At last week’s Plastics Recycling Conference, the end-of-life challenges related to film and flexible packaging were referenced throughout a number of sessions, with one specifically focused on the topic: “Film and Flexibles Volumes, Collection & Processing: Scaling National Solutions in the U.S. and Canada.” Of all the plastics used in brand packaging, film and flexible packaging are the most difficult to recycle, with the former recycled only through store drop-off (in the U.S.), and the latter unable to be recycled at all, unless redesigned as mono-material.
Presenting at the “Film and Flexible Volumes” session were Kate Eagles, program director for The Association of Plastic Recyclers (APR), and Charles David Mathieu-Poulin, lead, Governmental and External Relations, Éco Entrerprises Québec (EEQ), who shared their respective organizations’ efforts to find solutions to the film/flexible packaging recycling issue.
 | Read this related article from the Plastics Recycling Conference, “Plastics Industry Association Educates Consumers, Policymakers on Recycling” |
In both the U.S. and Canada, EPR legislation is driving the need for a significant increase in collection of these materials, as well as increased use of PCR in new film and flexible packaging. For example, under Canada’s EPR regulations, dictated by Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC), Canada’s version of the EPR, 40% of film and flexible packaging must be recycled in Quebec by 2027, and 25% in Ontario by 2026. “We estimate that the recycling rate is currently at 4%, so we have three years to get from 4% to 40% and 25%,” said Mathieu-Poulin.
Other drivers include ambitious voluntary commitments by brands made through the Ellen MacArthur Foundation and the U.S. and Canada Plastic Pacts, as well as consumer preferences for more recyclable packaging.
APR’s primary mission is to increase plastics recycling. In her presentation, Eagles shared results on a new study conducted by APR and Eunomia Research and Consulting on the potential for advanced recycling to increase recycling of residential film and flexible packaging (abbreviated as FFP by APR). Mathieu-Poulin’s talk was an overview of Canada’s PRFLEX initiative, aimed at improving the recovery and recycling rates of flexible plastic packaging (referred to as FPP by PRFLEX) from households.
Advanced recycling’s potential for film and flexible packaging recycling
APR typically looks at mechanical recycling solutions. But in 2021, it established a Chemical Recycling Research Working Group focused on identifying the key steps needed for chemical recycling processes, in particular, pyrolysis, to play an effective role in the recycling of plastic products.
Said Eagles, who is a member of the working group, “We are supportive of chemical recycling technologies that complement mechanical recycling by converting post-consumer plastics back into recycled resins or resin precursors for new plastics products.”
The working group’s recently released report, “How to Scale the Recycling of Flexible Film Packaging: Modeling Pyrolysis’ Role in Collection, Quantity and Costs of a Comprehensive Solution,” looks at the consumer-facing side of FFP and where those synergies might be between pyrolysis and the recovery of post-consumer film and flexible packaging.
Said Eagles, the report focused on household FFP, as it’s the main target of state and federal policy, and because of the complexity of the mixed material streams involved. It focused on pyrolysis because the technology is scaling relatively quickly and, according to Eunomia, has the potential to process an FFP stream that consists of 85% plus polyolefin waste.
In discussing the report’s results, Eagles emphasized that they are based on assumptions—around better packaging design, more policy, more voluntary activity, and improved sortation by 2030. “I want to be clear that this is not a primer for how to do it, it’s just sort of a ‘what if,’” she said.
Where we are now; where we could be in 2030
Looking at current estimated material flows, Eagles shared that there are about 12 million tons of FFP currently available in the U.S. market. Approximately 124,000 tons of that is residential PE film, 90% of which is recovered through store drop-off. Three million tons, made up of materials such as trash bags, are not currently being targeted for recovery. That leaves 9 million tons. Commercial FFP makes up 3.7 million tons, which is not included in the report. The resulting 5.3 million tons are residential film, comprising mixed polyolefins, mono-PE, or mono-PP, that can be recovered through pyrolysis (3 million tons) or mechanical recycling (2.3 million tons).
Estimates for 2030 material flows are where assumptions were made: “We asked, if half of that material that’s not targetable now, because it’s multi-material or multi-resin, was converted to a mono-PP, a mono-PE, or a polyolefin mix of some sort, what would that look like?” said Eagles. “We have four states with EPR. Now, let’s say another 15 states adopt EPR laws. And let’s say we have some additional voluntary facilities.”
Given these assumptions, the residential FFP stream is expected to grow to an estimated 7.1 million tons (versus 5.3 million currently). Under this future scenario, 5.6 million tons could be available for pyrolysis, with 2.2 million tons the result of design changes. Fifty-nine percent of that could also potentially be mechanically recycled, since the model anticipates that it will be mono-PE or mono-PP.
| | Read related article, “Emerging Recycling Infrastructure to Address Flexible Plastic Film Growth” |
“There are a lot of assumptions made here,” said Eagles. “But looking collection, there are currently about 124,000 tons of household FFP. In this scenario, it would be up to 930,000 tons if all these things were in place. So while this is a theoretical assumption, what it does show us is that the recovery of residential film is not easy or inexpensive, but we kind of understand what has to happen. We understand what parts of the system would have to work together.
“Chemical recycling technologies like pyrolysis are one step in a large process, and like any reprocessors’ system, including mechanical, the material collection will not scale without changes in package design, collection, sortation, probably with some policy assist, and consumer participation. And those various levers will be needed to see systematic change. So I think what this report does is set us up to put the pieces in place for a lot more questions and a lot more work.”
Canada seeks to optimize film and flexible packaging recycling
To understand what’s needed to create a “perfect recycling system for flexibles” in Canada, a group of circularity leaders came together in May 2023 to form the PRFLEX initiative. Among the members are the Canada Plastics Pact (CPP), the Chemistry Industry Association of Canada (CIAC), Circular Materials, the Circular Plastics Taskforce (CPT), Éco Enterprises Québec (EEQ), Recycle BC, and The Film & Flexibles Recycling Coalition of The Recycling Partnership in the U.S.
As Mathieu-Poulin explained in his presentation, PRFLEX began with four goals. These were to understand baseline data to determine the percentage of FPP packaging currently being collected and recycled, according to format and type, in each province; to identify infrastructure gaps in material recovery facilities (MRFs) and at recyclers; to propose new technologies and optimize processes to increase capture rates, improve sorting, and produce higher-quality PCR resins; and to apply learnings by installing and measuring the performance of the better-suited equipment in select partner facilities. From this, it produced a report based on its results.
At 47%, FPP makes up nearly half of the packaging in Canada—a number that’s growing 4.2% year over year. “So we can’t really say that it’s not something that’s a big issue, we definitely have to deal with it,” Mathieu-Poulin noted. “I think a lot of people know the great sustainability advantages of flexibles—less carbon footprint, much easier for transport, it’s great for preserving shelf life and increasing the lifetime of food. But we know there are a lot of other challenges, obviously the recycling of it.”
Report findings focus on collection and sortation
In contrast to the U.S., 70% of Canadian households have access to curbside recycling of PE-based FPP. However, what PRFLEX learned in its conversations with MRFs is that “loose, flexible plastic packaging is probably the most annoying material for them to deal with,” said Mathieu-Poulin.
Due to its light weight and because it’s two-dimensional, FPP overlaps with other materials on the conveyor belts. Also because of its 2D nature, it gets sorted with paper, contaminating the sorted material. It also accumulates around rotating sortation equipment and can become contaminated with organic matter. “And of course, it also requires a lot of handling,” said Mathieu-Poulin. “So imagine if you have to have either a robot or a human pick for flexibles. To do one 750-kg bale of flexibles is between 75,000 to 225,000 film units, so that makes it very complicated.”
In looking at collection of FPP in order to build a collection hierarchy, Mathieu-Poulin said that the worst way to collect it is the way Canada is currently collecting it, which is single-stream collection. “It’s less costly and simpler to collect, but maybe not so much for a MRF,” he said.
One solution PRFLEX is looking at is bag-in-bag, which is being done in some areas in the U.S. In this scenario, households put all their FPP in one bag and place it in the bin, which means MRFs need to pick just one bag rather than multiple picks. Another solution is depots, which is being done in British Columbia and comprises a system similar to what the U.S. does with store drop-off.
PRFLEX also looked at ideas to improve systems at the MRF level. This includes more equipment at the start of a MRF sorting line to remove the film, or quality control equipment for the paper stream to remove contaminants. “Obviously, some MRFs are not in the best shape or don’t have enough room to add more equipment or change their set up,” said MP. “So the next best scenario would be to have new MRFs built specifically to handle film.”
Dual-stream collection, which is being done in one-third of Canada’s provinces, may also provide a solution. With dual-stream, the collection of paper and FPP rotates week-to-week or households are supplied with different bins for each material. “But again, dual-stream is more complicated,” said MP. “It requires a lot more consumer education and a lot more cost.”
Recommendations for the future of FPP recycling in Canada
In summary, through its research, PRFLEX came up with nine high-level recommendations to move from the 30,000 tons PE-based FPP currently recycled per year to 100,000 tons of FPP of all types by 2027:
1. Aim for better harmonization of FPP through the implementation of design for recyclability measures following established industry guidelines.
2. Through regulatory reporting and waste studies, improve the understanding of FPP composition and market.
3. Accept all FPP in curbside collection and make MRFs responsible for capturing FPP, and not for separating FPP by resin or type.
4. Set up dedicated collection of FPP in ICI (industrial, commercial, and institutional).
5. Where not already implemented, evaluate the feasibility of dual-stream collection.
6. When dual stream is not suitable, evaluate the feasibility of building new single-stream MRFs designed to sort FPP more efficiently.
7. If building a new single-stream MRF is not feasible, implement solutions for reducing loose FPP, such as depots and bag-in-bag collection programs.
8. Develop new capacities for FPP separation at reclaimers and implement emerging sorting and recycling technologies.
9. Through supply chain collaboration, support the building of viable end-markets for all types of collected FPP, including hard-to-recycle materials.
On the subject of chemical recycling, Mathieu-Poulin said, “We are only using mechanical recycling right now, although we have three or four companies that do chemical recycling. We will need the help of chemical recycling technology, because some of the FPP that’s going to be collected can’t be recycled through mechanical means.” PW
