"Chemical recycling" explained: Burning plastic isn't recycling
- Sat, Apr 25 2026 at 10:57 AM
Mark,
Despite the plastic industry's lofty promises of a solution to our pollution problems, so-called "chemical recycling" isn't recycling at all. It may actually make pollution even worse.
But right now, the EPA is considering a plan to loosen regulations on certain forms of chemical recycling.1
Here's why that's a bad idea:
Pyrolysis is one type of "chemical recycling." The process involves exposing plastic to intense heat in an oxygen-free environment to break it down into raw materials for other products.2
At first glance, that sounds like recycling -- but it doesn't actually prevent pollution. The trouble is that most so-called "chemical recycling" facilities are "plastic-to-fuel" plants. The final result of pyrolysis is synthetic oil often used in turn to make diesel fuel or gasoline.3
That means it just turns one kind of pollution into another.
"Chemical recycling" simply isn't a real solution to our plastic problem. The numbers tell the true story:
The toxic air pollutants emitted by "chemical recycling" include chemicals known to cause cancer, reproductive harm, birth defects and other health problems: benzene, mercury, arsenic, formaldehyde and more.4
And the toxic trouble isn't limited to the air we breathe: Plastic-to-fuel facilities produce a lot of solid and liquid hazardous waste, too. Just a single "chemical recycling" plant can produce hundreds of thousands of pounds of waste annually -- waste that can contain carcinogens and neurotoxins.5
Even if it wasn't a source of deadly pollution, "chemical recycling" simply isn't efficient enough to put a dent in our plastic pollution problem. At most, only about 6% of the plastic you put in can get turned into usable new plastic using pyrolysis.6
The real answer to our plastic waste problem isn't more "chemical recycling." And weakening regulations on pollution from "chemical recycling" facilities, like the EPA is currently proposing, certainly won't help either.
We need to stop producing so much plastic in the first place. That's why PIRG is building support to cut the unnecessary production and use of plastic off at the source.
And we're winning. 1 in 3 Americans now live in a state with restrictions on at least one form of single-use plastic.7 And we're even convincing companies like Amazon to take steps to reduce their use of wasteful packaging.8
Together, we'll keep building on these victories and keep making progress toward a future beyond plastic.
Thank you,
Faye Park
President, National Office
P.S. All of our work to confront the plastic pollution crisis is made possible by supporters like you. Donate today to help keep these important campaigns going strong.
1. Megan Quinn, "US EPA seeks comments on plan to remove pyrolysis from air emissions rule," Waste Dive, March 24, 2026.
2. Celeste Meiffren-Swango, James Horrox, Grace Vickers, et al., "'Chemical recycling': What you need to know," PIRG, July 14, 2025.
3. Celeste Meiffren-Swango, James Horrox, Grace Vickers, et al., "'Chemical recycling': What you need to know," PIRG, July 14, 2025.
4. Celeste Meiffren-Swango, James Horrox, Grace Vickers, et al., "'Chemical recycling': What you need to know," PIRG, July 14, 2025.
5. Celeste Meiffren-Swango, James Horrox, Grace Vickers, et al., "'Chemical recycling': What you need to know," PIRG, July 14, 2025.
6. Celeste Meiffren-Swango, James Horrox, Grace Vickers, et al., "'Chemical recycling': What you need to know," PIRG, July 14, 2025.
7. "Reducing plastic waste in the states," PIRG, July 26, 2022.
8. Jenn Engstrom and Celeste Meiffren-Swango, "Amazon just took another big step toward reducing its plastic waste. But the job's not done," PIRG, June 20, 2024.
Comments
Post a Comment