Pursuing the objectives of the European Green Deal in a Clean Industrial Deal, create a new law on the circular economy to intensify the use of secondary raw materials and optimize public procurement.

The FEhS Building Materials Institute considers the planned measures in the EU Commission’s Political Guidelines 2024-2029 to be trendsetting. In many respects, they are in line with the FEhS Institute’s core demands for sustainable resource management and the key points of a legal opinion on the EU Public Procurement Directive commissioned by the FEhS Institute and the European association EUROSLAG in 2020.

The legal opinion on the EU Public Procurement Directive calls for specifications for a circular public procurement system, such as the comprehensive approval of secondary building materials and their conditional preference in public procurement. Among other things, the fundamental importance of environmental criteria in the award of public contracts should be enshrined, “aspects of environmental protection, the circular economy and resource conservation” should be mandatory in the specification of services and the non-approval of secondary materials should be justified in the contract award notices.

Thomas Reiche, Managing Director of the FEhS Institute and Chairman of EUROSLAG: “We are optimistic about the guidelines presented by the EU Commission. This is considerable progress compared to 2020, when the objectives formulated in our report were not heard by the EU Commission. We are working with our partners at all levels to ensure that these plans are put into practice.”

The FEhS Institute has been campaigning for many years at the political interfaces for improved framework conditions and the sustainable use of products containing slag. Building materials and fertilizers from the steel industry have been making an important contribution to the conservation of natural resources for many decades. In the period from 2000 to 2023 alone, the use ferrous slag avoided the extraction of around 1.2 billion tons of natural rock across Europe.

Whilst the WEEE Forum acknowledges that much more waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE) must be separately collected for responsible management and to recover (critical) materials, we also believe that it highlights the need to thoroughly revise waste legislation.

Under Directive 2012/19/EU on WEEE, the minimum collection rate to be achieved annually by the Member States is set at 65% of the average weight of electrical and electronic equipment placed on the market in the three preceding years in the Member State concerned, or alternatively 85% of WEEE generated on the territory of that Member State. The majority of Member States failed to collect sufficient WEEE separately and therefore missed the EU collection target. The Commission says that “Member States should boost their implementation efforts in order to meet the abovementioned obligations”.

“Whilst it is undeniably true that more WEEE must be separately collected, in view of proper re-use, repair or recycling, and that waste legislation must be adequately implemented and enforced, Member States’ failure in meeting the minimum collection rates underscores the urgency of a thorough rethink of waste legislation and its implementation and the importance of a reform of the Extended Producer Responsibility principle along #allactors principles” says Pascal Leroy, Director General of the WEEE Forum.

Over the past twenty years, PROs have invested millions in measures, chief among them were awareness campaigns and collection infrastructure, driving up not only collection volumes but also collected kilogram per inhabitant. Yet despite all these investments, after more than twenty years of WEEE legislation, Bulgaria and Slovakia are reportedly the only Member States that meet the minimum collection rate of 65% as defined by Directive 2012/19/EU on WEEE – see the Annex of total collection rate in the EU in 2021. The average collection rate in the EU barely exceeds 45%.

During the last few years, the WEEE Forum has consistently argued that the minimum collection rate methodology is not meaningful, and therefore not fit for purpose, for three distinct reasons: it has a perverse effect, it is ill-suited for circularity strategies, and it is distortive.

Perverse

The minimum collection rate has a perverse effect: the more WEEE is disposed of, the easier it is for that Member State to meet the minimum collection rate. Countries where people do not return their end-of-life appliances to a collection point to have them repaired or recycled, but repair them themselves, or give them a second life by sharing them with relatives, will generate a smaller volume of WEEE and therefore show lower collection rates. The EU seeks to promote circularity initiatives, not a pro forma higher collection rate.

Ill-suited for circularity

In an age where we strive to make our economy more circular, the current minimum collection rate fails to measure progress towards circularity in terms of products being reused or products’ lives being extended. The current methodology does not measure reduction of consumption, consumers’ hoarding, and circular consumer behaviour, which would be constituents of a much more powerful set of circularity metrics.

Distortive

The placed-on-market method looks at the preceding three years and does not take account of the full lifecycle of electrical and electronic equipment. Some products, notably photovoltaics and air conditioning equipment, washing machines and refrigerators, have a lifetime of, respectively, minimum 20-25 and 10–15 years. Therefore, the 65% minimum rate based on the preceding three years is meaningless. In the Member States where photovoltaics and other household appliances are clustered in the same product category, that category fails to reach the minimum collection rate due to the long lifespan of photovoltaics, which in turn induces the competent authorities to issue penalties and requiring PROs to collect higher volumes of non-photovoltaic products in order to reach the targeted volumes for photovoltaic panels. Such penalties distort the market and the principle of Extended Producer Responsibility and are therefore unacceptable.

A draft final study supporting the evaluation of Directive 2012/19/EU, authored by a consortium of Ramboll, Umweltbundesamt and Öko-Institut in 2023, came to a similar conclusion: “Current calculation methodology usually applied are incoherent in so far as the long lifespan of some products are not taken into account”.

Call for action

For all the above reasons, the WEEE Forum suggests the following:

A. Revise the Waste Framework and WEEE legislation
Pursuant to the most recent amendment to Directive 2012/19/EU, the impact assessment in view of a revision of the Directive must evaluate, inter alia,

• elements related to the waste hierarchy,
• the obligation not to burden consumers with disproportionate costs,
• provisions ensuring full implementation and enforcement of this Directive, in particular with regard to adequate collection targets,
• measures aimed at preventing illegal trade of WEEE,
• a new ‘photovoltaic panels’ category.

B. Design and develop circularity metrics
The minimum WEEE collection rate methodology must measure all aspects of the circular economy, such as reduction of consumption, the global economy, market trends, consumers’ hoarding, and circular consumer behaviour, which would be constituents of a much more powerful set of circularity metrics. Legislation must identify alternative performance indicators more akin to a circular economy.

C. Evaluate, improve and harmonise Eurostat system of waste statistics
The validity and robustness of the Eurostat system of waste statistics must be made subject to a thorough, critical evaluation and revision, involving consultation of stakeholders.

D. Put the #allactors principle into practice
It takes a village to solve the e-waste problem; e-waste is a societal challenge. The 2023 amendment to the Directive says that “provisions ensuring full implementation and enforcement of this Directive, specifically concerning adequate collection targets, as well as preventing illegal trade of WEEE” must be assessed. The Member States must enforce the legal obligations of all actors and an EU enforcement agency must be empowered to audit the Member States obligations. The #allactors principle, underlining the importance of collective, collaborative action and good governance, must lie at the heart of the revised Extended Producer Responsibility policy approach: all entities that have access to e-waste are subject to minimum legal obligations and actively collaborate towards responsible operations.

E. Integrate EPR waste objectives in the wider framework of materials management
Beyond the Waste Framework legislation, the EU is in need of a policy framework for managing materials through the lens of circularity. We cannot achieve climate goals without becoming more circular. Reducing dependence on materials will contribute to our resilience.

The EU also bases its policies on the SDGs. Eurostat has analysed the extent to which the EU is on track to meet the 2030 targets. The results are rather sobering.

Sustainability goals have long played an important role in EU policy. The United Nations’ 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, with its 17 Sustainable Development Goals, has given new impetus to global efforts to achieve sustainable development. The sustainability goals were also at the heart of the von der Leyen Commission. With this report, Eurostat aims to show where the EU currently stands in relation to these goals.

No poverty

The first Sustainable Development Goal is not only to eradicate extreme poverty, but also to halve poverty in all its dimensions by 2030. The number of people at risk of poverty in the EU is to be reduced by at least 15 million by 2030, compared to 2019. At least 5 million of these people are children. However, considerable efforts are still needed to reach the 2030 target. Although the number had fallen by 2.9% in 2022 compared to 2017, there has been little change since 2019.

Zero hunger

The aim is to eradicate hunger and all forms of malnutrition. However, the EU faces the opposite problem, as more than half of the EU population is overweight and one in seven is obese. This is mainly due to unhealthy diets that are high in energy, fat, trans fats and saturated fats. Physical inactivity and sociological and genetic factors also play a role. Obesity is a major public health issue in the EU.

Sustainable agricultural production is a key element for ensuring a fair, healthy and environmentally friendly food supply. The European agricultural sector needs to become economically sustainable. An important indicator of this is labour productivity, which was 34.2% higher in 2023 than in 2015, and organic farming is on the rise across the EU. However, the pace of expansion needs to be stepped up to reach the 2030 target. The current share is around 9.9%, whereby the target for 2030 is 25%. The EU is on track to meet its targets for reducing the use of pesticides and the sale of antimicrobials for use on animals.

In 2022, the agriculture sector accounted for just under 11% of total greenhouse gas emissions in the EU. Since 2017, emissions caused by agriculture have been falling much more slowly than overall emissions.

Good health and well-being

In the EU, life expectancy has continued to rise in recent decades, although the rate of increase has slowed recently, partly due to the pandemic. However, life expectancy alone does not indicate whether people are living healthy lives.

The pandemic has also had a significant impact on mortality rates in Member States, with people over 60 and those from disadvantaged groups particularly affected. Between January 2020 and February 2023, 1.74 million more deaths were registered in the EU and EFTA regions than the average for the years 2016 to 2019.

Quality education

The SDGs state that by 2030, all children should have access to quality early childhood development, care, and education. They should also be able to complete free, equitable and quality primary and secondary education. According to Eurostat, participation in early childhood education and care has deteriorated since 2021. While a rate of 93.4% was reached in 2020, it dropped to 92.5% in 2021. The EU target is 96% by 2030.

Another target is to reduce the share of early school leavers to below 9% by 2030. This rate has been falling steadily since 2002 and stood at 9.5% in 2023. The target is therefore likely to be met. In addition, the share of people with tertiary education has increased significantly since 2002. The target for 2030 is 45% and already stood at 43.1% in 2023.

Basic digital skills are also becoming more important. Here, the proportion of 16-74 year olds with at least basic digital skills is targeted to rise to 80% by 2030. In 2023, however, the proportion was only 55.6%.

Gender equality

Ensuring high employment rates for both men and women is one of the EU’s main objectives. However, there are still large differences in the rates for men and women, and by 2030 the gender employment gap needs to be at least halved compared to 2019. Although women are better educated than men in most EU countries, they are still paid less on average. Traditional gender roles, a lack of support for both women and men to combine care duties with work, as well as political and corporate cultures are some of the reasons why women are under-represented when it comes to decision-making. Promoting gender equality in this area is one of the EU’s priorities for achieving gender equality overall.

Clean water and sanitation

As a vital resource, water is considered a public good in the EU. The indicators chosen to monitor sanitation are the proportion of the population without a bath, shower, or indoor flushing toilet in the household and the proportion connected to at least one wastewater treatment plant. The proportion of the population without a bath, shower, or indoor flushing toilet at home fell from 2.2% in 2015 to 1.5% in 2020. The data also show that the proportion of the EU population connected to a secondary wastewater treatment system has increased steadily since 2000 and reached 80.9% in 2021.

Almost every household in the EU had basic sanitation in 2020 and most countries reported that less than 1% of their population still lived in households without a flushing toilet, a bath or a shower. However, in some countries the proportion remains relatively high.

Although the nutrient pollution of European waters has decreased since the 1990s, it is still the main reason why 28% of surface water bodies are not of good quality.

Affordable and clean energy

The EU aims to reduce its total energy consumption by at least 11.7% by 2030 compared to the Reference Scenario for 2020. This means that in absolute terms, the EU should not consume more than 992.5 million tonnes of oil equivalent (toe) of primary energy and 763 million tonnes of oil equivalent of final energy by 2030. Primary energy consumption has been generally declining since 2007 and amounted to 1,257.1 Mtoe in 2022, a reduction of 15.6% over the last 15 years, while final energy consumption decreased by 8.6% to 940.5 Mtoe over the same period.

The difference between the decline in primary and final energy consumption is mainly due to more efficient energy production and the switch to renewable energy sources. However, further improvements in energy efficiency and consumption patterns are needed if the EU is to meet its two energy consumption targets for 2030. Recent developments also point to a decoupling of economic growth from energy consumption. The share of renewable energy in gross final energy consumption is projected to increase to 42.5% by 2030. In 2022, the share totalled 23%.

However, to reach the 2030 target, efforts will have to be stepped up in the coming years.

Decent work and economic growth

Gross domestic product in the EU grew steadily by 2% per year between 2014 and 2019. After the pandemic-related dip, growth resumed in 2022 and annual growth averaged 0.9% between 2018 and 2023. Growth of 1.0% and 1.6% is expected for 2024 and 2025 respectively. At the same time, however, the EU’s material footprint has also risen. After a dip due to the financial crisis in 2008, there was an increase of 7.6% between 2015 and 2019. And even after the pandemic, there was another significant rise. At 6.67 billion tonnes, in 2022 it reached its highest level since 2012. The EU’s material footprint is well above the global average and exceeds sustainable levels of resource extraction.

By 2030, the EU aims to reach an employment rate of 78% for the 20-64 age group. A historic high of 75.3% was recorded in 2023. However, the target is expected to be achieved by 2030. In 2023, the unemployment rate reached its lowest level since 2009 at 6.1%, while long-term unemployment dropped to an all-time low of 2.1% in 2023.

Industry, innovation and infrastructure

The industrial sector accounts for more than 20% of the European economy and employs around 35 million people, but industry is also a major source of pollution, although significant progress has been made in recent years in terms of emissions.

Environmental products and services make a significant contribution to the EU’s gross value added, rising from 1.8% in 2006 to 2.5% in 2021, growing faster than other sectors and employing more than 5.2 million people in 2021.

However, the share of buses and trains in total transport dropped significantly in 2020 and did not really recover in 2021. Before the pandemic the share was relatively stable at 17.6%, but fell to 12.9% in 2020, with only a slight increase to 13.7% in 2021.

The share of railways and inland waterways has fallen continuously since 2012 and reached its absolute low in 2022 with a share of 22.2%.

Reduced inequalities

The income gap between high-income and low-income households has narrowed in recent years, as measured by the difference between the 20% with the highest and the 20% with the lowest disposable income. The ratio fell from 5.22 in 2013 to 4.89 in 2019. The poverty gap between urban and rural areas has also shrunk.

Sustainable cities and communities

The quality of life has improved steadily since 2010, and noise pollution and crime have both fallen. However, the slow but steady increase in land sealing is problematic. In 2018, 2.7% of the total land area was sealed.

The EU is also at risk of failing to meet its municipal waste recycling target. In 2022, 229,482 tonnes were generated, equivalent to 513 kilograms per capita. The amount increased by around 3% between 2017 and 2022. Although the recycling rate rose from 27.3 to 48.6% between 2000 and 2022, the annual growth rate since 2017 is only 2.3 percentage points.

Responsible consumption and production

The EU’s material footprint has continued to grow over the last decade and reached 6.67 billion tonnes in 2022, requiring further action to meet the Green Deal targets. The consumption footprint exceeds planetary boundaries by a factor of 3.4 and the 2022 figure marked a historic high. Imports accounted for 22.4% of direct material use in 2022. The share was particularly high for fossil fuels (69.7%) and metal ores (51.5%), whereby the imported share of non-metallic minerals was only 3%.

Resource productivity, on the other hand, has increased. In 2022, the value of resources produced was 4% higher than in 2017. Energy productivity also rose significantly.

A total of 2.2 billion tonnes of waste was generated in the EU in 2020. Mineral waste from the construction and mining sectors accounted for almost two thirds of this amount. Moreover, the EU is not making progress in terms of recycling rates, which increased from 8.9 to 11.5% between 2007 and 2022. Since 2016, however, the figure has stagnated between 11.3 and 11.6%. Considerable efforts are still needed to reach the target of 23.2%.

Climate action

The EU aims to be climate-neutral by 2050 and has set itself an interim target of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by at least 55% by 2030 compared to 1990 levels. The EU Commission has now proposed a further interim target of 90% by 2040. Emissions fell by 31% between 1990 and 2022. The reduction will therefore have to be much faster if the target is to be met by 2030. However, net greenhouse gas emissions from land use and forestry also fell, by 22.2% between 2007 and 2022. This is partly due to a slowdown in net afforestation and an increase in tree mortality and harvesting. In 2022, net removals totalled 236.4 million tonnes of CO2eq, well below the target of 310 million tonnes to be met by 2030.

Life below water

SDG 15 is one of the key international targets dealing with biodiversity and ecosystems. In the EU, this target ensures that the health and functioning of terrestrial ecosystems and the provision of ecosystem services remain a priority. This is especially important in the face of global trends such as population growth, accelerated urbanisation, and increasing demand for natural resources. It also addresses the impacts of climate change. The monitoring of SDG 15 in the EU context focuses on trends in the condition of ecosystems, land degradation and biodiversity. Over the five-year period under review, there have been several negative trends in the indicators analysed in the EU, resulting in an overall moderately negative score for SDG 15 as a whole. While the forest area in the EU has slightly increased, recent trends in pollutant concentrations in EU rivers have been mixed. Soil degradation continues, with land use and the impact of droughts increasing. Biodiversity indicators show a long-term and sustained decline in common bird species and meadow butterflies in the EU. In addition, the designation of protected areas on land has stalled, and the EU is not on track to meet its 2030 target.

Life on land

SDG 15 is one of the key international targets dealing with biodiversity and ecosystems. In the EU, this target ensures that the health and functioning of terrestrial ecosystems and the provision of ecosystem services remain a priority. This is especially in the face of global trends such as population growth, accelerated urbanisation, and increasing demand for natural resources. It also addresses the impacts of climate change. Monitoring of SDG 15 in the EU context focuses on trends in ecosystem condition, land degradation and biodiversity. Over the five-year period under review, there have been several negative trends in the indicators analysed in the EU, resulting in an overall moderately negative score for SDG 15 as a whole. While forest area in the EU has slightly increased, recent trends in pollutant concentrations in EU rivers have been mixed. Soil degradation continues, with land use and the impact of droughts increasing. Biodiversity indicators show a long-term and sustained decline in common bird species and meadow butterflies in the EU. In addition, the designation of protected areas on land has stalled, and the EU is not on track to meet its 2030 target.

Peace, justice and strong institutions

Peace and security are prerequisites for sustainable development. Peace, security, democracy, the rule of law and respect for fundamental rights are also core values of the EU. The monitoring of SDG 16 in the EU context focuses on personal safety, access to justice and trust in institutions in the EU. Progress towards SDG 16 is uneven in all these areas. While the number of deaths from homicide and robbery and the perceived level of crime, violence and vandalism has decreased significantly recently, the number of victims of human trafficking in the EU has increased. Public spending on justice has risen significantly and more than half of Europeans consider their justice system to be independent, although this proportion has dropped over the last five years. The perception of corruption in the EU has remained stable.

Partnerships for the goals

Partnership is at the heart of the EU and an overarching principle for achieving the SDGs within and beyond the EU’s borders. The monitoring of SDG 17 in the EU context focuses on global partnership, financial management and access to technology. Over the five-year period analysed, the EU’s progress in the area of global partnership has been mixed. On the one hand, imports from developing countries have increased, and the EU is on track to meet its Official Development Assistance (ODA) target, partly due to support from Ukraine. On the other hand, despite the increase in ODA, overall EU funding to developing countries has decreased. Furthermore, fiscal management in the EU remains a challenge, as evidenced by the declining share of environmental taxes in total tax revenues and the high level of gross public debt. Meanwhile, access to technology in the EU has improved, with a significant rise in the share of households with broadband internet access.

Overall, the report sees significant progress for the SDGs ‘Decent work and economic growth’ and ‘Reduced inequalities’. For the goals ‘Good health and well-being’, ‘Clean water and sanitation’, ‘Affordable and clean energy’ and ‘Life on land’, Eurostat sees a moderate movement away from the targets. For all other goals, there is moderate progress.

As a result, work is yet to start on over a quarter (26%) of the polices originally detailed over six years ago

The reasons cited for this slow rate of progress include frequent ministerial changes post 2018, preparing for the UK’s exit from the European Union and responding to the Covid-19 pandemic.

CIWM makes the point that while delivery of some aspects of the 2018 Resources and Waste Strategy, such as EPR (Extended producer Responsibility) and Consistent Collections, must be prioritised, the world has moved on. As a result, this strategy is now outdated will be unable to deliver a zero-waste economy which has the ability to deliver significant growth in UKGDP, increase jobs and maximise resource efficiency. CIWM believes there is an urgent need to produce a new Resource Resilience Strategy aimed at delivering a circular economy and helping the UK to achieve net zero.

The outstanding 2018 policy with the potential to have the biggest impact is Consistent Collections, which would see weekly food waste collections services provided by the 50% of councils in England not already providing this service. This will help all households to recycle more and will reduce carbon emissions as a result of less biodegradable waste entering the residual waste stream. It is estimated that carbon savings could be as high as 58MtCO2 up to 2035. The overall recycling rate in England could increase from the current 44% to around 60% and cost-effective societal benefits are estimated to be around £3bn up to 2035.

As they are non-biodegradable, plastics accumulate in the environment, altering habitats and natural processes. Millions of wildlife are also trapped by plastic waste every year.

When plastics break down, they release toxic compounds that contaminate the environment. They also disintegrate into small pieces of plastic called microplastics. Microplastics are now found all over the globe and are linked to severe health effects such as metabolic disorders and organ damage.

Recycling plastics reduces the amount of plastic waste that would otherwise be discarded and conserves natural resources. However, only about 10 per cent of plastic is currently recycled around the world. The figure is low in part because recycling some types of plastic, such as e-waste and marine plastic litter, is difficult. Chemical reactions that break down plastics into simpler components to be reused are also energy intensive.

From using e-waste plastics to culture cells to developing a greener method that breaks down plastics, researchers at NTU Singapore are solving some of the greatest challenges that stand in the way of recycling plastics. They are also making strides in reducing plastic pollution.

Repurposing e-waste plastics to grow “mini tumours” for laboratory testing

Plastics comprise a large portion of electronic waste (e-waste), and rapid technological advances, and high consumer demand drives its growing use in electronics. According to a UN report, the generation of e-waste is rising five times faster than the official recycling rate figures show. In 2022, e-waste generated 17 million tonnes of plastic globally.

Single-use plastics are also widely used in research and healthcare applications such as cell culture.

Acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS) is an e-plastic commonly used in the housings of devices such as keyboards and laptops. Repurposing plastics such as ABS for high value biomedical applications could be an attractive waste-to-resource strategy for effectively reducing plastic waste.

NTU scientists have developed a synthetic matrix to culture cells using ABS from discarded keyboards. The matrix is porous like a sponge and functions as a support structure, providing a framework for cells to attach and grow.

The matrix can culture spherical clusters of cells, called cancer spheroids, that resemble actual tumours. Due to their 3D shape, these “mini tumours” more accurately represent tumours than conventional cell cultures.

To fabricate the matrix, the scientists dissolved plastic scraps from discarded keyboards in an organic solvent, acetone and poured the solution into a mould.

The matrix supported the growth of breast, colorectal and bone cancer spheroids. The cancer spheroids had properties similar to those grown using commercially available matrices and may be used for biomedical applications such as drug testing.

“Our innovation not only offers a practical means to reuse e-waste plastics but could also reduce the use of new plastics in the biomedical industry,” said Assoc Prof Dalton Tay of NTU’s School of Materials Science and Engineering, who led the research.

The research was reported in Resources, Conservation & Recycling in 2024.

Converting hard-to-recycle plastic waste into hydrogen and carbon additives for polymer foams

While some types of plastics can be repurposed into new products, it is not as easy to recycle other kinds of plastics. Household plastics, packaging waste and marine plastic litter recovered from the environment are all examples of plastic waste that are difficult to recycle. There are also limited economic benefits to treating mixed and contaminated plastics.

Researchers from NTU explored using difficult-to-recycle plastics as a source of solid carbon material for application in polymer foams. The researchers first obtained gas and oil by heating different types of plastic waste at high temperatures (600 degrees Celsius) in the absence of oxygen. Then the gas and oil were heated at over 1000 degrees Celsius to break down the molecules into solid carbon and hydrogen. The solid carbon can be added to polymer foam to increase its strength and resistance to abrasion for cushioning applications. The foam containing the synthesised solid carbon derived from plastic waste exhibited properties comparable to other carbon-based and conventional reinforcing materials available on the market.

At the same time, the hydrogen produced could be collected and used as fuel.

Published in the Journal of Hazardous Materials in 2024, the research is a milestone in finding a use for plastic waste that previously could not be recycled. “We have developed a feasible approach to repurpose hard-to-recycle plastics, which is an important aspect of the circular economy,” said lead investigator Assoc Prof Grzegorz Lisak of NTU’s School of Civil and Environmental Engineering.

A bright way to break down plastics into valuable compounds

Although plastics can be broken down by heating them at high temperatures, such processes are energy intensive and generate greenhouse gases, contributing to global warming.

Addressing the need for greener methods of breaking down plastics, NTU scientists have developed a process that can upcycle most plastics into chemical compounds useful for energy storage. The reaction uses light-emitting diodes (LEDs) and a commercially available catalyst and occurs at room temperature. It can break down a wide range of plastics, including polypropylene, polyethylene and polystyrene, all commonly used in packaging and discarded as plastic waste.

Compared to conventional plastic recycling methods, the process requires much less energy.

First, the plastics are dissolved in the organic solvent called dichloromethane, making the plastic polymer chains more accessible to the photocatalyst. The solution is then mixed with the catalyst and flowed through transparent tubes where LED light shines on it.

The light provides the initial energy to break the carbon-carbon bonds in a two-step process with the help of the vanadium catalyst. The plastics’ carbon-hydrogen bonds are oxidised, which makes them less stable and more reactive. After that, the carbon-carbon bonds are broken down.

The resulting end products are compounds such as formic acid and benzoic acid, which can be used to make other chemicals employed in fuel cells and liquid organic hydrogen carriers (LOHCs) – organic compounds that can absorb and release hydrogen through chemical reactions. LOHCs are being explored by the energy sector as a storage media for hydrogen.

According to Assoc Prof Han Soo Sen of NTU’s School of Chemistry, Chemical Engineering, and Biotechnology, who led the study, the breakthrough not only provides a potential answer to the growing plastic waste problem but also reuses the carbon trapped in these plastics instead of releasing it into the atmosphere as greenhouse gases through incineration.

The method was reported in the journal Chem in 2023.

Comprehensive, meaning electricity and heat incineration, as well as biogenic CO2, to ensure these facilities are included properly.

Developed by Equnimator, the report entitled, “Incineration in the EU-ETS: A set of suggestions for its inclusion” highlights the urgency to adopt this recommendation to achieve the EU’s climate goals.

After the European Parliament approved reforms to the ETS in 2022, a path opened to consider municipal waste incineration under its scope, but as of 1 January 2024, these facilities have only been included for monitoring, reporting, and verification purposes. They are not yet required to surrender allowances for their emissions.

The Commission is required to study the feasibility of including these facilities in the EU-ETS in July 2026, with a potential inclusion by 2028.

Janek Vahk, Zero Pollution Policy Manager at Zero Waste Europe, states: “The inclusion of incineration within the EU-ETS is long overdue. Incinerators are poised to become the most carbon-intensive power source once coal is phased out. Bringing municipal waste incineration into the EU-ETS will ensure that every sector contributes to emission reductions, driving us towards a cleaner, more circular future.”

The study proposes several key recommendations. Firstly, both power and heat from incineration should be included in the EU ETS without free allowances for heat generation. This approach aligns with the scheduled inclusion of the buildings sector in 2027. Secondly, the European Commission should consider not only landfills but also recycling and waste prevention in their study, meaning the inclusion of municipal waste incinerators within the EU-ETS should not undermine the cascading principle. And thirdly, it should analyse the impact of including waste incinerators and other waste management options based on their performance, and provide recommendations on the economic instruments, such as a tax on incinerators, that may be replaced solely by the EU ETS.

Looking forward, Zero Waste Europe hopes to see a requirement for all CO2 emissions from incinerators, whether fossil or non-fossil, to surrender allowances under the ETS. The current practice of excluding non-fossil CO2 is inconsistent and undermines the goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Lastly, the current 20 megawatt threshold for inclusion is ambiguous and should potentially be lowered to 10 megawatt to prevent small-scale facilities from being excluded and reduce the risk of system manipulation.

“CO2 is CO2,” Vahk adds, “whether fossil or non-fossil; the atmosphere doesn’t care where it comes from, the impact on climate is the same. Therefore, EU ETS needs to address them both.”

With interinstitutional negotiations poised to begin, and the obligation to separately collect used textiles starting in January 2025, EuRIC Textiles urges swift action to reach a deal before the end of the year.

Under the adopted Council position of 17 June, the Commission shall consider establishing specific targets for waste prevention, collection, sorting and recycling of textiles by the end of 2028. Member-States are given the option to use eco-modulation of fees to target ultra-fast-fashion, based on criteria that consider textile products overproduction and overconsumption practices.

Harmonised extended producer responsibility (EPR) schemes requiring fashion brands, retailers and textile producers to cover the costs of textile waste collection and treatment shall also be established within 30 months after the directive comes into force. EuRIC Textiles welcomes the inclusion of microenterprises in the EPR scope, ensuring that all producers, regardless of size, are accountable.

However, EuRIC Textiles warns against the potential of Member States to introduce EPR fees for the placing on the market of second-hand clothes and textiles. Only new textile products placed on the market for the first time should fall under the EPR scope, as EPR is an application of the polluter pays principle and reusing clothing has a positive environmental impact.

Mariska Boer, President of EuRIC’s Textiles reuse and recycling branch, stated: “Introducing EPR fees for re-use operators who put second-hand clothes on the market will be fatal blow to a sector already on the brink of collapse due to rising costs and dropping sales.”

Ahead of the upcoming trilogues, EuRIC Textiles calls for:

• Retaining ownership of collected waste with all waste operators regardless of their social status, ensuring equal treatment for all actors involved in the collection and treatment of used textiles and textile waste.
• Broad representation in Producer Responsibility Organisations (PROs) including collectors, sorters and recyclers, to ensure that EPR effectively supports a high-quality circular economy in the European textiles industry.
• Implementing EPR at the national level 18 months after the WFD’s entry into force, aligning with the Parliament’s proposal, instead of the Council’s 30-month implementation period proposal.

This marks another milestone in the file’s legislative process to hold textile producers accountable to the ‘polluter pays’ principle.

The Council’s green light to introduce Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) for textiles across the EU was long overdue. However, the text lacks crucial provisions, including concrete waste prevention and management targets. The meagre clause to allow setting reduction targets after 2028 is insufficient given the vast quantity of textile waste generated.

Theresa Mörsen, Waste & Resources Policy Officer at Zero Waste Europe, states: “During the negotiations, a few Member States had the good sense to openly voice their intentions to end fast fashion. Honouring the long-established polluter pays principle means addressing the root cause of the waste crisis we’re in. We are delighted to see that the Council recognises a brand’s business strategy as a factor in fee contributions and looks at quantities and the extrinsic durability of products. This will make it easier to hold apparel giants accountable and work towards more sufficient business models. But it is unacceptable that the Presidency proposed extending the transposition period from 18 to 24 months. This extension means valuable time is lost, effectively giving polluters a free ride.”

Meanwhile, Member States agreed to maintain the food waste reduction targets for 2030, as proposed by the Commission. The text includes a review clause for the targets, set for 2027, yet this would be far too late to change course. Sustainable Development Goal 12.3, which requires a 50% reduction, will most likely be missed unless Member States put in a substantial effort at the national level. Similarly, the potential legislative proposal for a target for food waste and losses in primary production, scheduled for the end of 2027, is considerably delayed. This is significant because Eurostat already measures those losses.

“I sincerely have to question the commitment of many Member States today to act decisively on climate change,” Mörsen continues. “Not acting on food waste reduction contradicts the UN Sustainable Development Goals. The European Scientific Advisory Board on Climate Change has only recently warned against the huge impact food waste has on climate change.”

Finally, the text allows Member States to require textile producers to cover the costs of textile waste that ends up in mixed municipal waste.

Janek Vähk, Zero Pollution Policy Manager at Zero Waste Europe, states: “ The adopted text is vague and contradictory. The costs associated with extracting textiles from mixed waste, and then recycling them, must be covered by EPR fees in all states. This is crucial, as the Joint Research Centre published a study showing that 78% of post-consumer textile waste isn’t separately collected and ends up incinerated or landfilled. This mismanagement harms the environment, causes excessive greenhouse gas emissions, water use, pollution, and unnecessary land use. The Council failed to address this, while the Parliament’s position is much stronger in this respect as it urges Member States to implement waste sorting systems for all municipal mixed waste.”

Zero Waste Europe urges EU Member States to align with the position taken by the European Parliament in the forthcoming negotiations. Moreover, the environmental network calls for a more substantial review to become a priority during the new European mandate.

This non-compliance bears importance as it obliges the immediate implementation of a deposit return system (DRS) for cans, bottles, and cartons. The groups behind the study, Zero Waste Europe and Zero Waste Alliance, point out that DRS works in more than 50 regions around the world and ensures the reuse and recycling of 90% of beverage containers.

The groups are now urging the Spanish Minister of Ecological Transition and Demographic Challenge, to acknowledge the non-compliance.
“This dismal 36% is a wake-up call for the Spanish Government. Just admit we’ve missed the mark! As mandated by the Spanish Waste Law, it’s high time to roll out the deposit return system for beverage containers,” said Zero Waste Alliance spokespersons.

The Alliance says Spain’s manipulation of recycling results is paradigmatic at a European level. Zero Waste Europe has announced that it will take the evidence presented in the report to the European Commission to put an end to the fake data blocking the implementation of zero waste policies. Member States must report the initial data on the separate collection of beverage plastic bottles for the year 2022.

The consultancy Eunomia led work on the study, entitled “Analysis of the Separate Collection Rate of Plastic Beverage Bottles of up to three litres in Spain”. It forms three conclusions: opacity in Spain’s packaging waste data; a lack of solid methodology for tracking legal milestones in plastic bottle collection from the Ministry; and inconsistencies in the beverage industry’s data.

Joan Marc Simon, founder of Zero Waste Europe, expressed concern over the alarming lack of data on packaging recycling, stating: “If recycling rates were achieved, it would be transformative. But the industry’s ongoing data manipulation hinders the adoption of zero waste policies. That’s why we’re left with no choice but to bring this evidence to the European Commission, urging Eurostat to reject these fabricated figures that stall progress.”

The manifesto serves as a call to action for the next term of European Institutions. It emphasises the need to prioritise a European Industrial Deal that makes Europe’s industry sustainable, competitive, and circular.

Furthermore, it highlights the need for a Circular Material Use Act (CMUA) to enact comprehensive policies encompassing waste management and the transformation of waste materials into productive resources for industrial production. As Claudia Mensi, FEAD’s President, highlights, ‘for the circular economy to function, there needs to be a constant demand for recycled materials that compete with the quality standards and prices of virgin materials’.

The manifesto parts from the Vision for 2030, which FEAD published in February. Thus, the CMUA should establish two legally binding targets:

• A Circular Material Use Rate target of 25% by 2030, 30% by 2040, and 35% by 2050.
• A target of 75% for the recycling of all waste materials in the EU by 2035.

These targets will support shifting Europe’s material use towards recycled materials and foster innovation in a thriving circular economy. In addition, to drive the transition towards a comprehensive circular economy, the CMUA will need to act on 5 key levers:

1. Aligning industrial production to the circular economy
2. Strengthening EU autonomy over its supply of resources
3. Harnessing the potential of waste management and the circular economy towards climate change mitigation measures
4. Establishing an enforcement mechanism for European waste management legislation
5. Ensuring there is a competitive market for waste management

If this is denied, a massive potential for WtE to recover heat and to substitute the combustion of fossil fuels (gas, coal, or peat) for efficient district heating will be lost. Waste not suitable for recycling is thermally treated to reduce volume, destroy pollutants and avoid landfilling. Excess heat created in this process is used to produce electricity and supply heat to district heating.

The current regulatory framework, particularly the Renewable Energy Directive (RED II and III) and the Energy Efficiency Directive (EED), acknowledges the importance of waste heat and sets ambitious targets. However, it is essential to ensure that heat recovered from WtE processes is fully recognised within these directives, in particular in the Guidance Documents for RED and EED that are currently under preparation.

The rationale for this recognition is twofold. Firstly, unlike conventional power plants, WtE facilities have the hygienic task of treating the waste. This exothermal process unavoidably generates excess heat (waste heat). If this is not used, the waste still needs to be thermally treated for sanitary

reasons. Hence, waste is not a conventional fuel! Waste is not produced on purpose. It is the leftover of our society that must be reliably treated in an environmentally sound manner, with complex flue gas cleaning. To do so, WtE plant operators must comply with the strict rules set in the Industrial Emissions Directive, under the waste incineration chapter.

Secondly, the heat generated from the treatment of non-recyclable waste, which would otherwise be lost, can significantly contribute to our heating needs and facilitate the MS to reach the targets. In some regions, the heat supply from WtE covers more than 50% of the local heat demand.

WtE offers a strategic advantage by transforming non-recyclable waste into valuable energy for district heating systems, enhancing our energy security and supporting the transition to a circular economy. This process aligns with our waste management principles and provides a competitive and secure energy alternative.

Excluding the full heat production from WtE plants from the waste heat definition could lead to the underutilization or even elimination of an important energy resource. If these plants are not integrated into efficient district heating and cooling systems, the energy they recover would be wasted, despite its availability.

Acknowledging the heat generated by WtE plants as waste heat under RED and EED is vital for maximising the use of local, sustainable excess energy sources. This approach is not just about energy efficiency; it is about recognising the valuable role WtE plays in managing waste and recovering energy. Such recognition aligns with the goals of environmental sustainability and efficient resource use.

In conclusion, recognising waste heat from WtE under relevant EU directives is imperative for enhancing our energy efficiency and sustainability efforts. It supports broader environmental objectives and contributes to a more resilient and self-sufficient Europe.

The undersigned organisations – business organisations, associations, and companies active in the waste management value chain — welcome and support this decision, as it marks a crucial step in the right direction. However, this decision still needs to be confirmed during the plenary session next week, where MEPs will vote on the objection.

During today’s vote in the ENVI Committee, MEP Ska Keller rightly underlined the importance of this vote by stating that it concerns ‘the future of recycling’. The Commission’s draft report, if implemented, would create an uneven playing field between recycling technologies and could lead to structural greenwashing, preventing consumers from making sustainable purchasing decisions.

Whilst it has been stated that this Implementing Act would not pre-empt any calculation methods for the Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation, the Commission has clearly indicated that it is a testing ground for the legislation. Therefore, the waste management sector reiterates that it is inappropriate to expedite and use a legislative instrument with such a narrow scope to shape the future of an entire recycling industry.

The signatories call on legislators to not oppose the investments made by the chemical recycling industry to the investments already made by the mechanical recycling industry to achieve the 2025 target of 25% recycled content for PET beverage bottles. While we support the complementarity of chemical and mechanical recycling technologies, priority should be given to mechanical recycling for waste streams, including PET, that can be recycled mechanically with a lower environmental footprint.

Finally, the proposed Decision could result in unfair competition for access to waste feedstocks between technologies that are claimed to be complementary. The mechanical recycling of plastic waste sustains 30,000 jobs across 850 companies, with 90% of these being small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) that could face direct impacts from this unfair competition. The question it comes down to is whether Parliament wants to support SMEs and local businesses delivering a sustainable solution for plastic waste.

For these reasons, our Business Coalition urges MEPs to vote in favour of the objection during the plenary session to align with the objectives of the SUPD and promote the transition to a circular economy.

The motion, submitted by rapporteur Jutta Paulus (Greens/EFA), was approved with 26 to 24 votes, paving its way to next week’s plenary session.

Establishing a recycled content calculation method under the SUPD based on the fuel-use exempt model would set an alarming precedent for other regulations, such as packaging, automotive, ecodesign and textiles. An appropriate method should be adopted under the framework of the Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation (PPWR) and chemical recycling should be a last resort, only when mechanical recycling falls short.

Given that over 80% of packaging within the decision’s scope is made of PET, chemical recycling cannot be considered an indispensable technology for other beverage bottles or future food-contact applications using non-PET feedstock.

Ahead of next week’s plenary vote, EuRIC urges lawmakers to widely support the drafting of a resolution opposing the proposed mass balance approach. This method leads to significant discrepancies between claimed and actual recycled content, thus misleading consumers with false green claims, while it also unfairly favours chemical over mechanical recycling technologies and fundamentally undermines the SUPD’s core objective of realising a circular economy.

Eunomia Research and Consulting Ltd. has published a report ‘Managing Materials for 1.5oC: An EU Regulatory Framework for a Low Carbon Material Economy’. It presents a series of recommendations designed to enable Europe to prosper whilst reducing the pressure we place on the planet from our consumption of materials.

The report was funded by a consortium comprised of Handelens Miljøfond, Minderoo Foundation, Tomra and Zero Waste Europe, all of whom have an active interest in questions relating to the way we can better manage materials to tackle environmental challenges.

While decarbonisation of energy supply is crucial in tackling the climate crisis, the public and political discourse has to date largely ignored our consumption of materials. This must change. Extraction and processing of material resources account for over 55% of greenhouse gas emissions – more than 60 per cent if land use impacts are considered.

More broadly, the extraction, manufacture, transport, use, and disposal of materials is responsible for 90% of land-based biodiversity loss and water stress. The extent and nature of our consumption of materials is at the heart of the triple planetary crisis – the crisis of climate change, the crisis of nature and biodiversity loss, and the crisis of pollution and waste.

The proposed regulatory framework is based on several underpinning principles, full details are contained within the report:

1. Leveraging the power of the Single Market.
2. Minimising administrative burden for business through harmonisation.
3. Engaging the digital transition.
4. Levelling the playing field.
5. Maximising use of economic instruments.
6. Securing popular support for the broad framework of measures.
7. Expanding the EU’s influence on global policy for managing materials and reducing greenhouse gas emissions

The proposed regulatory framework builds on what is already in place or underway, makes connections between policy mechanisms where relevant, and presents a number of more innovative, novel approaches in various areas. A key theme is providing greater clarity and simplification for business through harmonisation across the EU, accompanied by a transfer of decision-making competences in certain areas away from individual Member States to the EU-level.

The proposed regulatory framework encompasses:

• Decarbonising materials production
• Product policy for a low carbon economy
• Maintaining material value at end of life
• Reducing overall material consumption

The most politically challenging — but arguably also the most important – of the proposed measures is the greater application of environmental taxation at the EU-level. To overcome these challenges, this significant shift will have to be undertaken creatively in ways that will need to directly benefit – and be seen to benefit – the majority of citizens. That is to say that the shift overall must have broad popular appeal.

Read the report

The final text is expected to be published in the Official Journal in April, and the Regulation will then enter into force 20 days after publication.
The Rethink Plastic alliance and Break Free From Plastic welcome the Parliament and Council’s decision to endorse the revised text negotiated at Trilogue, which includes increased obligations and standards regarding the shipment of EU plastic waste.

This includes:

• A phased-in 2.5 year ban of all plastic waste exports to non-OECD countries, to complement existing bans on the export of hazardous and Y48 plastic waste
• Increased obligations and standards, both regarding exporting waste to non-OECD and OECD countries
• That intra-EU shipments of waste destined for disposal will only occur under exceptional circumstances
• The digitisation of the exchange of information and data on waste shipments

Whilst the Rethink Plastic alliance and Break Free From Plastic movement have always evidenced the need for and advocated for a full ban of EU plastic waste outside the EU and EFTA, amongst other recommendations, the agreed trilogue text does set in motion increased protections and obligations for environmentally-sound management. It is now for the Commission and Member States to take all steps necessary to ensure effective transposition, implementation and enforcement.
Regrettably, last year’s trilogue negotiations between the EU institutions did not result in a decision to stop exporting its plastic waste to all non-EU/ EFTA countries. For example, Türkiye (an OECD country) receives a significant amount of EU plastic waste – despite clear evidence of this resulting in environmental and human health harm. We strongly encourage that the necessary resources are set aside to ensure obligations are being met by all, and if not met, that the EU suspends exports to relevant recipient OECD countries also.

The EU’s revised Waste Shipment Regulation now forms some of the most ambitious waste exporting rules in the world. The EU must work to amplify this success, by reducing its plastic consumption and ensuring strict adherence to the waste hierarchy in managing its plastic waste.

Although most of the current rules will continue to apply for a defined transition period of two to three years, depending on the provision, today marks the final step of the formal adoption of the new regulation, which will then be published in the EU’s Official Journal and enter into force 20 days later.

Safe and efficient shipments of waste are key for a circular economy. The new regulation brings important changes and modernises waste shipments, including the digitalisation of the procedures, which should increase the speed, efficiency, transparency, and traceability. Improving the efficiency of the procedures is one of the highest priorities for FEAD. Indeed, an important achievement in the revised regulation is the clarification that a shipment should not be considered illegal if only minor clerical errors in the documents occur. However, efficient procedures are not only dependent on a good regulation, but also on competent authorities with sufficient technical and material means to observe the deadlines and process the notifications satisfactorily. Contrary to FEAD’s view, co-legislators have decided to limit the possibility of tacit consents to transit authorities. Therefore, we now make a call to the Member States to ensure that their administrations can process waste shipment notifications in due time so that we can overcome the long and persistent delays we currently face.

Important to note is that the entry into force of the new WSR will not be the end of the legislative work but also the beginning. The text includes substantial empowerment clauses for the Commission to adopt implementing and delegating acts, that can bring relevant and needed improvements and clarifications, to help overcome bottlenecks linked to differing interpretations by authorities. These include a possible risk-based and harmonised method for calculating the financial guarantee or equivalent insurance; the specification of the technical feasibility and economic viability required to authorise shipments for disposal; or classification criteria for waste. In addition, the Commission will have to supplement the regulation establishing and updating the list of non-OECD countries to which export of non-hazardous waste from the Union for recovery are authorised. Important work lays ahead, to which FEAD is ready to contribute with experience and expertise.

Claudia Mensi, FEAD President, commented: ‘the new WSR introduces restrictions for international waste markets, which means that we will keep more of the generated waste within the EU. Our role as industry representatives is now to make understand that such restrictions require improved recycling and waste management capacities, a strong and stable demand for recyclates, and improved procedures for us to be able to process these increased amounts of waste. In addition, a smooth and harmonised implementation of the new WSR by all competent authorities will be essential because a review of is not foreseen until 2035.’

Decisive action is essential to drastically reduce waste, prioritise reduction of resource use, improve recycling rates and improve the introduction of products that are designed for circularity from the outset, according to a major European Environment Agency (EEA) state of play assessment on the circular economy, published today.

European Union circular economy policies have been reinforced over recent years, but they still need to become more binding and target oriented to accelerate the uptake of a more regenerative economy in Europe. This means moving beyond the current strong focus on waste to address resource use more directly. The benefits behind the potential setting of future targets on resource use or material footprint and possible avenues to speed up the transition to a more circular model are explained in the EEA report “Accelerating circular economy in Europe — state and outlook 2024”.

Developing a circular economy is a crucial part of the European Union’s efforts to address climate change, biodiversity loss and pollution. The EEA report gives a comprehensive analysis of how the EU is doing in the transition to a more circular economy and the strong policy push seen under the EU’s Green Deal, together with options and prospects to further accelerate it.

Mixed progress so far

Europe’s heavy reliance on natural resources to provide materials, food, and fuel comes with significant environmental and climate impacts. However, following steep increases in resource consumption in the past, this trend has stabilised recently, the report says. A modest decoupling of EU resource consumption from economic growth has been observed, with total consumption of materials dropping slightly while EU gross domestic product (GDP) increased. At the same time, Europe’s dependence on global imports for supply of some critical raw materials, metal ores and fossil-fuels are currently increasing against the backdrop of a more challenging geopolitical context.

The EU has put measures in place to enable the shift to a circular economy, which means shifting from current ‘linear’ production models and consumption patterns. This transformation is enshrined in the Circular Economy Action Plan, one of the key parts of the European Green Deal. There has been positive progress recently towards circularity in Europe, such as increased recycling rates and the emergence of a sharing economy and other circular business models.

With a circularity rate of 11.5% in 2022, Europe consumes a higher proportion of recycled materials than other world regions. However, progress in the EU has been slow, and we are still far from the ambition to double the Union’s circularity rate by 2030.

Assessing progress towards current circular ambitions, the EEA report states that there is a low or moderate likelihood for them to be achieved in the coming years.
The report explains, however, that many circular economy policies are still relatively new and some have not yet been fully put in place at national level. Added to this, the impact of these measures takes time to filter down to changes in business models, consumption patterns and, ultimately, our patterns of resource use. However, in addition to the implementation of existing policies, more can be done.

Future action

The report also looks into potential actions for the future, such as the setting of targets and promoting higher quality recycling — where materials keep their original function and value for the longest possible time — to foster EU resource independence and lower their import. In addition to implementing eco-design principles, increasing circularity by maximising the use and lifespan of products through reuse, repair and remanufacturing is also critical.

Extra attention should also be given to the economics of raw material supply — so incentives and prices of raw materials account for their environmental impact, and recycled materials have a better route to be reintroduced in the economy.

Underpinning these changes is a need to reduce product consumption from current unsustainable levels, but current trends in the EU are, unfortunately, moving in the opposite direction. There are numerous opportunities for future EU policies to be informed by ongoing research on consumer demand, on how to change consumer behaviours, as well as embedding just transition principles in future action.

Read the report

Its data provides an overview of European plastics production, conversion, consumption, and waste management, and includes an analysis of plastics production from non-fossil sources, and recycling technologies.

The study’s central finding is that circular plastics now account for 13.5% of new plastic products manufactured in Europe. This means that the European plastics system is halfway towards the interim ambition – established in the ‘Plastics Transition’ roadmap – to use 25% of plastics from circular sources in new products by 2030.

However, the report’s data also highlights several major challenges that will undermine the Plastics system’s progress towards circularity; including growing rates of incineration with energy recovery (+15% since 2018) of plastics waste needed as circular feedstock that could have been recycled.

Virginia Janssens, Managing Director of Plastics Europe, said: “Our latest ‘Circular Economy for Plastics’ report provides essential insights into the transition of the plastics system. This edition is also broader in scope and contains more in-depth data than ever before. Whilst the data confirms the shift to circularity is firmly established and picking up pace, it is frustrating that we still incinerate so much plastics waste when this potential feedstock is desperately needed by our industry to accelerate the transition. Without urgent action to increase the availability of all circular plastics feedstocks, we cannot maintain the current rate of progress and realise the ambitions of our ‘Plastics Transition’ roadmap and the EU Green Deal.”

In total, 26.9% of European plastics waste is now recycled, meaning that, for the first time, more plastics waste is recycled than is put into landfill; an important milestone in Europe’s plastics circularity journey. However, to meet the growing demand for plastics manufactured from circular feedstocks, we need to massively upscale the collection and sorting of post-consumer plastics waste, and increase the availability of biomass and captured carbon.

The data also highlights that the uptake of circular plastics is not uniform, but varies by industry sector. The strongest demand comes from the packaging, building and construction, and agriculture sectors, however others, including automotive and electricals and electronics, are falling behind.

The report found that in 2022 circular plastics were produced from several sources: the largest source (13.2% of all plastics produced) was mechanically recycled, while only 1% came from bio-based feedstock, and 0.1% was chemically recycled.

The report also shows that Europe’s share of global plastics production decreased from 22% (2006) to 14% (2022). If this continues, Europe will become increasingly dependent on imports and its ability to invest in circularity and support the transitions of the many downstream sectors and value chain partners that rely on plastics, will be undermined.

Download report

Enhancing packaging circularity is imperative from both environmental and industrial standpoints, and this signed deal marks a significant step forward.

The deal reached is likely the best outcome, given the trade issues that caused delays and the fact that it was only reached after any condition of origin for plastics accounting for recycled content was removed. For Olivier François, President of EuRIC, “setting equivalent conditions that guarantee that imported recycled plastics meet equivalent standards to those set in the EU is vital for ensuring European industrial sovereignty and competitiveness, while delivering climate objectives and fostering a truly circular economy.”

These measures not only comply with WTO rules but also ensure consistency. It is necessary for the EU to impose conditions on imports of recycled plastics used in packaging products placed on the EU market, just as it bans exports of plastic waste in another piece of legislation.

However, certain challenges remain. Granting Member-States the freedom to prioritise access to recycled plastics – a measure that EuRIC has consistently opposed – to meet PPWR targets risks disrupting the well-functioning internal market. Instead, the focus should be on recyclability requirements and improving collection rates, which are the best tools to enhance packaging circularity and close the loop. “Ambitious recycled content targets are crucial for driving investments in Europe and building the industry capacity necessary to meet them. This practically means both more circular packaging products but also more green industrial jobs within Europe,” added the EuRIC President.

EuRIC looks forward to closely collaborating with EU institutions on the various implementing and delegated acts outlined in the Regulation to ensure the PPWR delivers on its objectives and effectively bridges environmental protection with green industrial growth in Europe.

It is estimated by the European Environment Agency, that the textile industry is the fifth industrial sector for primary use of materials and greenhouse gas emissions. Clearly, a step change is needed, and today we celebrate that the co-legislator voted in favour of introducing an EU-wide Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) for textiles. This will promote sustainable textiles and textile waste management in accordance with the waste hierarchy and will support handling the expected increase in textile collection volumes from 2025.

When we envisage the future of textile waste management, it is essential that all separately collected textiles are considered waste until they have undergone a sorting operation by trained operators. While the EPR implementation will provide the needed incentives to scale up and enhance sorting, preparation for reuse and recycling, the waste status of the separately collected textiles will mean the application of EU environmental legislation, which guarantees traceability and environmentally sound management. This was already rightly proposed by the Commission. However, to achieve our goals, we must also ensure that all involved actors will equally apply the new rules and procedures. It is crucial, on the one hand, that all textile producers, regardless of their size, are covered by the EPR, and on the other hand, that all operators handling waste fall under the same rules. This is not the case in the text voted today in Parliament, as it was not the case in the Commission’s proposal from July.

Claudia Mensi, FEAD President, commented: ‘Only a small part of discarded textiles is today reused and recycled. If the separate collection is well implemented in 2025, we will have big amounts available in the EU, but we also need the capacity to sort, prepare for reuse and recycle this waste. The private industry is ready to invest but needs to see some signals that the framework that will be in place will offer a level playing and the right market conditions, where no actors are privileged or enabled to hold dominant positions.’

Finally, it is important that the co-legislators consider and reduce as much as possible the gap between the mandatory separate collection of textile waste and the implementation of the new rules from the revised Waste Framework Directive. FEAD will continue its engagement with policymakers and stakeholders, advocating for a level playing field and for adequate waste management rules to ensure a more sustainable textile industry in alignment with the waste hierarchy.