1 Microplastics Recovery from Polymer operations.
Your browser does not support viewing this document. Click here to download the document.
2 Incineration of all "unrecylable" plastics - Report
Some time ago a study was carried out for the Canadian Plastics Industry Association (CPIA) by the School of Planning of the University of Waterloo.
www.canplastics.com/news/study-highlights-value-of-canadian-plastics-to-energy-strategy/1002010430/35vsq8wWs42l2u7uM20/?ref=enews_CP&goback=.gde_3172679_member_208291886
The essence of this report recommends the incineration of all "unrecylable" plastics to convert to energy.
Fusionpolymers comment.
It's interesting, but highlights the "lets take the easy way out ," philosophy associated with such a doctrine. Plenty of people and technologies know how to convert plastic to energy. Burn or pyrolise it.
That surely should not be the question. Once burned , now more plastic is needed ...ok then lets go take more oil from the ground to make new ... how does that stack up with this short sighted philosophy ?
Oh ..and by the way ..if the Canadian Government ( and others) were not so intent upon ensuring continuance of extraction of oil from the ground to keep the vested interest of taxes flowing into the coffers, then perhaps a different strategy would emerge. In Canada's case this vested interest philosophy probably also extends to the either ignorance, or deliberate blinkered vision, of alternative recycling processes capable of substituting the timber products such as, fencing, benches, decking, plywood, concrete shuttering, all of which can be manufactured from the ill defined "unrecyclable dirty co mingled plastics".(every tonne recycled as opposed to being "incinerated permanently" creates a saving of 1.5 tonnes of CO2 compared with creating new plastic).
Oh but just a minute ...that means Canada wouldn't have to cut down so many trees .... maybe additionally that could contribute to some benefit in restricting global warming ......or is that too difficult to contemplate . Additionally, surprise surprise ....the caveat to that is after that secondary life is finished of the recycled plastic products (unlike most timber products possibly a further 50 years), then lo and behold it can be re recycled once again ..... probably by a more enlightened and intelligent society than exists today. Surely the current effort should be to specify and finance the already known and proven technologies to separate (not at kerbside ---that's old technology too) and extract and reuse all these plastics instead of advocating destroy and use once ...... then "lets extract more oil to replace what we just burned, but could have reused" ( over and over again !!)
www.canplastics.com/news/study-highlights-value-of-canadian-plastics-to-energy-strategy/1002010430/35vsq8wWs42l2u7uM20/?ref=enews_CP&goback=.gde_3172679_member_208291886
The essence of this report recommends the incineration of all "unrecylable" plastics to convert to energy.
Fusionpolymers comment.
It's interesting, but highlights the "lets take the easy way out ," philosophy associated with such a doctrine. Plenty of people and technologies know how to convert plastic to energy. Burn or pyrolise it.
That surely should not be the question. Once burned , now more plastic is needed ...ok then lets go take more oil from the ground to make new ... how does that stack up with this short sighted philosophy ?
Oh ..and by the way ..if the Canadian Government ( and others) were not so intent upon ensuring continuance of extraction of oil from the ground to keep the vested interest of taxes flowing into the coffers, then perhaps a different strategy would emerge. In Canada's case this vested interest philosophy probably also extends to the either ignorance, or deliberate blinkered vision, of alternative recycling processes capable of substituting the timber products such as, fencing, benches, decking, plywood, concrete shuttering, all of which can be manufactured from the ill defined "unrecyclable dirty co mingled plastics".(every tonne recycled as opposed to being "incinerated permanently" creates a saving of 1.5 tonnes of CO2 compared with creating new plastic).
Oh but just a minute ...that means Canada wouldn't have to cut down so many trees .... maybe additionally that could contribute to some benefit in restricting global warming ......or is that too difficult to contemplate . Additionally, surprise surprise ....the caveat to that is after that secondary life is finished of the recycled plastic products (unlike most timber products possibly a further 50 years), then lo and behold it can be re recycled once again ..... probably by a more enlightened and intelligent society than exists today. Surely the current effort should be to specify and finance the already known and proven technologies to separate (not at kerbside ---that's old technology too) and extract and reuse all these plastics instead of advocating destroy and use once ...... then "lets extract more oil to replace what we just burned, but could have reused" ( over and over again !!)