Extrusion International 4-2025-USA

41 Extrusion International 4/2025 produced worldwide, according to Plastics Europe, but the share of recycled materials continues to be low: only 8.7% of plastics were recycled – most of them by mechanical recycling – whereas the lion’s share was in- cinerated or landfilled. This is happening even though recyclates hold an enormous potential. Their produc- tion requires markedly less energy than the production of new products from fossil raw materials, thereby sub - stantially reducing CO 2 emissions. On top of this, their use increases supply security – a factor of rising impor- tance in times of geopolitical crises. However, recycling is technically demanding – and of - ten more expensive than producing new plastics. After all, post-consumer plastics have to be sorted, cleaned and prepared with great effort. In addition, the legal requirements are strict, high-quality recyclates scarce and many processes energy-intensive – all resulting in higher production costs compared to new plastics. “But nobody wants to pay higher costs,” stresses Ulrich Rei - fenhäuser, Chairman of the K Advisory Board. “Plastics are so successful because they are so much better than other materials. But the transition to the circular econ- omy costs money. This cost issue will not be overcome without regulatory requirements.” However, the responses to the question of how the transition to a functioning circular economy will work vary from country to country. While other nations focus on voluntary commitments and market-oriented solutions, Europe regulates by law. Strategies such as the “Circular Economy Action Plan” (CEAP) and regulations such as the Packaging and Pack- agingWaste Regulation (PPWR) and the Single-Use Pack- aging Directive (SUPD) drive the transition to circularity by means of recycling rate, mandatory recyclate content and Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR). The PPWR shows how this works: since 2025 single-use PET bottles have to contain a minimum of 25% recycled plastic and this percentage will go up 30% by 2030. For manufac- turers such as Coca-Cola or Nestlé this means rebuild- ing their supply chains, sourcing high-quality recyclates, adapting production – otherwise they run the risk of a sales ban. The SUPD is also having an impact: in Lithuania the return rate of PET bottles shot up from 34% to 92% after the introduction of a deposit system – in as little as two years. Companies face major challenges in the pro- cess: the limited availability of high-quality recyclates, the technical complexity of changing over to a recycling- friendly design – not forgetting the short deadlines set for complying with these often complex requirements. Chemical ingredients are also increasingly moving into the focus of the EU. Especially disputed is the handling of PFAS since a ban could make recycling considerably more difficult – because plenty of waste plastics would then be classified as contaminated and eliminated from the circular economy. Wolfgang Große Entrup, Direc - tor General of VCI, therefore warns against a blanket ban: “With each individual substance banned in the EU the risk grows that more of our industry players move to less regulated regions. This, however, does not solve the original problem.” Accounting for 53% of global plastics production Asia is the main player – and the main source of plastic waste. While some countries pursue ambitious recycling strategies, others lack the basic infrastructure. For a long time, China was the biggest importer of plastic waste, now the country is recharting its course. By adopting its “National Sword Policy” the country has stopped the imports of unsorted plastic waste and is now driving the expansion of own recycling structures. The 14th 5-year plan focuses on modern collection and sort- ing systems and promotes both mechanical and chemical recycling. By 2035 the industry aims to be largely decar- bonised and have transited to closed material cycles. This strategy is accompanied by the “Circular Economy Pro- motion Law”, which obliges companies to take back and safely dispose of specific products, and the establishment of the state-owned “China Resources Recycling Group” with the aim of centrally controlling the transformation. Japan and South Korea are among the pioneers in cir- cular economy – not least due to clear political objectives and early-adopted legislation. In Japan the “Container and Packaging Recycling Act” has already obliged com- panies since the 1990s to participate in return and recy- cling systems. This is supported by the “Plastic Resource Circulation Act” adopted in 2022, which promotes re - cyclate use and prescribes detailed recycling plans for plastic products. South Korea pursues a systemic, technology-driven approach via its new “Act for Promotion of Transition to a Circular Economy Society” (APTCES): binding recy- cling rates, clear requirements for sustainable product design as well as targeted regulation for hard-to-recycle products. In addition, companies wanting to place new recycling technologies on the market, are temporarily exempted from restrictions. UnlikeEurope, these two countries arebankingon clear responsibilities, hands-on implementation and targeted innovation funding rather than detailed regulation. This approach is supported by high social acceptance and re- sponsibility assumed across the board when it comes to waste separation and saving resources, for example. In India the “Plastic Waste Management Rules” (PWMR) oblige companies to take back plastic waste. Despite this important step insufficient infrastructure and the varying regional applications of the rules re- main a major challenge for a nation-wide implementa- tion. Similar problems exist in Vietnam, where an EPR law was introduced in 2022. It holds manufacturers and importers accountable for seeing to the recyclability of their products. In Thailand the “Plastic Waste Management Road- map 2030” pursues the aim of recycling or energetically using 100% of plastic waste by 2027. There are local ini- tiatives in Indonesia but there is no comprehensive na- tional strategy. One objective is to drastically reduce the plastic waste that ends up in the sea by 2040. Despite the progress made in these countries the re- gional fragmentation of waste management and the lack of infrastructure continue to pose a major chal- lenge. Raising people’s awareness and stronger indus-