Article Tools

Print | Email | Bookmark and Share

Dow pilots recycled plastic-to-energy system

Scrap film is incinerated to recover 96% of available energy, equivalent to 11.1 million BTUs of natural gas.

Dow_waste.jpgThe Dow Chemical Company reports that it has successfully demonstrated the use of recycled plastic to generate energy. The successful pilot test measured how plastic that has been reused and recycled to the full extent possible can be used as fuel for an ultimate end-of-life option instead of going to a landfill for disposal.

The pilot test found that 96% of available energy was recovered after incinerating 578 pounds of used plastic in a kiln at one of Dow’s waste treatment facilities. The energy recovered was equivalent to 11.1 million BTUs of natural gas and was used as fuel for Dow’s incinerator during the test. The trial was completed in compliance with regulatory permits.

Linear low-density polyethylene scrap film generated in one of Dow’s extrusion laboratories was used in the test. The film was the same type commonly used for packaging food and consumer products. The test took place at Dow’s second-largest U.S. manufacturing location in Midland, MI.

“The purpose of the test was to collect data showing that used plastic can provide a valuable source of energy and ultimately help reduce our need for natural gas or other fossil fuels,” says Jeff Wooster, Plastics Sustainability Leader for Dow’s North American Plastics business. “The study results demonstrate that almost all of the available energy stored in used plastic can be captured and reused as opposed to being buried in a landfill.”

While most thermoplastics can be reprocessed, there currently are limited end-of-life options for certain types of used plastic packaging, such as some flexible films and containers made from a combination of materials.

U.S. lags behind in energy recovery, Dow says
“Energy recovery and chemical transformation do not replace the traditional means of recycling plastics—they extend and complement it,” Wooster explains. "The U.S. lags behind many other countries that capture trapped energy from recovered materials. Recovering embedded energy in recycled plastic is a ‘best-in-class’ approach used in Europe and other regions. Our next step is to help find a way to scale up this more sustainable practice in the United States.”

According to Dow, the sustainability advantages of energy recovery include utilizing natural gas or oil first to make plastics, which can then be used, reused, recycled, and recovered at end-of-life, capturing the energy content of the original feedstock. Energy recovery allows more utility captured from every natural gas or oil molecule.

“Energy recovery is a clean, reliable, renewable source of energy having less environmental impact than many other sources of energy,” Wooster explains. “We look at this endeavor as another way in which Dow can deliver on its core value of protecting the planet—by harnessing its innovation engine to help customers, communities, and society while encouraging others to do the same.”

The recycle-to-energy recovery trial provided the concept validation for the submission and approval of one of several energy efficiency projects recently chosen to receive funding through Dow’s Energy Intensity Improvement Fund. The $100 million investment fund targets Dow projects designed to help reduce energy usage and greenhouse gas emissions.

Comments: 3

They have been doing this in European Countries now for many years.
One question I have is; how possible is it to convert old Nuclear plants to use this technology? We have an old Nuke plant near us that was converted to coal a number of years ago. It would limit the overall dollars needed to use this technology in the US if it was a cost effective conversion from Nuclear to waste as an energy source. I would feel a lot better if they stopped burying resources and phased out Nuclear for energy production.

Technology has been in place - but how will the films be collected post-consumer to feed WTE via a cost effective method?

So, Dow didn't use post consumer waste in the first place. And in the second place, they didn't use a product made from post consumer waste. And in the third place, they didn't use a product which would have been made from post consumer waste from products which would have been made from post consumer plastic waste. And in the fourth place, only 578 pounds is really nothing for a big oven, so how could you measure the efficiency then? The warmth stored in the walls of the oven can have a major impact on the measurements.
So, just some thoughts that make me conclude that this whole message is only pr for Dow and the plastic industry and totally crap.

You should know that unfortunately, mosts products made from post-consumer waste are not made of clear monostreams (which can indeed be recycled and recycled again) but mixed plastic waste. From which it's hard to make a good, nice, light, clean product again. In Europe we have about 20 years experience with this.
So, what's being done in those cases: extra additives are added, and virgin materials are added, in order to get some kind of product that 'll still have some functional properties... Mostly a lot more massive than the comparable original product.

If you'd incinerate a product like that, and even more, if you'd incinerate a product which 'd be made out of the remnants of these products after they've been used, than surely I can tell you, the energy recovery rate will not be as high as Dow is claiming now. And, much worse, if you'd incinerate these kind of waste streams in a regular oven, lots of dangerous toxic gases could be evaporated.
In Europe we have more than 30 years experience with waste incineration as well... Ever heard of dioxine, which can be formed when burning PVC under badly controlled conditions?

Actually I couldn't believe what I was reading here in this article, this is really prehistoric!

The only viable sound way for plastic packaging recycling that most environmentalists see in Europe, is to collect monostreams, which at best be separated directly at household-level instead of in separation plants, in order to make a high quality recycling possible... a bit like the C2C philosophy.
And which is already realized in your country as well, through deposit systems and reverse vending machines.
There are many studies about this topic.

In the Netherlands and Germany NGO's like Greenpeace and specialized NGO's on waste topics can tell you all about this. And you can contact me as well.

Post new comment

Already a member of this site? Log in first before you post!
The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • You may use [inline:xx] tags to display uploaded files or images inline.

More information about formatting options

CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
1 + 2 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.

* indicates an article that was submitted directly to this Web site by the supplier, and was not handled by the Greener Package editorial staff.

Greener Package may share your contact information with our sponsors, as detailed in our Privacy Policy. Greener Package will not share your information with a sponsor whose content you have not reviewed. The members of the Advisory Board and Expert Network do not review, approve or endorse advertisements on this Web site.

Don’t miss intelligence crucial to your job and business!
Click on any newsletter to view a sample. Enter your email address below to sign up!
Each newsletter ranges in frequency from once per month to a few times per month at most.
Email: