste
is simply burned as a means of disposal, es-
pecially in European countries that put a

Boston Consulting Group | 13

PLASTICS REGENERATION
FILLS THE GAP

P lastics regeneration can fill a gap

in the current plastic waste treatment
spectrum through its use of conversion
to at least a second round in the case of the
former and to potentially several more in the
latter, depending on the ultimate usage and
technologies. Pyrolysis, for example, the disposal.
technology we explore here in depth, is adept
at handling a variety of plastic types that In the past two decades, a handful of compa-
mechanical-recycling centers typically reject. nies have piloted pyrolysis as a for-profit way
Although pyrolysis uses heat, it does so in an of turning otherwise nonrecyclable plastics
oxygen-free environment; hence, the only into fuel. (Active companies include Agilyx,
carbon dioxide it emits is from the energy RES Polyflow, Brightmark Energy, RTI, and
source that generates the heat. As a result, its Klean Industries.) In 2000, Klean Industries
carbon footprint is much smaller than that of and Toshiba built a pyrolysis plant in Sappo-
incineration. ro, Japan, that produced 40 to 50 tons a day;
it operated until 2012, producing about
9 million liters a year of light oil (used as a
The output from pyrolysis chemical feedstock) and medium fuel oil
(such as diesel) as well as about 4 million
is 70% to 80% oil and watts a year of electricity. BP and RES Poly-
flow are constructing a US pyrolysis plant in
10% to 15% gas. Indiana that will produce 100 kilotons a year
and is expected to begin operations in 2019.
BP will purchase all the diesel fuel produced
Depending on the mix of inputs—and that by the facility.
can vary substantially—the output from pyrol-
ysis is 70% to 80% oil, which can be used for a In addition to these commercial efforts, pyrol-
number of purposes, and 10% to 15% gas, ysis has also been the subject of a number of
which is usually recycled to provide the pyrol- academic and industry reports.1
ysis heat. Only about 10% to 15% of the out-
put is char, an inert solid that is typically re- Like any chemical process, pyrolysis has its
cycled for roads or sent to landfills, although challenges. The biggest are scale and opera-
some usage of char as a fuel has also been tional complexity. Pyrolysis reactors require
demonstrated. Using the liquid output from regular maintenance, and the downtime is
pyrolysis as fuel or inputs for petrochemical costly. A plant typically comprises multiple
plants prolongs the original plastics’ life cycle reactors, with additional reactors added in

14 | A Circular Solution to Plastic Waste

parallel to increase capacity. Some players are meaningful way to plastic waste solutions:
exploring smaller continuous-process reactors Is it economically viable?
to gain scale.

Another major issue is that pyrolysis requires

a sustained and consistent amount of quality
feedstock in order to function effectively; pro- Note
viding this steady flow of input can be chal- 1. See, for example, Conversion Technology: A
Complement to Plastic Recycling, 4R Sustainability, for
lenging because the plastics must be sorted the American Chemical Council, April 2011; 2015
and cleaned in advance to avoid contamina- Plastics-to-Fuel Project Developer’s Guide, Ocean Recov-
tion (although the cleaning and processing ery Alliance for the American Chemical Council, June
2015; and Energy and Economic Value of Municipal
standards are less stringent than those re- Solid Waste (MSW) and Non-Recycled Plastics (NRP)
quired for mechanical recycling). These and Currently Landfilled in the Fifty State, Themelis et al.,
other issues raise a key question with respect Columbia University Earth Engineering Center, July
2014.
to whether pyrolysis can contribute in a

Boston Consulting Group | 15

THE ECONOMICS OF
PYROLYSIS

F our factors directly determine

pyrolysis’s economic viability, and they
vary considerably by region and market. They
chemical companies—BCG researched eight
markets, each with its own distinct character-
istics. The markets can be divided into three
include the addressable volume of plastic representative categories:
waste, feedstock acquisition and treatment
costs, the capacity and operating expenses of •• Mature markets have established and
pyrolysis plants, and potential revenues from well-developed collection systems, lim-
the sale of pyrolysis gas and liquids.1 In ited landfill use because of regulations
addition, several structural and environmen- or space constraints, near-term recycling
tal trends shape the impact of these factors targets with stringent monitoring, as
and the feasibility of pyrolysis in each well as near- and medium-term plans
market. (See Exhibit 6.) to reduce single-use-plastics consump-
tion. Our study included Singapore
To assess the financial viability of pyrolysis as and Seine-Maritime, a province of
a business—particularly for energy and France.

Exhibit 6 | The Factors Affecting the Economic Viability of Markets

The addressable volume Feedstock acquisition Pyrolysis design capacity Revenues from the sale
of plastic waste and treatment costs and operating costs of pyrolysis liquids
• The quantity of plastic waste • The cost of acquiring plastic waste • The design throughput capacity of • Available markets for the pyrolysis
generated each day from various channels the pyrolysis unit liquids
• The volume of plastic waste • The cost of cleaning and processing • The associated operating and • The estimated price point of each
feedstock available through plastic waste into pyrolysis feedstock capital costs barrel of pyrolysis liquid product
cost-effective channels

Structural and environmental trends

• Current and future regulations that could affect the volume and cost of feedstock
• Social perceptions and views on waste management

Source: BCG analysis.

16 | A Circular Solution to Plastic Waste

•• Moderately developed markets have In each market, we used two criteria to deter-
established waste collection systems, little mine economic viability:
pressure on reducing landfill use because of
favorable economics, and some long-term •• Volume. Estimated number of 30-kt/year
recycling goals in place (including data plants that can be run given the address-
collection to support them) but no firm able volume of plastic waste in the market.
regulation aimed at reducing plastics
consumption. We studied the five US •• Margin. Revenues from the sale of pyrol-
coastal states along the Gulf of Mexico as an ysis liquids minus the costs to acquire
area that is representative of these markets. feedstock, the cash costs of operation, and
capital expenditures.2
•• Nascent markets have inadequate plastic
waste collection systems, few recycling We set the size of the pyrolysis unit at 30 kilo-
targets, and no firm regulation for reduc- tons per year accounting for scalability issues
ing plastics consumption. We looked commonly seen in pyrolysis reactors. We es-
specifically at a few regions of Indonesia tablished an arbitrary nominal internal rate
( Jakarta, Ambon, and Batam) and two of return (IRR) hurdle of 12% as the mini-
provinces in China: Guangdong and mum return that a company would need to
Zhejiang. Overall, China spans the nascent justify investment. Our analysis indicates
and moderate categories: many cities have that, of the eight markets, six exceed this IRR,
developed formal collection systems, and and four do so substantially, including one
incineration of waste to generate electrici- nascent market: Jakarta. (See Exhibit 7 for
ty is common. examples.)

Exhibit 7 | Pyrolysis Has a Positive Investment Outlook in All Three Market Categories

MARGINS ACROSS THREE MARKET ARCHETYPES SENSITIVITY OF THE RETURN RATE TO COSTS AND
(30-kt/y capacity plant) REVENUES: SINGAPORE EXAMPLE
(30-kt/y capacity plant)

IRR (%) 22% 28% 16% Singapore base case in bold5

Crude price
453 –14 14
500 445 446 ($40/bbl | $60/bbl | $80/bbl)

40 Pyrolysis liquid price

400 75 117 88
136 (Marpol disruption6: None | Low7 | Severe8)
125
($/plastic ton)

Feedstock acquisition cost9

Revenues

300 145 –4 5
($50/t | $10/t | ($40)/t)
145 82
200 Cash cost
($250/t | $214/t | $170/t)
–4 4
100 214 200
173 Capital-equipment investment
($35 million | $30 million | $25 million)
–3 4
0 10
Mature: Moderately Nascent: –20 –10 22% 10 20
Singapore developed: China1 IRR (%)
US Gulf Coast

Margin Capital cost2 Cash cost3 Feedstock4 Product economics Local market Operational

Sources: Expert interviews; industry reports; BCG analysis.

Note: Consumers may be willing to pay a premium on goods from recycled content, which may result in higher revenues from pyrolysis liquids.
Bbl = barrel.
1
Estimate for a single province (either Guangdong or Zhejiang), not a combined value for both.
2
Capital cost of installing pyrolysis plant as well as sorting, cleaning, and pretreatment facilities if required are valued at a 12% hurdle rate.
3
Cost to prepare and process pyrolysis feedstock, including labor and utilities, transport of feedstock, and shipment of pyrolysis product.
4
Cost of acquiring plastic feedstock.
5
Base case uses Singapore economics.
6
For more information, see “Just How Disruptive Will IMO 2020 Be?,” BCG article, May 2019.
7
Assumes that price of fuel oil with sulfur content >0.5% drops to $20/bbl, with value of pyrolysis liquid at about $95/bbl.
8
Assumes that price of fuel with sulfur content >0.5% drops to $5/bbl, with value of pyrolysis liquid at about $110/bbl.
9
Cost of acquiring feedstock independent of cleaning and sorting costs.

Boston Consulting Group | 17

 Here’s how the economics play out for select- goes straight to incineration centers. Only
ed markets in each category, with particular about 12% to 20% enters recycling sorting fa-
emphasis on two of the four factors cited cilities, and just half of this is actually recy-
above: the addressable volume of plastic cled, with the balance rejected principally
waste and the feedstock acquisition and treat- because of contamination.
ment costs, which are often the most signifi-
cant variables with the broadest range. (See With the potential for 120 to 300 tons a day
also the sidebar “The Yangtze River: A Big of discarded plastics from sorting centers,
Need, a Complex Problem,” which presents a Singapore could provide ample feedstock for
particularly tricky and troubling case with a 30-kt/year pyrolysis plant. (Regulatory
some challenging economics.) changes that favor pyrolysis could divert ad-
ditional plastic waste from incineration and
offer even greater supply.) The municipal
Mature: Singapore and Seine- waste stream is poorly segregated, however,
Maritime—the Challenges of and substantial cleaning and sorting are re-
Volume and Market Structure quired to convert plastic waste to usable
Two very different markets illustrate the op- feedstock, which drives up costs. Pyrolysis
portunities and challenges for pyrolysis in operators would need to partner with the
mature, regulated markets. Singapore and the four companies that control waste collection
Seine-Maritime province in France have at- in Singapore. Our analysis indicates that they
tractive IRRs (more than 20% and 25%, re- could expect to pay almost $170 a ton for
spectively), but these high rates are based on mixed-plastic waste, leading to a total operat-
extremely different business cases. In Singa- ing cost of $370 a ton and a profit margin
pore, the market offers an ample supply of of about $75 a ton, or nearly 17%. (See Ex-
mixed-plastics feedstock, but the high cost of hibit 8.)
collection and cleaning can have a big impact
on profitability. In Seine-Maritime, feedstock In Seine-Maritime, feedstock costs are sub-
is relatively inexpensive, but quantities are stantially lower—less than $120 a ton, result-
limited, which undermines one of the pre- ing in total costs of about $320 a ton, almost
requisites of a profitable pyrolysis facility: 15% lower than in Singapore. A pyrolysis op-
the ability to operate continuously. erator could expect to achieve a profit margin
of almost $130 a ton, or close to 30%. But
Singapore generates some 2,200 tons a day of Seine-Maritime generates only about 150 to
plastic waste, about 50% of it from residential 190 tons of municipal solid waste (MSW) a
sources. Most of this (about 1,800 tons a day) day, most of which (110 to 160 tons) goes to

THE YANGTZE RIVER

A Big Need, a Complex Problem

Ten rivers account for some 85% of global because PTF technology can be used to
plastic waste carried to the ocean—the dispose of the waste cost-effectively once
Yangtze River alone carries 50%, or some it is collected. Small, portable, and modular
200 tons a day of plastic waste, into the pyrolysis reactors, such as the ones being
East China Sea. But collection technologies tested by RTI (with an annual capacity of
aimed at recovering usable plastics from approximately 5 kilotons to 7 kilotons),
the water, while innovative, so far take the could be trucked to, and operated at, waste
form of small-scale pilots or concepts that collection sites and may pave the way
lack funding and technological support. forward for treating riverine plastic waste.
More-effective efforts to clean up the
Yangtze, potentially through partnerships,
could have a huge impact on the problem
of global marine plastic waste, especially

18 | A Circular Solution to Plastic Waste

 Exhibit 8 | Example: The Pyrolysis Value Chain for Singapore

Plant
Value Total cost Margin Revenues Breakeven Rate of
capacity Handling Processing
recovery
(kt/y) ($/ton2) ($/ton2, %) ($/ton2, $/bbl3) cost of return
Acquisition and Pyrolysis of plastic Transport and sale
feedstock (%)
pretreatment of feedstock of pyrolysis ($/ton)
pyrolysis feedstock liquid to market

Collected Treated
mixed-plastic plastic Pyrolysis
waste feedstock products
$75/ton $445/ton
30 kt/y $169/ton $196/ton1 $5/ton $370/ton
(17%) $75.81/bbl
$244/ton 22%

$244/ton
Key
Material
entering the Value chain step
current step
Activity in the current step

Sources: Osiris calculations; BCG analysis.

Note: The pyrolysis liquid price was estimated by valuing Brent crude at $60/bbl and estimating the price in Singapore. For other Asian markets,
the price of crude is the price of crude in Singapore plus the costs of shipping crude to the respective markets.
1
$196/ton includes the cost of operating the pyrolysis reactor and the capex hurdle rate at 12% per year.
2
Value per ton of plastic.
3
Value per barrel of pyrolysis liquid.

incinerators or landfills. Only approximately margin of about $135 a ton, or 30%. Contin-
25 to 30 tons is recycled, and current EU ued fallout from China’s decision to restrict
regulations favor mechanical recycling over imports of recyclables adds to the address-
pyrolysis. To ensure sufficient supply for a able volume and reduces costs for potential
30-kt/year plant, an operator would need to operators.
either look beyond the Seine-Maritime prov-
ince to other regions for supply or use plastics Improved sorting efficiency could cut costs
extracted from landfills, which would require further because of lower contamination. (The
cleaning and sorting. Either solution adds US state of Rhode Island, for example, saw
costs. A variety of planned and potential contamination levels drop 20% in one year
regulatory initiatives—including steps to re- after it promoted standardized labels for re-
duce plastic waste, redirect waste from land- cycling bins and increased efforts to address
fills, expand sorting, and improve sorting consumer confusion about recyclables sort-
efficiency—contribute to a somewhat fluid ing.) Once recycling efforts produce streams
cost and supply picture for the foreseeable of well-sorted, very clean plastics, mechanical
future. recycling becomes a viable option in the re-
gion, however.

Moderately Developed: The US

Gulf Coast—Sufficient Quantities, Nascent: Guangdong and
Low Costs Zhejiang—High Volumes, High
The five states of the US Gulf Coast (Ala- Costs
bama, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, and Texas) The provinces of Guangdong and Zhejiang
constitute a high-potential market for pyroly- share similar characteristics. A small group of
sis. Plastic waste is both ample (about 25,000 cities in each generates 80% of the plastic
tons a day) and inexpensive (approximately waste (nine cities produce 25,000 tons a day
$125 a ton). Of the five states, only Florida re- in Guangdong; six cities create almost 20,000
cycles a significant percentage of its MSW tons a day in Zhejiang). Private companies
(37%); the other states are in the single digits, manage waste collection and processing, but
with 90% or more of their MSW going to land- mechanical recycling depends on an informal
fills. We estimate that pyrolysis plants in the network of waste pickers, collectors, and trad-
Gulf Coast states could operate with a profit ers. The regions have the potential to produce

Boston Consulting Group | 19

 an ample supply for pyrolysis facilities, but sis with conventionally produced ULSD. The
the cost of feedstock acquisition is high: more study concluded that “the GHG emissions
than $200 a ton in both regions. This results [from pyrolysis-derived ULSD] would likely
in total operating costs of more than $400 a be reduced up to 14% when it is compared to
ton. Estimated margins are about $40 a ton, conventional ULSD … [Pyrolysis]-derived
or 8% to 9%. ULSD fuel could therefore be considered at a
minimum carbon neutral with the potential
to offer a modest GHG reduction. Further-
Pyrolysis prevents plastic more, this waste-derived fuel had 58% lower
water consumption and up to 96% lower fos-
waste leakage from collection sil fuel consumption than conventional
ULSD fuel in the base case.”3
systems and diverts plastics
from landfills. The paper also compared the production of
pyrolysis-derived fuels with alternative sce-
narios for managing plastic waste such as
The regulatory outlook is only mildly nega- landfilling and incineration (power genera-
tive for volume, but potential regulatory tion) and concluded that the negative envi-
changes could easily drive feedstock prices ronmental impact of pyrolysis was far lower
higher, which would imperil already thin pro- than that of other plastics regeneration alter-
spective margins. In Guangdong, the govern- natives.
ment is piloting sorting programs in some cit-
ies, and the government in Zhejiang is taking
measures to promote sorting at the source. Additional Challenges
Both these actions could have a positive im- Despite the advantages of pyrolysis, some im-
pact on the quality of supply and therefore portant limitations and risks also have to be
the overall cost. addressed. The most immediate shortcomings
are the current small scale (explored more in
the next section) and the challenging technical
The Environmental Impact of operations. Furthermore, unintended conse-
Pyrolysis quences must be considered. Several chemical
Like most industrial processes, pyrolysis has companies are putting major efforts into re-
positive and negative effects on the environ- search and development of plastic products
ment. On the plus side, it is a relatively effi- that have a greater ability to be mechanically
cient way to reuse raw materials that have al- recycled. Promoting pyrolysis, a means of plas-
ready been taken out of the planet. It is not tics regeneration, could eliminate the incen-
as efficient, in many instances, as mechanical tives for these R&D efforts. In addition, the
recycling, but mechanical recycling—at least conversion from plastics to fuel allows for only
today—is not economically viable for all plas- one additional use of the initial plastic as op-
tics. Pyrolysis increases flexibility because posed to a completely circular solution, which
plants can be built close to sources of waste leads to several life cycles of the polymer.
(and some are even portable), reducing long
transportation distances to central recycling Pyrolysis development could have socio-
centers. While pyrolysis requires energy and economic consequences as well: in some
produces some emissions, it also has the sig- regions, the informal subsector of collecting
nificant benefits of preventing plastic waste and sorting waste provides a livelihood for
leakage from collection systems around the millions of people. (See the sidebar “The Col-
world and diverting plastics from landfills. lection Conundrum.”) Large sorting centers
or collection systems with at-the-source sepa-
A 2017 study by Argonne National Labs of a ration would have a detrimental effect on
pyrolysis-based PTF technology compared such subsectors.
the energy, water consumption, and green-
house gas (GHG) emissions of ultra-low- When deciding on the best recycling option
sulfur diesel (ULSD) fuel made from pyroly- for a given plastic material, a full life cycle

20 | A Circular Solution to Plastic Waste

assessment must be conducted, taking into regulations shift to favor more ultra-low-sulfur fuels,
account all factors—economic, environmen- that could provide a boost to sales of pyrolysis liquids
because the principal output is low-sulfur oil.
tal, and social—to determine the preferred
2. During the analysis of the business cases, a broad
solution. variation in the quality of the resulting pyrolysis liquids
was assumed, given the wide variation of ingoing
feedstock.
3. The full-length research article is “Life-cycle analysis
of fuels from post-use non-recycled plastics,” Benavides
et al., Fuel, 2017:203;11–22. Five companies provided
Notes pyrolysis product yields and material and energy
1. Profitability is affected by the price of oil and the consumption data that were processed using a
demand for various types of fuel (such as gasoline, proprietary GREET (Greenhouse Gases, Regulated
kerosene, and jet fuel). If Marpol (International Emissions and Energy Use in Transportation) model.
Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships)

THE COLLECTION CONUNDRUM

In most nascent markets, the informal estimates. Recyclables are sold through a
economy looms large in waste collection. chain of intermediaries to recycling plants.
In Jakarta, for example, which has little This long collection chain increases the
enforcement of laws mandating the sorting market price (by a factor of three to five)
of household waste, an informal network of and provides feedstock of variable quality.
pickers collects trash door-to-door and Major companies are reluctant to engage
transports refuse to some 1,100 temporary with such informal networks, yet these
waste stations, where it is sold to middle- markets provide perhaps the only source of
men. All waste is eventually collected at a employment for thousands of uneducated,
single landfill facility, where it is sorted by unskilled workers.
3,000 to 5,000 pickers, according to some

Boston Consulting Group | 21

ACHIEVING PYROLYSIS AT
SCALE

P yrolysis offers energy and chemical

companies the opportunity to explore
profitable, new business models while
thirds of all plastic waste), Guangdong (a
quarter of all plastic waste), and Zhejiang
(one-fifth of all plastic waste). Pyrolysis is also
simultaneously improving their environmen- economically viable in many mature markets,
tal, social, and governance (ESG) perfor- but in regions such as the US Gulf Coast,
mance. (BCG research on companies’ total where it competes on cost with ample landfill
societal impact shows that companies that do capacity, governments need to decide wheth-
well on nonfinancial ESG measures also er they want to use their legislative and regu-
deliver a better financial performance and latory authority to discourage landfilling and
command a disproportionately higher incentivize alternatives.
valuation.)
In all markets, the biggest single challenge for
pyrolysis is to achieve the scale necessary to
Pyrolysis can have an have a significant impact on the plastic waste
problem and generate sufficient revenues
immediate and significant and profits to justify investment. All mem-
bers of the ecosystem can help facilitate prog-
impact in immature markets. ress. Industry players and governments espe-
cially should take action.

Pyrolysis (and other plastics regeneration

technologies) can also act as a complement to Industry
mechanical recycling, reducing waste volumes Companies in the energy and chemical sec-
that go to less efficient and environmentally tors are the likely lead actors. Some have
adverse incineration facilities and cutting invested in mechanical recycling, and most
substantially into the amount of plastic waste chemical companies are designing bioplastics
that goes to landfills or is simply dumped. or plastics with enhanced recyclability. Sever-
al companies are also exploring, or at least
This potential expansion of waste manage- monitoring, monomer recycling and PTF
ment methods should prompt government in- technologies. The market case exists in plenty
terest. Pyrolysis can have an immediate and of places for stepping up their efforts.
significant impact in immature markets such
as Jakarta (where pyrolysis could handle Numerous startups experimenting with pyrol-
more than half and potentially up to two- ysis and other conversion technologies may

22 | A Circular Solution to Plastic Waste

find the prospects of a large corporate part- plastics into new products by 2025
ner attractive. For example, Bin2Barrel, and reduce reliance on landfills and
which was recently acquired by Integrated incineration
Green Energy Solutions of Amsterdam, is con-
structing a pyrolysis plant for the port of Am- •• Encouraged producer responsibility
sterdam that will process 100 tons of plastic through member state regulations and
waste a day. In May 2018, Recycling Technol- discussion of fees on manufacturers to
ogies of the UK announced agreements worth subsidize waste collection and recycling
€65 million to sell the oil output from its pat-
ented PTF technology. Also in the UK, ReNew •• Moved to improve rates of household
ELP is constructing a PTF plant, using Austra- plastics recycling by as much as 60%
lian technology, that can process up to 20,000 by 2020
tons of plastic waste annually. The company
has announced plans to build three addition- Governments need to shape policies such that
al plants once the first is up and running. they create guiding frameworks that can help
define a clear waste management hierarchy
Resource scarcity and high commodity costs and incentivize recycling of all types of plas-
have long led the chemical industry to put tic. These frameworks can aid in the develop-
resource efficiency and output maximization ment and successful implementation of inno-
at the core of its operations. Setting up viable vative product design, waste management
opportunities for plastics regeneration infrastructure, and mechanical recycling, as
through pyrolysis would require that chemi- well as plastics regeneration technologies. All
cal companies partner with firms in other levels of government can play a role, from lo-
sectors (such as packaging, consumer goods, cal and regional legislative bodies to national
and waste management) along the plastics assemblies, executives, and agencies.
manufacture, usage, and waste management
value chain. Finally, the role of governments in changing
behaviors and habits through education sys-
Such partnerships are opportunities for pack- tems, incentives, and their own sourcing stan-
aging and chemical companies to develop dards should not be underestimated. Clearly,
new products, for consumer companies to governments have a broader role to play that
adopt sustainable-packaging solutions, and can provide long-term benefits to society.
for waste managers and haulers to set up col-
lection and processing systems—all efforts
that may result in potentially superior growth
rates and a positive societal impact. While
these partnerships might constitute a new
paradigm, closing the loops and creating a
truly circular solution to manage plastic
waste is a critical need that calls for new
models and solutions.

Government Regulations
Mandates at the government level can incen-
tivize the development of plastic waste solu-
tions through the promotion of and invest-
ment in new processes and technologies as
well as by regulating usage and disposal of
plastics. Europe has been a leader in the lat-
ter regard. In recent years, the EU has:

•• Promoted reuse and recycling with plans

to integrate 10 million tons of recycled

Boston Consulting Group | 23

A VIABLE SOLUTION—NOW
AND INTO THE FUTURE

T o tackle the colossal societal and

environmental issue of plastic waste, we
need proportionally meaningful efforts from
A cross-value-chain collaboration to realize
the full benefits of plastics regeneration is al-
most certainly an imperative. An industry co-
the private and public sectors as well as alition has taken a first step with the found-
society at large that encompass behaviors ing of the Alliance to End Plastic Waste. More
and habits. The ultimate solutions will than 40 global and regional chemical compa-
involve a combination of judicious consump- nies, packagers, consumer goods manufactur-
tion and disposal measures as well as the ers, and waste managers (supported by BCG)
development of cost-competitive and envi- have pledged to invest up to $1.5 billion in
ronmentally friendly alternatives. Most plastic waste management infrastructure in
observers would agree, however, that these Southeast Asia, where the plastic litter and
changes are years away. In the meantime— leakage problem is most acute. This move
over the next decade or two—we can imple- clearly signals that the private sector is ready
ment circular solutions to reuse or repurpose to scale up efforts to combat one of the most
plastic waste in the most efficient way. pressing environmental issues of our times.
Plastics regeneration technologies such as While this is a credible start that may yet cat-
pyrolysis will also play a part in these efforts alyze further investments in the cause, we
and are technologically and financially viable still have a way to go before we find a com-
alternatives. prehensive, definitive solution.

24 | A Circular Solution to Plastic Waste

 FOR FURTHER READING

BCG publishes regularly on the What Companies Can Learn from The Role of Green Projects in
subjects of sustainability and total World Leaders in Societal Impact Scaling Climate Investments
societal impact. Some previous A report by Boston Consulting Group, An article by Boston Consulting Group,
publications include the following: April 2019 February 2018

The Economic Case for Ten Steps Toward the Circular

Combating Climate Change Economy
A report by Boston Consulting Group, An article by Boston Consulting Group,
September 2018 February 2018

Total Societal Impact: A New

Lens for Strategy
A report by Boston Consulting Group,
October 2017

Boston Consulting Group | 25

NOTE TO THE READER

About the Authors Miriam Benedi Díaz is a senior For Further Contact
Holger Rubel is a managing knowledge analyst for total soci- Holger Rubel
director and senior partner in etal impact and sustainability in Managing Director and Senior Partner
the Frankfurt office of Boston the firm’s Madrid office. You BCG Frankfurt
Consulting Group. He is the firm’s may contact her by email at +49 69 91 50 20
global topic leader for green energy [email protected]. [email protected]
and an expert on total societal
impact and sustainability. You Acknowledgments Udo Jung
may contact him by email at The authors are grateful to Kanika Senior Advisor
[email protected]. Gupta and Andres Morales for their BCG Frankfurt
contributions to developing the +49 69 91 50 20
Udo Jung was a senior partner at content of this report. They also [email protected]
the firm for more than two dec- thank Katherine Andrews, Siobhan
ades focusing on chemicals and Donovan, Kim Friedman, Abby Clint Follette
polymers. He is now a senior Garland, Frank Müller-Pierstorff, Managing Director and Partner
advisor to BCG and a member of and Shannon Nardi for editorial BCG Houston
the supervisory board of a company and production support. +1 713 286 7000
focusing on innovative, viable [email protected]
solutions to push the boundaries
for mechanical recycling of multi- Alexander Meyer zum Felde
layer, multipolymer films. You Associate Director, Total Societal
may contact him by email at Impact & Sustainability & Circular
[email protected]. Economy
BCG Hamburg
Clint Follette is a managing +49 40 30 99 60
director and partner in the firm’s [email protected]
Houston office and a leader of
the petrochemical sector. You Santosh Appathurai
may contact him by email at Principal
[email protected]. BCG Houston
+1 713 286 7000
Alexander Meyer zum Felde is an [email protected]
associate director for total societal
impact & sustainability & circular Miriam Benedi Díaz
economy in BCG’s Hamburg office. Senior Knowledge Analyst
You may contact him by email at BCG Madrid
[email protected]. +34 91 520 61 00
[email protected]
Santosh Appathurai is a princi-
pal in the firm’s Houston office.
He is a core member of BCG’s
energy practice area and works
on total societal impact and
sustainability strategy projects.
You may contact him by email at
[email protected].

26 | A Circular Solution to Plastic Waste

© Boston Consulting Group 2019. All rights reserved.

For information or permission to reprint, please contact BCG at [email protected].

To find the latest BCG content and register to receive e-alerts on this topic or others, please visit bcg.com.
 
Follow Boston Consulting Group on Facebook and Twitter.
7/19
bcg.com