Plastics rubbish and the developing world: Lost petrochemicals demand and the new service-led approach

Business, China, Company Strategy, Economics, Environment, Europe, European petrochemicals, Olefins, Polyolefins, Styrenics, Sustainability

By John Richardson

IT WAS billed as a liberating product, something that brought a little luxury to the lives of the very poor. That’s how the single-serve pouch was marketed. But nobody thought enough about the environmental impact of selling single measures of say shampoo in these pouches to people in countries such as India who were too poor to buy a whole bottle of shampoo.

The same applies to numerous other single-use plastic applications. The crisp packet, or potato-chip packet if you’re American, also falls into the same category. Eight layers of foil and different polymers made the packets very attractive design-wise and very light weight, which of course reduces transportation costs.

Single-serve pouches, crisp packets and many other single-use applications for polymers are impossible to mechanically recycle, as separating the different layers of polymers and other materials cannot be done.

The great hope is that this problem will be resolved by chemicals recycling. Some 15 technologies are being developed which aim to produce commercial-scale fuels and naphtha by reducing plastic rubbish back to its constituent levels. An alternative approach, being pioneered by INEOS, involves turning polystyrene (PS) back into styrene feedstock.

If commercial-scale breakthroughs are made in chemicals recycling this could change everything. Single-serve pouches, crisp packets and much of the other mechanically-unrecyclable plastic detritus of modern life could in theory be directly dumped into chemicals recycling units with limited need for separation. The betting is that there will be major breakthroughs in chemicals recycling within the next three years.

But it is estimated that some 2bn people out of the global population of 7.7bn have no access to any rubbish collection system at all. They have no choice but to either burn plastic, with all its attendant environment problems, are more likely dump it into rivers or the oceans in the way they used to dump biodegradable wrapping materials such as banana skins.

This explains the often-quoted statistic that 10 rivers are responsible for 90% of the plastic pollution in the world’s oceans, with all of the rivers flowing through the developing world.

You can see how this might work out:

  • The EU develops a highly sophisticated network of chemicals recycling plants, made profitable by plastic taxes under the Extended Producer Responsibility scheme. No longer will it be a case of “out of sight out of mind” through plastic rubbish being shipped to the developing world. Plastic waste will instead be dealt with locally. The need for local landfill sites will be greatly reduced, along with plastic rubbish in the open environment.
  • But in the developing world, many people will still lack even a rubbish collection system. And think of the scale of the collection problem across a continent such as Asia with its many different languages, cultures and systems of government. Think of Indonesia with its 17,508 islands and its 54.7m kilometres of coastline. Think of the Philippines with its 7,641 islands and 36.2m kilometres of coastline.

A side effect of extreme poverty

One of the side effects of extreme poverty in the developing world is that there is a vast army of people which makes a living by collecting plastic rubbish. In India alone the “rag pickers” are thought to number between 1.5m and 4m.

This has led to plastic recycling rates of 60-70% in India. “Needs must”, rather than environment pressures, has in India created perhaps the world’s most comprehensive plastics recycling system. This was established long before most of us woke up to the environmental hazards created by plastic waste.

But here’s the thing: Most of the millions of people who live off collecting plastic waste mainly only pick up plastic bottles, usually made from high-density polyethylene (HDPE) and polyethylene terephthalate, because they are easy to identify and by weight give them the best returns.

Also, well-established recycling systems for plastic bottles make it worthwhile to pick up the bottles – i.e. the rubbish collectors usually have someone willing to buy what they collect. Not so with single-serve pouches and crisp packets etc. because as they cannot be recycled.

Perhaps the developing world’s rubbish collectors can be incentivised to pick up single-serve pouches, crisp packets and fragments of plastic film used for food wrapping. But the volume that would have to be collected to make a difference would be huge, as would building an entirely new incentive system for rubbish collectors across the whole of Asia and the rest of the developing world.

If we carry on as we are, volumes of unrecyclable plastic waste can only grow as the world gets richer and hundreds of millions more people are lifted out of extreme poverty.

So, what’s the answer? Stop making some end-use products. The polymers industry needs to take the lead in voluntarily stopping production in order to be seen as part of the solution to this crisis, otherwise applications will be banned anyway by legislators. The laggard producers will also be taxed out competitiveness.

Either 12.2m tonnes or 33.5m tonnes of lost demand

If we stop making some products how do we continue to deliver modern-day products at affordable prices?

Let’s stick with shampoo as an example and the single-serve pouch. Instead of selling single-use portions of shampoo in pouches, used HDPE shampoo bottles could be used repeatedly. Someone could take a shampoo bottle to a store and buy whatever shampoo they can afford from a large dispensing bottle.

Perhaps, though, the answer is to redesign single-serve pouches to make them more recyclable, provided collection problems can also be overcome. Maybe I am wrong here and the single-serve pouch can be made recyclable.

For the polymer companies, the inevitable outcome is less-than-expected demand growth. The only question is how much less demand.

Let’s take linear-low-density PE as an example, some 55% of which is used in single-use applications. Our base case sees annual global demand growth averaging 4.8% from now until 2025. But as end-use applications disappear for LLDPE my two downsides see growth at 3.8% per annum in the best case and 3% in the worst case.

The best case would involve a strong industry response to the recycling challenge. Yes, demand would be lost as some applications disappear. But demand can also be protected by redesigning multi-layer packaging so single types of polymers and no aluminium, thereby enabling recycling. In this outcome, global consumption of LLDPE would be 12.2m tonnes less than our base case on a cumulative basis during the whole forecast period.

If the industry doesn’t respond my guesstimate is that annual demand growth falls to 2%. This would mean cumulative consumption at 33.5m tonnes less than our base case. LLDPE would see a major market share loss to other materials such a paper and aluminium.

It is up to the polymers industry. Either it responds in the right way or it doesn’t respond. But in either event, loss of expected demand growth is, as I said, inevitable as we move to a lower growth world – and to a world where polymer producers need to be more service-based. Providing environmental solutions rather than endlessly building new capacity is where the answer lies.

PREVIOUS POST

Little prospects of genuine US and China deal leave US petrochemicals exports very vulnerable

11/10/2019

As always, this blog post expresses my own personal views and these are not the ...

Learn more
NEXT POST

Surge in US polyethylene exports occurs as China growth slows, Asian margins turn negative

16/10/2019

By John Richardson PERHAPS ONE could argue, but I certainly wouldn’t, that in ...

Learn more
More posts
China 2020 polyethylene demand 4.1m tonnes lower on single-use plastics ban and coronavirus
27/01/2020

By John Richardson CHINA was supposed to be the one polyethylene (PE) market we could all depend on ...

Read
China single-use plastic bans: Polyethylene imports 68m tonnes lower in 2020-2030
24/01/2020

By John Richardson THE good news from a “business as usual” perspective is that China’...

Read
China’s bans on single-use plastics: The impact on polyethylene demand
21/01/2020

    By John Richardson DON’T SAY I didn’t tell you. It has always been just a question...

Read
Why the trade deal is much ado about almost nothing
20/01/2020

These are, as always, my personal views and do not express the views of ICIS. Thanks By John Richard...

Read
The polymers industry, climate change and a call to action
13/01/2020

By John Richardson MUCH OF the debate about plastics and the environment is, I fear, missing the big...

Read
Why President Trump, unlike with Iran, will find it harder to shift course on China
10/01/2020

As always, these are my personal views only and do not represent the views of ICIS. Thank you  ...

Read
US and Iran conflict in a world of declining growth and fragile supply chains
08/01/2020

By John Richardson THINK of the Fukushima disaster in 2011 and multiply its impact on global supply ...

Read
Iran and the US: Assessing the risks for petrochemicals and the global economy
06/01/2020

As always, these are my personal views only and don’t reflect the views of ICIS By John Richar...

Read

Market Intelligence

ICIS provides market intelligence that help businesses in the energy, petrochemical and fertilizer industries.

Learn more

Analytics

Across the globe, ICIS consultants provide detailed analysis and forecasting for the petrochemical, energy and fertilizer markets.

Learn more

Specialist Services

Find out more about how our specialist consulting services, events, conferences and training courses can help your teams.

Learn more

ICIS Insight

From our news service to our thought-leadership content, ICIS experts bring you the latest news and insight, when you need it.

Learn more