Instead of the “inferior” approach of mechanically turning plastics back into granules for re-use, the association would prefer to see plastics burned or chemically treated.
The study, carried out by the Darmstadt Institute of Ecology in Germany and released this week said that in the majority of cases, feedstock recycling – the chemical reprocessing of plastics to their individual components – and energy recovery are the “most beneficial methods” for the recovery of plastics in cars that have reached the end of their lives.
About eight million ELVs arise in Europe each year. Under the European ELV Directive, car producers will be responsible for recovery targets of 85% of all ELVs by weight by January 2006 (minimum 80% recycling) and 95% by January 2015 (minimum 85% recycling). About 11% by weight of modern cars are plastics.
APME, the voice of the polymer producing industry believes the German study provides “the first quantitative data for the comparison of recycling and energy recovery options for plastics parts in end-of-life vehicles”.
Axel Kistenmacher, responsible for the automotive sector in APME's Technical and Environmental Centre, said: “The use of plastics in cars is steadily growing and by 2015 we expected that some 1.3 million tonnes of plastics waste will come from 12 million ELVs. This study will help to facilitate the development of technologies that support the reuse, recycling and energy recovery of these car parts.”
Components
The study compared the eco-efficiency performance of six waste management options for plastics – mechanical recycling (in which plastic parts are shredded and compounded before being extruded to produce plastic granules), blast furnace, cement kiln, syngas production, waste combustion and landfill. It focussed on seven different vehicle components – bumpers, seat cushions, intake manifolds, wash-liquid tanks, air ducts, headlamp lenses and mirror housings.
The report concluded that:
- Mechanical recycling is the method of choice for large, easily accessible, mono-material parts.
- Mechanical recycling of a plastic part “often results in recycled plastic granules with inferior technical properties”.
- For most parts studied, feedstock recycling and energy recovery are the methods of choice.
- Manufacturers should optimise plastic parts for the use-phase of a vehicle, rather than just the end-of-life phase.
Whether feedstock or chemical recycling should be regarded as true recycling has been the subject of some debate over the years. The option presented as the most likely “chemical recycling” option for mixed plastics by an earlier report from the TNO Industrial Research was burning it in a blast furnace.
In another producer responsibility area, that of packaging waste, whether or not energy recovery should count towards recovery targets is under review. Should it be decided by the European Commission that it should not, there may be implications on it use in recovery targets for ELVs.
For more information on the study, Recovery options for plastic parts from end-of-life vehicles – an eco-efficiency assessment, visit the APME website.
Register for free to comment