9  Recycling of Plastics
Adrian Merrington
Midland Compounding and Consulting, Midland, MI, United States
9.1 Introduction
The United States Environmental Protection
Agency (USEPA) defines municipal solid waste
(MSW) as any garbage or refuse, sludge from a
wastewater treatment plant, water supply treatment
plant, or an air pollution control facility and other
discarded material, including solid, liquid, semi-
solid, or contained gaseous material resulting from
industrial, commercial, mining, and agricultural
operations, and from community activities [1]. The
plastics component of MSW has risen from 390,000
tons in 1960 to 31.9 million tons in 2012. Perhaps
more significantly, the percentage of plastic waste in
MSW increased from less than 1% in 1960 to 12.7%
in 2012. It is perhaps this increase in the quantity dis-
carded that has made plastics an obvious target for
environmentalists [2,3,4] and plastic recycling a pub-
licly desired alternative to disposal in landfills [5].
The quantity of plastics recycled annually has in-
creased steadily since records have been kept. Nev-
ertheless, the rate of recycling is not keeping up with
the rate at which virgin plastics are being produced.
USEPA [1] tracks the generation and recovery of
plastics in the United States and reports that a higher
proportion of plastics are being disposed of in land-
fills than ever before (Fig. 9.1).
The recycling rate of one of the more sought-after
plastics, polyethylene terephthalate (PET) remains
stagnant [6]. The National Association for PET Con-
tainer Resources (NAPCOR) reports that the gross
recycling rate for PET captured from postconsumer
bottles has almost recovered to the level that was re-
corded some two decades earlier; 31.7% in 1995 and
31.2% in 2013. The Energy Information Administra-
tion [7] (EIA) who provides official US government
energy statistics suggests an even lower recycling
rate for most of the plastics on which they focused
their analysis and sets PET recycling as low as 19.5%
(Table 9.1).
The amounts of plastics produced and the quan-
tities that are discarded in landfills have meant that
plastic recycling continues to be an ever-increasing
political issue. Organizations and their respective
Applied Plastics Engineering Handbook. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-323-39040-8.00009-2
Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
websites vie to sway public opinion. Consolidat-
ing their efforts behind a single organization, the
­American Chemistry Council (ACC) has become the
voice of many chemical industries, including the plas-
tics industry [8]. In fact, ACC membership is limited
to commercial entities as they represent the leading
companies engaged in the business of chemistry, in-
cluding significant business groups such as the Plas-
tics Division and the Chlorine Chemistry Division
[9]. The ACC promotes the benefits of using plastics,
highlights recycling success stories and identifies the
plastics industry as a large player in the reduction in
the amounts of plastics disposed of in landfills.
There are many organizations that voice opposing
views to those represented by the ACC, some more
actively than others. Greenpeace [10] had in the past
been reported to suggest that banning the use of plas-
tics was a viable solution to the amount of plastic
waste being generated [11]. The unambiguously
named Campaign Against the Plastic Plague has the
long-term goal of seeing zero-waste attained [12] and
there is also an ongoing petition to ban the use of
plastics [13]. These organizations argue against the
use of some or all plastics and some argue against
the efficacy of recycling though most acknowledge
recycling as a better option than disposal in landfills.
Such viewpoints have gained some political sup-
port in recent years. In 2014 California Governor Ed-
mund Brown signed SB270 into law whereby single-
use plastic bags were prohibited from use at checkout
counters in large grocery stores and supermarkets
[14]. In 2013, New York City Mayor Michael Bloom-
berg signed Int. 1060-2013 into law and, if officials
were not able to prove that polystyrene foam could
be recycled in an environmentally effective, economi-
cally feasible and safe way, the ban would have taken
effect in July 2015 [15]. The ban has currently stalled
in the courts of t​ he Honorable Margaret A. Chan who
determined that it could not go forward. Current New
York Mayor Bill de Blasio’s spokesperson has said
that the City is reviewing options to keep the ban in
effect. In both instances though, plastics were being
targeted because of littering issues resulting from a
lack of recycling infrastructure.
167
168 Applied Plastics Engineering Handbook

Figure 9.1  United States Plastics generation, recovery, and recycling rate, 1960–2012, reported in 2014. Current
production and recycling numbers and rate are highlighted [1].

Table 9.1  Types of Plastic, Percentage Recycled (2014) and Common Applications for the Recyclate [124]

Recovery Rate
Resin SPI [24] Symbol (%, 2014) [7] Applications of Recyclate
PET 19.5 Fiber (clothing, carpet), film (balloons, packaging, thermal
sheets, adhesive backing), bottles (pop, water), cosmetics
packaging and food containers.
HDPE 10.3 Nonfood containers (laundry detergent, shampoo, condi-
tioner, and motor oil bottles) plastic lumber, pipe, buckets,
crates, flowerpots, film, recycling bins and floor tiles.
PVC <1 Packaging, loose-leaf binders, decking, paneling, gutters,
mud flaps, film, floor tiles and mats, traffic cones, electri-
cal equipment, garden hoses and mobile home skirting.
LDPE 5.3 Shipping envelopes, garbage can liners, floor tile, plastic
lumber, food wrapping film, shopping bags, compost bins,
dry cleaning bags and trashcans.
PP <1 Automobile battery cases, signal lights, brooms, oil fun-
nels, brushes, ice scrapers, condiment bottles, margarine
containers, yogurt containers, bicycle racks and rakes.
PS <1 Thermometers, light switch plates, thermal insulation, egg
cartons, vents, rulers, license plate frames, foam packing,
take-out food containers and disposable cutlery.
Other <1 Polycarbonate (refillable plastic bottles, baby bottles,
metal food can liners, consumer electronics, lenses);
nylons (clothing, carpets, gears); biodegradable resins
(food and beverage packaging); mixed plastics and blends
(electronics housing, plastic lumber), etc.

Some organizations focus on the technical as-
pects of recycling plastics and leave political opin-
ion out of their mandate. One such organization is
the Society of Plastics Engineers (SPE) Environ-
mental Division that was established to disseminate
information on plastic recycling [16]. The Division
sponsors conferences and online technical presen-
tations focused on the subject of plastics recycling
and highlights the technical and business aspects of
recycling [17].
9:  Recycling of Plastics 169
9.1.1  Definitions of Plastic and
Recycling to the Plastics Recycler
ASTM D883-12 defines plastic as a material that
contains as an essential ingredient an organic sub-
stance of large molecular weight, is solid in its fin-
ished state and, at some stage in its manufacture or
in its processing into finished articles, can be shaped
by flow [18]. That definition fails to include the mul-
titude of additives, fillers, coatings, or treatments that
are incorporated into the majority of parts made from
plastics. It is this combination of resin, fillers, addi-
tives and coatings that the recycler encounters when
recovering plastics for reuse.
Plastic recycling has been described as the process
of recovering scrap or waste plastics and reprocess-
ing the material into useful products, sometimes com-
pletely different in form from their original state [19].
Classifying by the final product of any given recovery
process has further differentiated between alternative
plastic recycling methodologies [20]. For example:
• Primary recycling: The recovered plastic is
used in products with performance character-
istics that are equivalent to those made using
virgin plastics. Ideally, closed-loop recycling
takes the recovered material and uses it back
in the original application. An example of pri-
mary recycling is where PET recovered from
postconsumer bottles is used in the production
of new bottles.
• Secondary recycling: The recovered plastic is
used in products that have less demanding perfor-
mance requirements than the original application.
Secondary recycling often requires reformulation
to meet specifications of the new product. An ex-
ample of secondary recycling is in the production
of flooring tiles from mixed polyolefins.
• Tertiary recycling: Waste plastic is used as the
feedstock in a process that generates chemicals
and fuels. An example of tertiary recycling is
the glycolysis of PET into diols and dimethyl
terephthalate that can then be used to make
­virgin PET.
• Quaternary recycling: Energy is recovered from
waste plastic by incineration. Tire derived fuels
(TDF) is an example of quaternary recycling.
This chapter focuses on primary and secondary
recycling where the plastic is reused rather than con-
verted into chemicals or fuel to meet energy needs.
Although tertiary and quaternary recycling routes are
valid alternatives to the disposal of plastics in land-
fills, the plastic, per se, no longer exists. However,
the ACC current position on energy recovery from
plastics proposes that our nation’s energy policy
must harness all of America’s energy sources, includ-
ing recovering energy from waste, to continue creat-
ing the innovative products and jobs our economy
needs, strengthen our economy, improve our energy
security and promote sustainable energy production
[21]. Their proposal describes how the United States
would support as many as 600 waste-to-energy fa-
cilities, create up to 38,900 jobs by new operations,
and employ 8800 directly at the facilities. Energy
recovery development is anticipated to generate an
annual payroll of $2.1 billion with $18.0 billion of
economic output during the investment phase. Op-
posing viewpoints to this proposal argue that, coun-
ter to the ACC’s position that energy recovery has a
synergistic relationship with recycling, the reality is
that valuable plastics are often diverted from recycle
streams to feed energy recovery facilities. There is
also apprehension over the fact that energy recovery
from waste is regarded as landfill-avoidance rather
than recycling.
There are terms used within the recycling indus-
try that differentiate the source material. Postindus-
trial plastics are recovered from the parts or resin
manufacturer before being sold to the public. This
stream is typically cleaner, newer, more homoge-
neous, and more valuable than the alternative post-
consumer plastic. Postconsumer plastic is collected
after the consumer has used it so it may be separated
by resin family by the user (such as pop bottles in
Bottle Bill States [22]) or, more typically, recovered
from comingled waste streams. Postconsumer plastic
may be many decades old before it is received at the
recyclers’ facilities. An emerging term, preconsumer
plastics, is being used to describe materials that have
been recovered during the recycling phase of postin-
dustrial scrap.
Potential classifications for postconsumer plastics
would be from where the recyclate is being sourced
or based on the length of time from production to
disposal. Such classification would essentially sepa-
rate postconsumer plastics recycle streams into two:
household (typically from packaging and nondura-
bles) and the rest (such as durable goods, electronics,
construction, automotive, etc.). Often, plastics recy-
cling infrastructure is focused on recovering house-
hold waste given the quantity of relatively new ma-
terials that are available but there is also significant
activity in recycling plastics recovered from other
markets.
170 Applied Plastics Engineering Handbook
9.1.2  The Complexities of Plastics
Recycling
Plastic may require greater processing to be re-
cycled than glass and metal materials. Mixed plastics
typically have poor mechanical properties resulting
from the poor interfacial adhesion. Low entropy of
mixing is typically established when bringing two or
more different plastics together so resins must often
be of nearly identical composition in order to mix ef-
ficiently. When different types of plastics are melted
together they tend to phase-separate and set-up in
these phases. The interfaces at the phase boundaries
are weak and cause structural weakness in the result-
ing compound. As such, mixed, untreated polymer
blends are only useful in limited applications [23].
The plastic recycling industry would rather focus
on the primary recycling of single types of plastics
that, in turn, generate the greatest financial returns.
To that end, postindustrial streams have been the fo-
cus of many recycling businesses as the material from
these sources is known, newer, essentially the same
from part-to-part and relatively clean when compared
with postconsumer plastics. Successful recycling of
postconsumer plastics has been mostly limited to eas-
ily identified parts that use a single, high-value resin
type and that are available in large quantities. There
are a few examples where mixed postconsumer plas-
tics have been utilized in secondary recycling appli-
cations such as plastic lumber and floor tiles.
Recycling single resin plastics from postindustrial
or postconsumer sources typically utilizes standard
processing equipment. Plastics are melted, extruded,
pelletized, and then formed into a final product. Ad-
ditives may be added that compensate for prior use,
additional processing caused thermal histories or
new product needs but the use of these additives is
minimized to control the overall cost of the recycled
plastic and thereby increase the overall profitability
of the process. The next section addresses some of
the technical issues associated with recycling spe-
cific individual plastic streams.
9.2  Technology to Recycle Plastics
9.2.1  Single Resins
Single resins are obtained most typically from
postindustrial scrap (a known plastic type, grade,
and source) or limited postconsumer scrap where the
item is known to be made from a single type of plas-
tic, is easily identified, can be separated from the mix
inexpensively and is available in quantity. The type
of resin might be identified using, for example:
• Society of the Plastics Industry (SPI) Resin
Identification Codes (RIC) (Table 9.1) [24].
• Automotive resin identification stampings
(Fig. 9.2).
• Knowledge of the product (e.g., HDPE is re-
covered from postconsumer milk bottles).
• Manufacturers’ data logs.
• By determining some property of the plastic
(e.g., hand-held RAMAN spectrophotometers
may be used to identify the resin used to make
plastic parts).
The SPI developed the RIC [24] system to be used
solely to identify resin content used in the manufacture
of plastic packaging more than 200 cm3 or 50 g. Thir-
ty-nine states (Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California,
Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia,
Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky,
Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michi-
gan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska,
Nevada, New Jersey, North Carolina, North Dakota,
Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Rhode Island, South Caro-
lina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, Wash-
ington, and Wisconsin) have adopted legislation re-
garding the use of the RICs on bottles of 16 ounces or
more and rigid containers of 8 ounces or more consis-
tent with the code. Although erroneously often termed
Recycling Codes, the SPI specifically states that the
manufacturer should not make recycling claims in
close proximity to the code, even if such claims are
suitably qualified. Still, there was enough confusion
that the Attorneys General of 11 states objected to
false and misleading claims about plastic recyclabil-
ity [25]. Even recycling officials stated that RICs were
confusing as the public thought that the chasing ar-
rows meant something is recyclable whereas, in real-
ity, the arrows are meaningless [26].
In response to these concerns, ASTM D7611: Stan-
dard Practice for Coding Plastics Manufactured Arti-
cles for Resin Identification [27] updated the previous
specifications by replacing the chasing arrows with a
triangle. Other potential modifications, such as add-
ing an 8 for bioplastics, were not included in the 2013
standard, which leaves, for example, compostable
PLA in the same category as polycarbonate, a resin
that some authorities are recommending be avoided
[28]. Options under consideration for future updates
include using 8 for linear low density polyethylene
(LLDPE), 9 for polylactic acid (PLA), and 10 for
9:  Recycling of Plastics 171

Figure 9.2  A stamping identifying the plastic used in an automotive bumper. The resin used in the production of
this Daimler–Chrysler part is identified as TEO (Olefinic Thermoplastic Elastomer), more commonly known as
TPO (thermoplastic polyolefin) [126].

cyclohexylenedimethylene terephthalate copolyesters
(CTC) but their addition still needs to be ratified [29].
A criticism often cited of the RICs is that their
usage stifles innovation [30]. As the standard limits
the amount of filler that can be used in a container
marked with anything other than a 7, biosourced
fillers that have the potential to lower the carbon
footprint of a part, find labeling causes a significant
barrier for new products to be accepted. Similarly,
multilayered bottles with outstanding barrier proper-
ties are also finding it more difficult to enter or stay
in [31] the marketplace.
Most single resins undergo a similar basic recycling
process. They are collected through some infrastruc-
ture mechanism, transported to a recycling facility,
separated by resin type, washed and dried to remove
debris, ground into flake, possibly pelletized and may
have some additive package added to meet application
needs or rejuvenate properties diminished through
prior use or the recycling process. Each step intro-
duces costs that potentially render technically feasible
processes economically unviable at larger scale when
used in quantity in the real world. Price fluctuation
of the virgin resin may also pose a significant barrier
to commercialization and this variable is one that is
beyond the control of the recycler; price fluctuation
alone caused the virtual collapse of many of the small
scale, mom-and-pop PET recyclers in the late 1990s.
9.2.1.1  Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET)
Amount Produced: 4,520 thousand tons [7]
Amount Recycled: 880 thousand tons [7]
Resin Identification Code: 1
The price that recycled PET can demand, as with
most recycled plastics, closely follows that of the
­virgin resin. The opportunity to lower costs is the fac-
tor that typically drives the manufacturer to look at
the recycle market but virgin PET can cost less than
recycled PET in some cases. Where PET recycling
172 Applied Plastics Engineering Handbook
has been particularly successful is where its reclama-
tion has been subsidized or in vertically integrated
operations. Transparent PET has the highest value
and the widest variety of end-use applications. Trans-
lucent and opaque PET may be less desirable due to
the presence of additives such as titanium dioxide.
This additive can be detrimental to PET recycling
for bottle-to-bottle and engineered resin uses [32].
Products including polyester carpet, t-shirts, thermo-
formed sheet and car parts are all made by companies
that manufacture products using recycle PET [33].
Some states, termed Bottle Bill States, demand
a deposit be paid on each drink container [22]. The
consumer and retail outlet serve as unpaid aggrega-
tion and separation facilities for the PET recycling
industry providing relatively homogeneous postcon-
sumer recycling streams. PET from these streams
can be used in the manufacture of new bottles but
is equally as likely to be used in the manufacture of
fibers used in the clothing and carpet industries. In
fact, some of the largest PET recyclers in the United
States are manufacturers integrated into the fiber in-
dustry and they use all of the PET that they recover.
Contaminants that can catalyze the hydrolysis of
PET into lower molecular weight entities with carbox-
ylic acid end groups are a significant issue. The contam-
inants may be acid, base, or even water; wet PET may
show significant property degradation when processed.
These lower molecular weight entities themselves may
further catalyze the hydrolysis of PET so that the deg-
radation becomes autocatalytic. Contamination by oth-
er plastics, particularly polyvinyl chloride (PVC), can
also be a significant issue. PVC will degrade at PET
processing temperatures and release hydrochloric acid
that will also catalyze the hydrolysis of PET.
Reprocessing PET may subject the resin to addition-
al heat histories that may reduce the molecular weight.
Some producers suggest that the legislated inclusion of
PET recycle into pop bottle manufacturing would lead
to significant degradation in the product over a rela-
tively short period of time [34]. However, the potential
for degradation of the PET feedstock has not deterred
many manufacturers from using recycled PET [35].
In addition to recycling PET, technologies to depo-
lymerize PET to its monomers have been established
by major PET producers. Glycolysis and methanolysis
(using glycols and methanol, respectively, at elevated
temperatures) have been shown to depolymerize PET
into low molecular weight diols and dimethyl tere-
phthalate (Fig. 9.3). Goodyear, for example, produced
REPETE resin with 20% recycle material recovered
by this technique [36]. Pepsi had previously used
REPETE in the manufacture of its pop bottles [37].
Figure 9.3  Depolymerization of PET by methanoly-
sis [34].
PET recyclers experience some unique issues
and some not so unique. Supply quality and quan-
tity remains major concerns: in 2013, reclaimers still
reported crisis-level contamination, particularly in
bales of PET generated in curbside programs. PET
itself is often cited as being a contaminant for the
PET recycler. PET used to produce bottles typically
has an intrinsic viscosity of 0.70–0.78 dL/g for water
bottles and 0.78–0.85 dL/g for carbonated soft drinks
but labels have an intrinsic viscosity of 0.6–0.7 dL/g.
The presence of PET used to produce labels in the
bottle stream may produce a low viscosity mix that
will then not support the production of new bottles
and render the recyclate less valuable. There are tech-
nologies to separate the biaxially oriented blown film
grade PET from blow molding grade (triboelectric,
electrostatic, air classification, etc.) but they are often
too costly for most recyclers to invest in and, there-
fore, are not commonly used [38]. Chain extenders,
an additive that increases the molecular weight of the
PET polymer chains and thereby also increases vis-
cosity, are commonly used to overcome these issues.
Although Coca-Cola’s PlantBottle [39] is mar-
keted as a drop-in replacement for its petroleum
counterpart, other biobased plastics are not. Con-
tamination by polylactic acid (PLA), a biosourced
and compostable alternative to PET, is often cited as
a major concern for PET recyclers. It is difficult to
separate PLA from PET in most recycling facilities.
While the technology exists to separate PLA from
PET, it is costly and not commonly used [40].
Polyethylene furanoate [41] (PEF) is another
biobased PET competitor produced when furandi-
carboxylic acid (FDCA) is polymerized in the pres-
ence of ethylene glycol (EG). PEF may compete
well with PET on performance as it has very good
barrier properties, higher modulus, lower melting
point and a higher glass transition than PET. PEF
does not currently have a significant presence in the
9:  Recycling of Plastics 173

Table 9.2  Typical Applications for Various Grades of Virgin Polyethylene [42]

Polyethylene Grade Acronym SPI RIC Typical Applications

Very low density VLDPE 7 a
Hoses, tubing, impact modifier, blown film.
Linear low density LLDPE 4 Plastic bags, sheets.
Low density LDPE 4 Containers, trays, paper laminate, snap-on lids, six-pack rings.
Medium density MDPE 7a Gas pipes and fittings, shrink film, screw closures.
High density HDPE 2 Milk bottles, fuel tanks, chemical pipes, Tyvek.
Ultra high molecular UHMWPE 7a Bearings, gears, artificial joints.
weight
a
Not commonly used in applications which require the use of SPI RICs.

marketplace but that may change. As PEF becomes
more prevalent, the opportunity for contamination in
PET recycling streams increases. PEF’s effect on the
recycling of PET is still unproven but concerns are
being voiced.
9.2.1.2  Polyethylene (PE)
Amount Produced: 5,530 (HDPE) and 7,350
(LDPE) thousand tons [7]
Amount Recycled: 570 (HDPE) and 390 (LDPE)
thousand tons [7]
Resin Identification Code: 2 (HDPE), 4 (LDPE)
There are many different grades of PE available
in today’s marketplace (Table 9.2) [42]. Application
needs typically dictate using low (<0.925 g cm−3) or
high (>0.940 g cm−3) density varieties but may also
demand specific rheological characteristics in their
manufacturing processes. Density, beyond defining
the type of PE (and its uses), may also indicate the
presence of a filler. However, mechanical properties,
processing characteristics, photochemical resistance
and surface and opacity properties may also be used
to classify the characteristics of the recycled PE [43].
Recovered HDPE and LDPE have sufficient value
that they are almost always processed into separate
recycled streams although linear low density poly-
ethylene (LLDPE) may be mixed with LDPE.
Although many users of recycled PE have a robust
stream available, some manufacturers using recycled
PE in place of virgin materials report experiencing
lower manufacturing efficiency that results in an
increased scrap rate from lower product quality. A
manufacturer may have a specific property and pro-
cessing window within which the purchased resin
must fall. The use of a recycle PE resin may not en-
sure that all of the narrow specifications can be met.
Outside of recovering PE from a single postindus-
trial source, simply describing the melt flow index
(MFI), the rate at which the plastic flows after being
melted, and the density may not adequately describe
the characteristics of the resin. Further, it may be dif-
ficult to find sufficient quantities of recycled materi-
als that meet the exact specifications required by the
process, especially given the hundreds of grades of
PE available. Advanced Blending Technologies [44]
has developed software that compounds low-cost op-
timized blends from wide spec, off spec, or recycled
PE streams by providing blend formulations based
on selectable material properties. The resulting alter-
native blends can be prioritized by factors such as
lowest cost; usually the main parameter in the manu-
facturer choosing to use recycle resins over virgin
materials.
PP contamination of PE will decrease the me-
chanical properties of the resin due to the difference
in the melting point. Clumps of PP may act as stress
concentrators in the PE matrix at high concentrations
though some have reported that low amounts of PP
can be tolerated [45]. Other contaminants that have
been reported to have a detrimental effect on PE in-
clude adhesives, paper, metal, PVC, and PET [34].
9.2.1.3  Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC)
Amount Produced: 870 thousand tons [7]
Amount Recycled: 0 thousand tons [7]
Resin Identification Code: 3
Vinyl 2010 [46] (which will potentially be re-
named Vinyl 2020) is a European industry-based
organization establishing recycling goals for PVC
users. Each industry that uses PVC (windows, pipes,
wiring, etc.) has established goals for recycling
within that organization. Their activity is a counter
measure to some of the activities of special inter-
est groups that highlight the problems of recycling
PVC [47,48]. However, most of the problems on
which those that oppose the use of PVC focus are not
174 Applied Plastics Engineering Handbook
actually problems with recycling rigid PVC. Rather,
the problems are associated with recycling other ma-
terials that are contaminated with PVC scrap or else
they deal with the debated health issues associated
with PVC additives, especially those used in flexible
PVC skins.
PVC contamination in other plastics is a major
concern. PVC labels have been used in the past on
PET pop bottles. The presence of PVC bottles can
also contaminate the PET recycle stream. Very low
quantities of PVC have been shown to significantly
diminish the mechanical properties of PET. PVC can
break down to form hydrochloric acid when mixed
with PET during processing. These acids diminish
the physical and chemical structure of PET, causing
it to turn yellow and brittle in addition to the potential
out-gassing of chlorine gas during reprocessing [49].
This potential for out-gassing of chlorine gas when
recycling PVC, however, is a debated issue [50].
Conversely, small amounts of PET contamination in
PVC bottle streams can similarly render that stream
useless [51].
Phthalates, for example di-2-ethyl-hexyl phthal-
ate, are common plasticizers used in the PVC indus-
try. These additives make the hard PVC flexible. The
USEPA classifies this additive as a probable human
carcinogen and there is also evidence of other health
issues [52].
Despite that the USEPA records the recycling rate
of PVC as negligible [24], postindustrial rigid PVC
regrind has been reportedly used in the manufacture
of extruded parts such as pipes [53] and in the manu-
facture of windows [54]. Postindustrial flexible PVC
has been ground up and reintroduced into the pro-
duction stream for vinyl flooring and carpet back-
ing [55]. Some feasibility studies have assessed the
opportunity to recycle vinyl recovered from wiring
applications [56].
9.2.1.4  Polypropylene (PP)
Amount Produced: 7,190 thousand tons [7]
Amount Recycled: 40 thousand tons [7]
Resin Identification Code: 5
The economic viability of PP recycling is hindered
by the low cost of the virgin polymer and the type
of applications that use the resin. The costly trans-
portation of relatively large parts that contain little
polymer is also a hindrance to commercially viable
recyclability given the extensive use of PP in packag-
ing applications. The economic constraints do not al-
low the recycler much opportunity to perform costly
recycling processes such as any extended separation
protocol or property rejuvenation using expensive
additives. The Preserve Group [57] had announced
a program to try to address the low recycle rate of
PP, called Gimme 5 [58]. The success of the program
that suggested activities such as the unpaid and un-
regulated consumer transporting the waste to col-
lection sites or paying to mail the scrap plastic to a
recycler has not significantly impacted the low rate
of recycling PP from household waste.
The carpeting and battery industries have long
been active in developing recycling uses for PP
waste. The Carpet America Recovery Effort (CARE)
reports that its partners have recycled materials used
in the manufacture of carpeting. However, even with-
in their activities, the amount of PP in their recycle
streams has dropped from 22% in 2006 to almost 8%
in each of the years since 2007 [59]. Battery Council
International (BCI) [60], a similar organization for
the battery industry, describes how 97% of batteries
sold in the United States are recycled but the driving
force is the recovery and reuse of the lead. The PP
cases comprise only a small percentage of the total
weight but this PP is recycled back into new plastic
cases.
9.2.1.5  Polystyrene (PS)
Amount Produced: 2,240 thousand tons [7]
Amount Recycled: 20 thousand tons [7]
Resin Identification Code: 6
PS is principally used in solid and expanded PS
(EPS) forms. Many of the applications for PS are sin-
gle use and disposable. Hurdles to PS recycling are
similar to those for PP. Californians Against Waste
[61] report that current estimates by the California
Department of Conservation peg the costs of recy-
cling (expanded) polystyrene at over $3000 per ton,
meaning that polystyrene actually has a negative
scrap value [62]. The National Polystyrene Recy-
cling Company was a coventure between a number
of PS producing chemical companies intended to in-
crease PS recycling but success was limited. Some
PS is recycled (audio and video cassettes, jewel cas-
es, etc.) but comparatively little from food packaging
usage.
It is perhaps this lack of recyclability that ensures
that EPS continues to be the target of many special
interest groups. MacDonald’s restaurants famously
switched from their EPS clamshells to paper (in real-
ity, back to paper, which was used prior to the clam-
shells) due to pressure from special interest groups
[63]. In addition to the proposed EPS ban in New
York, bans of its usage in takeout food packaging
9:  Recycling of Plastics 175
exist in other states, including California [64], Or-
egon, and Maine. Internationally, many countries in-
cluding India, Taiwan, and China have also banned
EPS takeout containers and tableware.
Routes to recycle solid PS include the basic wash,
dry, and pelletize route described earlier but EPS typ-
ically requires a densification process to be applied.
Densification eliminates the air in the foam beads by
mechanical grinding or solvent attack. The recycled
plastic is used in low-cost applications such as horti-
cultural trays, wastebaskets, wood substitutes, pack-
aging foam and desk trays.
9.2.1.6  Other Thermoplastics
Amount Produced: 28,940 thousand tons [8]
Amount Recycled: 30 thousand tons [7]
Resin Identification Code: 7
There are recycling opportunities for other plas-
tics beyond the few recognized by SPI RICs. The au-
tomobile industry, for instance, utilizes a series of en-
gineering thermoplastics that have a built-in market
if they can be recovered and reprocessed. These high
value plastics include polyamides (Nylon 6, Nylon
6,6, etc.), polycarbonates (PC), acrylics (PMMA),
styrenics (ABS), and blends (TPO, PC/PBT, PC/
ABS, etc.). Their higher value and demand allow re-
cyclers the opportunity to practice more exotic recov-
ery procedures and still have an economically viable
product.
There are many examples in industry where
niche-recycling processes are successfully meeting
business needs. CARE [65] recycles nylon from car-
pets and reuses the material to make new carpets by
blending it in with the virgin resin. PC is recovered
for reuse in automotive parts [66] despite the media
attention on the potential for producing bisphenol A
by-products [67]. PMMA has been depolymerized to
the monomer through pyrolysis for reuse [68]. Fu-
jitsu was reportedly recovering ABS from computer
housings and reusing it in the manufacture of new
computers [69].
Schiers [34] reviewed a number of techniques to
remove paints and plating from engineering thermo-
plastics that include hydrolysis, chemical stripping,
liquid cyclone, compressed vibration, melt filtration,
mechanical abrasion, cryogenic grinding, dry crush-
ing, and roller crushing. Although some of these
techniques are not inherently economic, they may
be when developed by the recycler to recover a par-
ticular resin. ACI Plastics, Inc. has commercialized
a process to remove paint from TPO bumpers. The
TPO recovered can be recycled back into products
requiring a Grade A surface finish. That company
also uses a process to separate the styrene maleic an-
hydride (SMA) substrate from shredded automotive
instrument panels (IPs) [70].
These few examples should provide the reader
with an indication of the level of activity within the
recycling community in recovering engineering ther-
moplastics. These high-value plastics are being uti-
lized in a variety of applications where they compete
favorably with virgin resins on properties and, most
importantly, price. However, the reduction in need
and falling commodity pricing of virgin resins expe-
rienced in late 2008 has seen a number of recyclers
facing tough times, even where they have patented
good technologies. There are strong indications,
though, that those tough times are over [71].
9.2.1.7 Thermosets
Amount Produced: 750 thousand tons [8]
Amount Recycled: 0 thousand tons [7]
Resin Identification Code: 7
The majority of this chapter has focused on ther-
moplastic recycling where the recycled plastic can
be heated and remolded into a new desired shape.
Another type of plastic, thermosets, where the plas-
tic cannot be remolded upon heating, is recovered
for reuse but to a lesser extent. Thermosets are used
in many applications such as in the production of
fiber-reinforced composites, polymeric coatings,
foams, lenses, and electronic chips. Thermoset re-
cycling is typically limited to grinding and incorpo-
ration of the regrind into an uncured monomer as a
filler (polyurethanes, epoxies, phenolic resins, etc.)
or, less commonly, compression molding (for exam-
ple, with some polyurethanes) but there are options
being investigated such as chemical, fuel or energy
recovery [72]. For example TDF, which consumes
up to half of the tires discarded in the United States
[73], may increase with the current push from the
ACC [21].
9.2.2  Mixed Plastics
Mixed plastics, as described earlier, cannot usu-
ally be combined into a single part that has good
mechanical properties. The commingled stream ei-
ther needs to be separated by resin type or else the
resins made compatible with each other by the addi-
tion of surface-active agents termed compatibilizers.
The following section describes those two alternative
routes in some detail.
176 Applied Plastics Engineering Handbook
9.2.2.1  Separation of Plastic Resins
9.2.2.1.1 Manual
Perhaps the most basic separation technique
and still the most commonly employed around the
world is to utilize manpower to separate the plastics.
An activity not limited to operations in developing
countries, manual separation is employed in many
US materials recovery facilities (MRFs) and other
operations [74]. This low-tech option sees individu-
als sorting parts using predefined characteristics. For
instance, HDPE milk and PET pop bottles may be
extracted from household waste by hand as they are
visually readily identifiable.
9.2.2.1.2 Density
Float-sink segregation uses density to separate
different plastics. Parts are ground into small pieces
and placed into a vessel containing a liquid. Those
plastics with a density lower than that of the liquid
will float whereas those with a density higher than
the liquid will sink. Simple liquids such as water
can be used in some situations but a saline solution,
where the density can be more tightly controlled, is
typically required to optimize resin separation [75].
Table 9.3 lists the density of the base resins of those
plastics classified by SPI RICs [24].
Density separation is complicated in many cases
because the density ranges of two given plastics may
cross. Separation is further complicated by the incor-
poration of fillers, air (in foams), adhesives or other
additives in some plastics as they can substantially
change the density. For example, 15% talc filled PP
has a density similar to that of ABS (1.02–1.20 g
cm−3) and may be used in similar applications result-
ing in a difficult mixture to separate [76]. An alterna-
tive to simple density separation would be required
in such a case.
Table 9.3 Density [75] of Plastics by SPI RIC [24]
Resin SPI RIC Density g/cm−3
PET 1 1.35–1.38
HDPE 2 0.94–0.96
PVC 3 1.32–1.42
LDPE 4 0.91–0.93
PP 5 0.90–0.92
PS 6 1.03–1.06
Other 7 Very broad
Air classification also uses density as the charac-
teristic by which different plastics may be separated.
A blast of air is blown through a steady stream of
falling ground, mixed plastics. The dense plastics
continue to fall while expanded foams and other
lighter materials are blown into a separate collector.
This technique is typically used to separate plastics
with significantly different densities whereas liquid
based density separations may be tuned more tightly.
9.2.2.1.3 Optical
Optical sensors can be used to separate plastics
based on either color or transparency. This technique
is used to separate bottles by color because clear PET
has more value than colored PET. Developed from
the coffee bean separators that are used to eliminate
unripe green beans from the mix, these computer-
controlled systems can rapidly differentiate between
the various hues of the plastic regrind. The color of
each piece of plastic is quickly established using a
type of CCD camera and is either allowed to flow
downward or is ejected with a puff of air into the
reject or collection pile. Satake [77], for example,
produces equipment that is specifically designed to
separate plastics by color but their main business is
still from the agricultural industry. Satake’s Scan-
Master IE, SE, and DE Optical Sorters are used to
differentiate the colors of HDPE and PET materials
in recycling operations.
9.2.2.1.4 Spectroscopic
Plastics identification by spectroscopic techniques
has increasingly focused on the use of near-infrared
and Raman spectroscopic techniques. LLA Instru-
ments, in conjunction with Daimler–Chrysler [78]
have developed a superfast near-infrared (NIR) sen-
sor system that has been used to separate mixed plas-
tics by type from shredded automotive parts. NIR
spectroscopy uses the near infrared region of the elec-
tromagnetic spectrum (from about 800 to 2500 nm).
Their two-phase process initially separates bright
and colored polymers and black polypropylene from
the mix. A second long-wavelength NIR sensor is
employed to then separate black plastics such as PC,
PMMA, ABS, PC/ABS blends, and others.
Raman spectroscopy relies on inelastic (Raman)
scattering of monochromatic light from a laser in the
visible, near infrared, or near ultraviolet range. Ra-
man spectroscopic techniques have historically failed
to separate different black resins. SpectraCode [79]
9:  Recycling of Plastics 177
was originally developed at Purdue University and
they manufactured Raman-based instruments used
for materials identification. Their RP-1 hand held
unit was well known within the recycling community
and has somewhat overcome the limitation that other
Raman spectrometers suffer when separating black
plastics. Although Raman is not a fast process, taking
up to 60 seconds to identify the resin type of a black
plastic, this technique may still have utility in iden-
tifying large parts. There are now many such instru-
ments on the market, for example Thermoscientifics’
Gemini Analyzer that combines both FTIR and Ra-
man spectroscopic techniques in a single unit [80]. It
should be noted that failure to correctly identify the
type of resin used to make black parts is of particular
significance because most mixed recycle streams end
up being black in color.
There are other spectroscopic techniques that
could find utility in the recycling industry. Laser
acoustic, laser-induced emission spectral analysis,
plasma emission spectroscopy, polarized light, phase
contrast illumination, UV light, and fluorescent tag-
ging have all been reported [27].
9.2.2.1.5 Electrostatic
Electrostatic separators were developed for the
metallurgical industry but have been used to sepa-
rate plastics for many decades. The technique is em-
ployed typically to separate two different plastics
rather than separate one plastic from a commingled
waste source but it has also found utility in the latter
[81]. The plastics are charged by ion bombardment.
A slight positive or negative static charge is imparted
to the flakes of different resins as they collide with
each other and with the walls of the charging cham-
ber. An electrostatic field is applied across a falling
stream of regrind to separate the plastics by resin
type. This technique has been used to separate PET
film from PET flake [82] and separate HDPE from
LDPE to greater than 90% purity [83].
9.2.2.1.6  Other Techniques
Froth flotation is a relatively expensive process
that has been privilege to significant US government
funding to define its efficacy to the recycling indus-
try. The process is used to selectively separate hydro-
phobic from hydrophilic materials [84]. The recycled
plastic is ground and treated with a reagent that im-
parts specific charges to the surface of the different
resins within the mix. A stream of air or nitrogen is
then bubbled into the separator and froth is produced
on the surface where different plastics are then sep-
arated by charge. The technology has been used to
produce recovered streams of 95% purity from au-
tomotive shredder residue (ASR). However, with a
significant remaining 5% impurity, the technology’s
uptake within the recycling industry is negligible and
unlikely to change without some outside intervention
given the high up-front investment the equipment de-
mands.
9.2.3  Compatibilization of Plastic
Resins
Parts are often manufactured using many differ-
ent plastics (e.g., polypropylene housing and nylon
gears) or else plastic blends (e.g., polycarbonate/
ABS blends). Recycling parts made from mixed plas-
tics remains chemically complex because of the gen-
eral lack of compatibility. A review article [85] high-
lighted how new materials advance parts production
and that the majority of the new materials identified
were blends.
The cost to separate parts made from many plas-
tics is often the main restriction to any recovery tech-
nology being commercially successful. The problem
is such that virgin plastics may cost less than their
postconsumer recycled counterparts. Further, con-
sumers refuse to pay a premium for recycled parts or
accept recycle parts with properties or qualities infe-
rior to those made from virgin resins.
One method to improve the economics of plastic
recycling is to reduce the need to separate plastics by
directly producing plastic blends [76]. These blends
must be of sufficient quality to be used as direct re-
placements for virgin plastics. Also, blends with
enhanced properties can be formulated when com-
bining more than one plastic. Current activities em-
ployed within the recycling industry to handle mixed
plastics or blends, however, are effectively limited to:
• Use of complex and costly processing tech-
niques such as coinjection molding or coextru-
sion and laminating.
• Identifying compatible plastics from compat-
ibility charts (Table 9.4) [86].
Few existing plastic blends are recycled with the
notable exceptions of TPO, TPE, SMA, and some
ABS streams (e.g., ABS, PC/ABS, ABS/Acrylic).
More complex recycle blends have not yet made a
significant impact on the recycle market. The use of
recycle materials from complex mixtures is currently
178 Applied Plastics Engineering Handbook

Table 9.4  Compatibility of Commonly Used Thermoplastics [17]

Major Component Minor Component

PMMA PA66 PC PET HDPE PP PVC PS
Acrylic PMMA 3 0 2 1 0 1 0 2
Nylon PA66 0 3 1 1 1 2 0 1
Polycarbonate PC 2 1 3 2 1 1 0 2
Polyester PET 1 1 2 3 1 1 0 1
Polyolefin HDPE 0 1 1 1 3 2 0 0
Polyolefin PP 1 2 1 1 2 3 0 0
Vinyl PVC 1 0 0 0 0 0 3 0
Styrenic PS 2 1 2 1 0 0 0 3

Key
3 This combination of two plastics is compatible in many concentrations and forms a product that has
useful properties.
2 A simple additive may need to be added to this combination of two plastics to get a blend that is a
product with useful properties. Technologies exist.
1 A useful product may be formed from this combination of plastics but the blend requires significant
modification. Technologies to modify the blend exist but the combination should be avoided unless
necessary.
0 Not compatible. Technologies to make products with useful properties from this combination of
­ lastics are not known so should be avoided.
p

limited to low cost applications such as floor tiles
and plastic lumber. A search of the patent literature
shows that there are many proposed solutions to the
problem of recycling blends. Where they fail in com-
mercialization is that they
• are too expensive to pursue,
• result in materials with inconsistent properties,
• suffer from an unfavorable cost/property bal-
ance,
• use feed streams that are too low in quantity or
too inconsistent in their composition,
• exhibit poor mechanical properties, and
• are envisioned for use only in low-cost appli-
cations and can therefore only demand a low
price for the mixed recycled plastics.
Knowledge of the compatibility of materials is
useful in making informed materials choices related
to recyclability. Other significant factors, such as ad-
ditive packages, resin history, contamination, range
of variability within the family, thermal and envi-
ronmental history, as well as any chemical changes
in the recycled materials, will also affect the ability
to melt mix materials. The compatibility of pairs of
virgin materials may, in fact, be vastly different than
the compatibility of the same pair of materials after
each has been fabricated, modified, subjected to use,
recycled and remelted.
Within a given resin family, different grades must
be identified to correctly define compatibility. The
inclusion of additives and the use of specific formula-
tions or grades of material will affect the compatibili-
ty. An example of a plastic blend that is sold commer-
cially is PC/ABS. This material is used extensively in
the computer, electronics, and automotive industries.
For optimal physical and mechanical performance,
formulations with very specific grades of ABS must
be used. Obtaining generic recycled ABS for use in
these applications leads to inferior parts. Further, the
additives used in the production and property modifi-
cation of certain ABS grades can also greatly reduce
efficacy in blends with PC [87].
The compatibility of pairs of commonly used
plastics compounded into a blend is delineated in
Table 9.4. The compatibility chart should be consid-
ered as only one of several pieces of information re-
quired to determine if pairs of plastics can be mixed.
Materials, even within the same family, may not
9:  Recycling of Plastics 179
Figure 9.4 Schematic representation of the compatibilization of two dissimilar plastics using an A-b-B block
copolymer [87].
readily mix if the density is substantially different.
High- and low-density PE represent such an exam-
ple. Further, blending even compatible materials may
provide a product that is not attractive in the market-
place. Biaxially oriented film contaminants in a blow
molding grade PET is an example of such a blend.
Even if two plastics can be made to mix, the resulting
composite may not be something that anyone wants.
Perhaps the recycler should ask if they should mix
plastics, not just if they can.
It is unusual to find different plastics that mix at
the molecular level. A blend of two plastics rarely
produces a system with a single homogeneous phase
and that is thermodynamically stable. A compatible
system is considered to be a useful multicomponent
plastic blend that has desirable properties. Some in-
compatible plastic blends may be made useful by the
presence of an additive, frequently termed a compati-
bilizer or compatibilizing agent.
Compatibilizers are frequently materials such as
block or graft copolymers. A specific example would
be a copolymer comprising two blocks where each
is compatible with one component of the blend (in
a blend of two plastics) and incompatible with the
other. An A-x-B block copolymer, where A and B are
long sequences of monomer that are identical to the
corresponding A and B polymers forming the blend,
and x is a bond between the blocks, is one of the sim-
plest forms of compatibilizer. A functionalized poly-
mer where the main polymer is compatible in one
phase and the functionality is compatible in the other
phase would be another example of a compatibil-
izing agent. One example of such a material would
be maleic anhydride functionalized polypropylene
(PP-MA) used to compatibilize blends of PP and
Nylon 66. Recent advances in the production of PP-
MA have seen an increase in the impact resistance of
polyolefin-based blends by up to 25% over the less
pure alternatives [88].
A compatibilizer may be used to modify the mor-
phology [89,90] and the interfacial adhesion of a
blend by:
• Reducing the interfacial tension between the
two phases which leads to a finer dispersion
of one phase in the other. For example, the in-
corporation of 1% poly(styrene-b-ethylene) di-
block copolymer in a blend of polystyrene and
polyethylene results in a reduction in interfa-
cial tension from 4.5 to 1.0 dyne cm−1.
• Enhancing the adhesion between the phases by
residing at the interface and providing a mecha-
nism by which the two phases are chemically
knit together.
• Stabilizing the dispersed phase against coales-
cence.
These actions combine to drastically improve
blend mechanical properties and are shown schemat-
ically in Fig. 9.4. The photomicrograph in Fig. 9.5
shows a blend of PS, LDPE, and PMMA and dra-
matically demonstrates the effect compatibilization
has on the morphology.
• The addition of the compatibilizer to this sys-
tem has reduced the nominal average phase
size diameter of the minor phase from 10 to
3  µm. The reduction in the size of the minor
phase increases the impact resistance as large,
incompatible phase particles can act as stress
concentrators.
• The addition of compatibilizers reduces the sur-
face smoothness that can be used to visualize
180 Applied Plastics Engineering Handbook
Figure 9.5 Photomicrograph of blends of polysty-
rene (PS) with low density polyethylene (LDPE)
and  poly(methyl methacrylate) (PMMA) in the ratio
of 70:15:15. (A) is the uncompatibilized blend and
(B) is of the blend containing an additional 2% of a
styrene–ethylene-styrene triblock copolymer [91].
how the surface tension has been affected. The
strength of the attraction between the two phas-
es has been increased as the degree of incom-
patibility has been decreased.
• Another effect is the introduction of the bind-
ing fibrils such as those seen at the top of
Fig. 9.4B. These fibrils bind the phase in place
and eliminate the possibility of phase coales-
cence. Both the binding action and the barrier
to coalescence increase the strength of the in-
terface. This example demonstrates how a sin-
gle compatibilizer can be used to improve the
properties of a multicomponent blend through
numerous mechanisms [91,92].
Some preformed compatibilizers, such as Kraton
[93] and Vector [94], are commercially available and
ready for use. Priex [95] maleic anhydride terminat-
ed polyolefins (PP-MA and PE-MA) are commonly
used to compatibilize minor levels of contamination
in PE and PP streams. Other postformed compati-
bilizers require a reaction or chemical or physical
change during the mixing or processing step before
they show efficacy. Materials used as postformed
compatibilizers are generally not compatibilizers
themselves but, because of an in situ reaction, result
in compatibilization.
Just because materials can be made to be com-
patible does not mean that there will be a demand
for the product. However, with caution, compati-
bilization may be used to help recycle otherwise
unrecyclable streams. Compatibilization was used
to help recover value from parts made using dif-
ferent resins during the recycling of plastics con-
tained within an automotive part, as is presented in
Fig. 9.6. More than 99% of the plastics used in the
manufacture of a minivan door were recovered in
this pilot scheme [96].
9.3 Challenges
9.3.1  Technical Issues
9.3.1.1 Additives
Manufactured plastic parts contain polymer resin
and additives. The additives used may impart a specific
property to the plastic or else serve as a processing aid.
A nonexclusive list of additives that are commonly used
in plastics would include: antiblocking agents, antifog-
ging agents, antioxidants, antistatic agents, blowing
agents, colorants, coupling agents, crosslinking agents,
curing agents, fillers, flame retardants, heat stabilizers,
hydrolytic stabilizers, impact modifiers, lubricants, pig-
ments, plasticizers, release agents, thermal stabilizers,
UV stabilizers, viscosity depressants, and so on [17].
There are numerous examples in the literature and in
the field where additives can cause the recycler issues.
A short list used to demonstrate the complexity addi-
tives pose to the recycler would include, for example:
• Some additives such as UV stabilizers may
have been used up during the initial use lifetime
of the plastic [96]. These additives would need
to be rejuvenated before reuse. Companies
such as Ciba sell Recyclossorb and Recyclo-
stab additive packages for the recycler, which
produces rejuvenated plastics [97].
• Some additives such as long glass fillers may de-
grade (break) during the recycling process. These
additives may demand that the recycling process
be modified to limit the effect on the properties
of the recycled plastics or else that more filler be
compounded into the resin to enable the plastic
to meet the demands of the application [98].
• Some additives used in one plastic may degrade
another plastic if used in a blend. For example,
compounding certain grades of recycled ABS
with virgin or recycled PC or PC/ABS will
cause the PC to degrade [87]. This type of com-
bination should be avoided.
The list above is obviously not exhaustive but
highlights how the recycler must consider what is in-
corporated into the resin to make it a useful plastic
for a particular part.
9.3.1.2  Chain Scission
Some plastics such as PET may suffer degrada-
tion through processing, as discussed earlier in this
chapter. The hydrolysis of PET into lower molecular
9:  Recycling of Plastics 181

Figure 9.6  Schematic representation of the process by which compatibilization and density separation techniques
can be used to recover over 99% of the plastics used in the manufacture of a minivan door [87].

weight entities with carboxylic acid end groups is
a significant issue. Epoxy-functionalized, styrene-
acrylic polymers with low molecular weight, high
functionality and tailored polydispersity are sold as
chain extenders or recycling aids for PET and other
polyesters. The inclusion of additives such as Sumi-
tomo’s Igetabond [99] can lead to an increase in
molecular weight, mechanical and rheological prop-
erties when used in virgin, reprocessed or postcon-
sumer recycled polyesters [100].
9.3.1.3  Coatings or Adhesives
Many coatings or adhesives are thermoset materi-
als. Thermosets do not blend well with thermoplas-
tics. Even when they can be made to blend [101],
they do not provide for a homogeneous surface. The
surface inhomogeneities that such a mix introduc-
es prevents the recycled plastic from being used to
manufacture parts requiring a high visual quality. A
number of commercial processes have been devel-
oped to reduce problems associated with recycling
painted plastics or plastics with adhesives. Paint re-
moval has been commercialized using solvent and
mechanical separation techniques [70]. Occasion-
ally, melt filtration is sufficient to remove some of
the inhomogeneities but this is the exception rather
than the rule [102].
9.3.1.4 Discoloring
A discolored plastic may be an issue if a white or
uncoated part is the end product. Often the answer
that the parts producer employs is to avoid using dis-
colored plastics. Some common examples of discol-
oring of which the recycler must be aware include:
• Polystyrene that has undergone degradation
is subject to an increase in the amount of free
monomer content, a decrease in molecular
182 Applied Plastics Engineering Handbook
weight, changes in morphology and a tendency
to yellow [103].
• Additives can also cause yellowing. Computer
gamers who still have old gaming systems will
notice that the flame-resistant chemical used
in an ABS case may have caused the part to
discolor through exposure to heat, air, or light
[104].
• Some batches of titanium dioxide, an additive
used to impart brightness, whiteness or high
opacity, have been known to cause pinking in
PVC windows and seals [105].
9.3.1.5 Contamination
Any number of materials may cause contamina-
tion in recovered plastics depending upon the source
of the recycle stream. The materials include: food-
stuff, dirt, fuel, oils, adhesives, secondary resins. A
plastics stream with significant contamination issues
is ASR. The valuable parts of an automobile are typi-
cally removed by hand and the remaining material is
shredded using a hammer mill. The resulting mixture
of metals, plastics, glass, fuels, and so on, is ASR.
Ferrous and nonferrous metals are separated from
the mix as they have value. There has been some re-
search [84] into mining the different plastics from
the residue but none that have made any significant
impact on the problem or that have been successfully
commercialized. There has also been effort at incor-
porating ASR into asphalt [106] but there is often re-
sistance to that kind of application from the asphalt
manufacturers.
9.3.2  Political Issues
Plastic recycling is often the subject of govern-
ment legislation due to concerns for the environment
and pressure from the media, the public, and special
interest groups. Legislation may dictate the elimina-
tion of certain plastic products availability, minimum
recycled content amounts, procurement directives,
producer responsibility, bottle-bill deposits, and dis-
posal fees.
9.3.2.1  United States
The USEPA oversees a variety of solid waste
regulatory issues including setting recycling goals.
However, recycling is legislated through state and
local governments and a national law for recycling
does not exist in the United States. California is often
seen as the state leading the recycling effort in the
United States by developing laws that other states or
the USEPA later adopt. However, all states are essen-
tially free to set their own limits and some examples
of how states’ laws differ include:
• Who pays for the recycling? Texas passed leg-
islation that producers of computers and moni-
tors pay for the collection, transportation, and
recycling of their products. California legisla-
tion assesses a fee on the consumer at the point
of purchase for these items.
• How to increase recycling rates. Michigan
assesses a deposit of 10¢ for each beverage
container purchased while Ohio does not.
Michigan’s bottle recovery rate is 97% of those
sold whereas the national average is around
22%.
• Lack of recyclability eliminates items from the
marketplace. New York tried to complete a ban
on food service items made from EPS. Most
other municipalities have no such ban in place.
9.3.2.2 Europe
As California is seen as the leader in the United
States, Germany has a similar reputation in Europe.
A number of laws that the European Union dictates
[107] through legislation focused on specific indus-
tries and anecdotal evidence, whether reality or not,
points to many of these laws deriving from the Ger-
man legislature. Whatever the reality, the pervasive-
ness of EU legislation means that their recycling rate
is significantly above that achieved in the United
States (Fig. 9.7) [1,108].
The Packaging and Packaging Waste Directive and
the Producer Responsibility Regulations are directed
at the European packaging industry and include:
• Minimization of packaging volume and weight
to a level that meet standards of safety, hygiene,
and acceptance by the consumer.
• Design and use of packaging in a manner that
permits its reuse and recovery.
The End-of-Life Vehicles (ELV) Directive was es-
tablished to prevent waste from ELVs being disposed
of in landfills and promote the collection, reuse and
recycling of the components. The law establishes re-
cycling targets for producers, dismantlers, and shred-
ders and directs that:
9:  Recycling of Plastics 183
Figure 9.7  United States and European Union Plastic Recycling Rates, 2012, reported in 2014 [1,108].
• Vehicles must be accepted at collection stations
without charge to the owner.
• Vehicle manufacturers or importers must pay
the costs associated with take back and treat-
ment.
The Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment
(WEEE) Directive aims to reduce the amount of elec-
trical waste, increase recovery and recycling, and im-
prove the environmental performance of all operators
involved in the lifecycle of electrical and electronic
equipment.
9.3.2.3 China
China has become a significant consumer of the
world’s plastic waste in the last decade. Substantial
areas of China’s southeastern provinces became dedi-
cated to handling single plastic products as the nation
became a major processing center for the world’s dis-
carded plastics. Cheap labor and infrastructure costs
ensure that the economics allow many plastics to be
recycled in China that cannot be recovered in the
Western world. However, China became a dumping
ground for substandard resins and general waste which
prompted the government to initiate Operation Green
Fence (OGF) in March, 2013 [109]. The program was
terminated in November 2013 but the long-term effect
on the world’s recycling market is still being assessed.
During OGF, a license was required to ship re-
cycled materials to China. Licensing was from the
General Administration of Quality Supervision,
Inspection and Quarantine (AQSIQ), performed
by its subsidiary, the China Entry-Exit Inspection
and Quarantine Association Reused and Recycling
Branch (CIQAR). Custom officials were impos-
ing tight contamination standards with significant
increases in inspections as inspectors examined
nearly all of the containers from license holders. As
the practice continued, China rejected hundreds of
containers of waste that were either contaminated
or contained improperly mixed different types of
scrap. Contamination by unacceptable materials in
mixed plastics loads, for example, was set at a level
not to exceed 1.5% [110]. Rejected shipments were
charged port demurrage fees until the containers were
returned and some export licenses were rescinded.
Much of the scrap that was rejected in China found
homes in other countries such as Vietnam and Ma-
laysia. One effect of OGF was to cause a 15% drop
in China’s import of plastic scrap [111] that, in turn,
had a dramatic effect on the prices that recycled res-
ins could demand; the spot price for mixed plastics
saw a 20% drop.
How OGF will be implemented long term is still
to be seen. Whether it is a temporary obstruction to
international trade or implemented as the new de
facto way of doing business with China, the effect
of the operation has been significant. OGF repre-
sents China’s commitment to environmental aware-
ness and because China receives 70% of the world’s
plastic waste exports and is the largest global user of
recyclables, the initiative had a major impact on the
recycling business in the rest of the world, particular-
ly the United States. As the United States provides a
huge share of China’s imported recyclables, the new
policies will force US recyclers to sort recyclables
more carefully or promote the concept of recycling
184 Applied Plastics Engineering Handbook
more material in the United States. However, what is
seen currently in the United States is that with plas-
tics other than PET and HDPE, more of it is going
into landfills.
9.3.3  Economic Issues
The cost to recycle plastics is typically in the 15–
40¢/lb range depending on resin, process, and degree
and type of contamination. That money covers the
cost to collect, transport, process, clean, compound,
rejuvenate, and pelletize. Most of these costs are fixed
with the price of the source plastic being one of the
few variables. Good quality recycled plastics usually
demand 60 to 70% of the price of the corresponding
virgin resin though that price can drop dramatically
as properties are lost. There needs to be some finite
difference between the cost to recover and the price
the product can demand for recycling a particular
resin by a given process to be economically viable.
The economics of plastic recycling become less
favorable as the commodity pricing of virgin resins
falls. Most plastics in North America are produced
from natural gas as opposed to Europe and Asia where
they are typically oil-based. New, low-cost domestic
sources of natural gas produced by hydraulic fractur-
ing from shale rock (fracking) are being developed.
Shale gas production increased in the United States
by 440% between 2007 and 2012 [112]. Up to 70% of
the cost to synthesize a resin is based on the cost of the
fuel stock, depending on the process used. The new
production has seen US natural gas prices fall to $3–
$4 per million BTU compared to $10 in the European
Union and $16 in Asia. The shale gas boom results in
the plastics industry having access to significant quan-
tities of a less-expensive feedstock. The cost of energy
used to synthesize resin, also from natural gas sources,
also is reduced by the availability of shale gas. As the
cost to produce virgin plastics decreases, the pres-
sures on the recycle market to further reduce the cost
of their product is intensified. This decrease in virgin
resin pricing is beyond the control of the recycler but
something of which the recycler must be aware.
Good resources to follow fluctuations in plastics
pricing, for both virgin and recycle, include:
• Plastics News at www.plasticsnews.com/resin.
This publication is also available as a weekly
subscription news magazine.
• The Plastics Exchange at www.theplasticsex-
change.com.
9.4  Industries and Industry
Organizations
Industries that use recycled plastics are as varied
as those that use virgin plastics. Companies may
have initially focused on the use of recycled plastics
to lower environmental impacts but the continued use
is usually driven by economic concerns. Companies
typically continue to use recycled plastic only when
it makes good economic sense. There is a smaller
subset of industries that have taken a more focused
approach to promote the use of recycled materials
in the manufacturing of their products. These orga-
nizations do not control their respective industries.
Rather, they are a combined voice when representa-
tion is needed for the plastics manufacturers, users,
or the many small to large recyclers that drive those
industries. In reality, most recyclers are not tied to
one industry and many act as plastics brokers selling
to wherever the plastic is needed and where the most
profit is generated.
The automotive industry uses significant vol-
umes of recycled plastics in the manufacture of au-
tomotive parts. The Vehicle Recycling Partnership
(VRP), part of United States Center for Automo-
tive Research (USCAR) [113], is a precompetitive
coalition of US automakers and was established to
conduct collaborative research to develop the tech-
nical and economic feasibility of vehicle recycling
in North America. The Automotive Recyclers Asso-
ciation (ARA) represents the recyclers that serve the
automotive industry [114]. The automotive industry
has, in the past, specified minimum recycle content
requirements to their suppliers. Although biobased
plastics appear to be the current media focus, re-
cycled plastics are used to help control costs and
maximize profits.
The National Association for PET Container Re-
sources (NAPCOR) [115] is the trade association
for the PET plastic industry in the United States and
Canada. Their activities, along with those of the As-
sociation of Post-consumer Plastic Recyclers (APR)
[116], promote recycling ideals in the packaging and
bottle industries.
The National Center for Electronics Recycling
(NCER) [117] is a nonprofit organization that is
dedicated to the development and enhancement of a
national infrastructure for the recycling of used elec-
tronics in the United States.
Carpet America Recovery Effort (CARE) [65] is a
joint industry-government effort to increase the recy-
cling rate, the volumes of postconsumer carpet that
9:  Recycling of Plastics 185
are reused and reduce the amount of waste carpet go-
ing to landfills.
The Institute of Scrap Recycling Industries (ISRI)
[118] is a membership organization for manufactur-
ers and processors, brokers and industrial consumers
of scrap commodities, including ferrous and non-
ferrous metals, paper, electronics, rubber, plastics,
glass, and textiles.
Recycled plastics are typically sold through in-
dependent brokers and dealers. [119] Their number
is too large to do anything but mention a few of the
better-known companies. Some of these companies
are buyers and sellers of recycled plastics but many
are also recyclers and innovators as they continue to
develop new processes to recover value from waste
plastic. MBA Polymers [120] was an acknowledged
leader at developing technology that recovers high
value engineering plastics from durable goods. How-
ever, they recently closed their facility in northern
California and moved operations to Worksop, Eng-
land where they feel funding for recycle activities is
stronger. ACI Plastics, Inc [121]. has concentrated
activity on becoming a recycler focused on helping
the automotive industry recycle their plastic waste.
They have developed technologies that separate au-
tomotive parts made from mixed plastics and that re-
cover painted or coated plastics. Butler-MacDonald
[122] has a long history in recycling engineering
thermoplastics from the electronics industry.
CarbonLITE [123] specializes in processing used
PET plastic bottles into bottle-grade PET pellets that
can then be used to manufacture new plastic bev-
erage bottles. CarbonLITE’s 220,000-square-foot,
Riverside, CA bottle-to-bottle PET recycling plant
processes more than two billion plastic bottles annu-
ally. They, like many others, recover plastics for re-
sale on the open market as well as offering recovery
services for hire.
9.5 Products
There are numerous applications for recycled
plastics (Table 9.1) [124]. From reuse in the same
application as initially used (whether at 100% or
more commonly compounded at some lower quan-
tity), to being used in less demanding applications,
recycled plastics utilization has made dramatic in-
roads in many industries. The manufacture of plas-
tic lumber, however, exists almost solely because
of recycling. Plastic lumber does not age or splinter
as does real wood but its cost to manufacture is sig-
nificantly higher when using virgin resins than the
cost to cut and transport traditional lumber materi-
als. The use of recycled alternatives to virgin plas-
tic ensures that the product is more commercially
competitive. Plastic lumber is typically made from
recycled PE that may contain other plastics and/or
fillers. Commingled plastics used with PE may in-
clude PVC, PS, PP, PET, and other materials. Fill-
ers used in these systems may include glass fibers,
PS fibers or cellulosic fillers such as wood fibers.
The principal use of plastic lumber is to replace
wood in areas where weathering is an issue such as
in decking, road barriers, or railroad ties.
9.6 Conclusions
There is an increasing need to recycle plastic
scrap as a vocal segment of the public demands
that less plastic waste is disposed of in landfills and
the political climate mandates that demand. There
are many opportunities to use recycled plastics but
utilization must be financially viable, technically
feasible and environmentally safe to be anything
but a temporary measure. Recyclers in the United
States and around the world are businesses first
and they will only stay in business and continue
to divert plastics from disposal in landfills if they
make a profit recycling what others discard. To that
end, most of the technology used today has been
focused initially on recovering value from homog-
enous high value, low contamination streams. That
low hanging fruit has been or is becoming success-
fully recovered unless the infrastructure to collect
and reprocess is not established. Some manufac-
turers use other recycled plastics in less demand-
ing applications. Yet there still remain a number of
plastics that cannot be economically recovered and
that number changes daily with the fluctuation in
the price of natural gas. The cost to produce virgin
plastics should decrease as they start to be manu-
factured from new, low-cost domestic sources of
natural gas produced by fracking. This price reduc-
tion may make some recycling processes even less
economically attractive. As always, some plastics
can be recycled, some can be recycled economi-
cally and some can be recycled economically in
quantity but not all and those that can, change with
outside drivers beyond the control of plastics re-
cyclers. The net effect is that many recyclers only
try to recycle a very limited number of plastics
(Table 9.5) [125].
186 Applied Plastics Engineering Handbook

Table 9.5  US Access to Plastics Recycling, 2007 [125]

MRFsa Recovering Plastics, 2007

Plastic Grade SPI RIC Number Percent
PET Clear 1 470 98.7
Colored 1 460 96.6
HDPE Natural 2 473 99.4
Colored 2 463 97.3
PVC 3 128 26.9
LDPE 4 140 29.4
PP 5 124 26.1
PS 6 112 23.5
Other plastics 7 129 27.1
Mixed plastics 3–7 136 28.6
Total MRFs 476
a
Material Recycling Facility (MRF)

Acknowledgment [6] Report on postconsumer PET container NAP-

I would like to express my gratitude to Mr. Thayer
(Ted) Brown (Midland Compounding and Consult-
ing), Dr. Steven E. Keinath (Michigan Molecular
Institute, retired), Mrs. Paris Stetkiw (Asahi Ka-
sei Corporation), and Mr. Chris Surbrook (Midland
Compounding and Consulting) for their invaluable
assistance in producing this chapter.
References
[1] Municipal solid waste generation, recycling,
and disposal in the United States: Facts and fig-
ures for 2012, www.epa.gov/osw/conserve/ma-
terials/plastics.htm#facts; 2012 data reported in
2015.
[2] Kumar, A. Legislators consider ban on plastic
shopping bags. Washington Post; January 22,
2009, p. B04.
[3] Austen, I. Canada takes steps to ban most plastic
baby bottles. New York Times; April 19, 2008.
[4] Lowy, J. Plastic left holding the bag as environ-
mental plague. Seattle Post-Intelligencer; July
21, 2004.
[5] Nutt A. Plastic bottle recycling: How to
keep plastic bottles out of the landfills,
ezinearticles.com/?Plastic-Bottle-Recycling-
--How-To-Keep-Plastic-Bottles-Out-Of-The-
Landfills&id = 1051464; 2009.
COR recycling activity in 2013. www.napcor.
com/pdf/NAPCOR_2013RateReport-FINAL.
pdf; 2015.
[7] Energy Information Administration: Official en-
ergy statistics from the US government. www.
eia.doe.gov; 2015.
[8] American Chemistry Council, Plastics Division.
plastics.americanchemistry.com; 2015.
[9] American Chemistry Council. www.american-
chemistry.com; 2015.
[10] Greenpeace. www.greenpeace.org; 2015.
[11] Amato I. The crusade against chlorine, to switch
or not to switch. Science 1993;261:152.
[12] Campaign against the plastic plague. www.
earthresource.org/campaigns/capp/capp-goals.
html; 2015.
[13] Ban plastic. www.gopetition.com/petitions/ban-
plastic.html; 2015.
[14] SB-270 Solid waste: single-use carryout bags.
http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNav-
Client.xhtml?bill_id=201320140SB270; 2015.
[15] Restrictions on the sale or use of certain expand-
ed polystyrene items. http://legistar.council.
nyc.gov/LegislationDetail.aspx?From=RSS&I
D=1444213&GUID=71AB91E9-EC77-47F0-
B904-4D4B4A607568; 2015.
[16] Society of Plastics Engineers, Global Plastics
Environmental Division. www.sperecycling.
org; 2015.
9:  Recycling of Plastics 187
[17] Merrington, A. Plastics recycling: processes, op-
portunities and issues, SPE e-learning s­eries.
www.4spe.org/online-store/so-you-want-­recycle-
plastics; 2008.
[18] ASTM D883-12 Standard Terminology Relat-
ing to Plastics. ASTM; 2012.
[19] Plastics Recycling entry on Wikipedia.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plastics_Recycling; 2015.
[20] ASTM D7209-06 Standard guide for waste re-
duction, resource recovery, and use of recycled
polymeric materials and products. ASTM; 2015.
[21] Economic impact of plastics-to-oil facilities in the
U.S. American Chemistry Council. plastics.ameri-
canchemistry.com/Stand-Alone-Content/Economic-
Impact-of-Plastics-to-Oil-Facilities.pdf; 2015.
[22] Bottle bill resource guide. www.bottlebill.org;
2015.
[23] Plastics recycling. www.absoluteastronomy.
com/topics/Plastic_recycling; 2015.
[24] The Society of the Plastics Industry (SPI) Res-
in Identification Coding System. http://www.
plasticsindustry.org/AboutPlastics/content.
cfm?ItemNumber=823; 2015.
[25] Johnson, J. Say so long to recycling code ar-
rows. Plastics News; June 14, 2013.
[26] Johnson, J. Resin ID codes could get upgraded.
Plastics News; January 10, 2014.
[27] ASTM D7611-13e1: Standard practice for cod-
ing plastics manufactured articles for resin iden-
tification. ASTM; 2013.
[28] Clauson, D. Modernizing the plastics resin
identification code. Standardization News;,July/­
August, 2013.
[29] Farnan, T. ASTM plastic resin codes. www.
pca.state.mn.us/index.php/view-document.
html?gid=15406. Minnesota Pollution Control;
2014.
[30] Environmental guideline review, official transcript
of the proceedings before the Federal Trade Com-
mission Docket Number P954501, 2nd corrected
copy. Washington DC; December 7, 1995.
[31] Siranosian, K. Heinz ketchup to use Coca-Cola’s
PlantBottle. TriplePundit. www.triplepundit.
com/2011/02/heinz-ketchup-going-green/; 2011.
[32] The Association of Post-Consumer Recyclers.
www.plasticsrecycling.org; 2009.
[33] Koester E. Friendly old PET vs. cheap new PET.
Mater World 1997;5(9):525–8.
[34] Schiers J. Polymer recycling. Hoboken, NJ:
John Wiley & Sons; 1998.
[35] Coca-Cola aims to increase recycled content,
reduce weight of bottles. Greenerdesign.com;
July 25, 2008.
[36] Rogers ME, Long TE. Synthetic methods in
step-growth polymers. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-
IEEE; 2003.
[37] Pepsi’s finally out of the paddock with Repete.
Packaging Digest; January, 1992.
[38] APR Releases Final Report on Sleeve Label
Working Group. American Recycler News;
­November 2014.
[39] Say hello to coke in PlantBottle® packaging.
www.coca-cola.com/content-store/en_US/SC/
PlantBottle/; 2014.
[40] Plastics from plants threaten recycling. www.
plasticredesignproject.org/PLAHome.htm; 2015.
[41] Polyethylene furanoate (PEF): 100% biobased
polymer to compete with PET?. polymerinno-
vationblog.com/polyethylene-furanoate-pef-
100-biobased-polymer-to-compete-with-pet/;
2013.
[42] Peacock AJ. Handbook of polyethylene. New
York: Marcel Dekker; 2000.
[43] Ehrig RJ, editor. Plastic recycling. New York,
NY: Hanser; 1992.
[44] Ernst AC, van der Klooster FR. Using recycled
polyethylene: avoiding the pitfalls. Global plas-
tics environmental conference proceedings;
2008.
[45] Karian HG. Handbook of polypropylene and
polypropylene composites. New York, NY:
CRC Press; 2003.
[46] Vinyl 2010. www.vinylplus.eu; 2014.
[47] PVC: Recycling killer, public menace. Grass
Roots Recycling Network. www.grrn.org/page/
pvc-recycling-killer-public-health-menace; 2015.
[48] PVC: the poison plastic. Greenpeace. www.
greenpeace.org/usa/global/usa/report/2009/4/
pvc-the-poison-plastic.html; 2015.
[49] CWC best practices in recycling PET, contami-
nation issue. American Chemistry Council; 1997.
[50] ChloroPhiles. www.ping.be/∼ping5859/Eng/
Chlorophiles.html; 2015.
[51] PVC bottles. www.plasticsrecycling.org/im-
ages/pdf/Other-Resins/PVC_Bottle_Design_
Guide.pdf; 2015.
[52] Chlorine. www.healthycar.org/chemicals.chlo-
rine.php; 2015.
[53] Utilization of regrind material in PVC extrusion
processing. Polyone Technical Service Bulletin;
1992.
[54] Recycling of PVC-U in windows and building
products. www.tangram.co.uk/TI-Glazing-Re-
cycling.html; 2015.
[55] How to recycle PVC. www.ecolife.com/recycling/
plastic/how-to-recycle-pvc-plastic-3.html; 2015.
188 Applied Plastics Engineering Handbook
[56] Mikofalvy BK, et  al. Traffic cones from recy-
cled vinyl. J Vinyl Technol; 15(3):159–163.
[57] The Preserve Group. www.preserveproducts.
com; 2015.
[58] Gimme 5. www.preserveproducts.com/gimme5/
index.html; 2015.
[59] CARE annual report 2013. carpetrecovery.org/
wp-content/uploads/2014/04/CARE-2013-An-
nual-Report.pdf; 2015.
[60] Battery Council International. batterycouncil.
org; 2015.
[61] Californians against waste. www.cawrecycles.
org; 2015.
[62] Luther, B. Use and disposal of polystyrene in
California: a report to the California legislature.
www.calrecycle.ca.gov/publications/Docu-
ments/Plastics%5C43204003.pdf; 2015.
[63] Rathje W, Murphy C. Rubbish! the archaeol-
ogy of garbage. Tuscon: University of Arizona
Press; 2001.
[64] Californians against waste. www.cawrecycles.
org/issues/plastic_campaign/polystyrene/local;
2015.
[65] Carpet America Recovery Effort. www.carpet-
recovery.org; 2015.
[66] Rao K. Value through recycling: utilization of
rejuvenated thermoplastic polymers for auto-
motive applications. Annual recycling confer-
ence proceedings,99; 1999. p. 457.
[67] Guy, M. Recycle polycarbonate plastic, ezine
articles. ezinearticles.com/?Recycle-Polycar-
bonate-Plastic&id=1680662; 2008.
[68] PMMA Recycling. www.heathland.nl/pmma-
recycling.html; 2015.
[69] Watanabe K, Ikeda S. Fujitsu uses plastic re-
cycled from its own PCs in new notebooks, an
industry first. Fujitsu Limited, public relations
document. pr.fujitsu.com/en/news/2002/11/28.
html; 2002.
[70] Melton S. ACI plastics: a case history. Global
plastics environmental conference proceedings;
2009.
[71] Ozimek A. Profits, not good intentions, drive the
global recycling industry. http://www.forbes.
com/sites/modeledbehavior/2014/04/26/profits-
not-good-intentions-drive-the-global-recycling-
industry; 2015.
[72] Snudden JP, Ward C, Potter K. Reusing automo-
tive composites production waste. Reinforced
Plastics; November/December, 2014, pp. 20–27.
[73] Use of the alternative fuel exemption under PSD
for tire derived fuel. www.epa.gov/ttn/nsr/gen/
memo-j.html; 2015.
[74] Unicor: Federal Prisons Industries, Inc. www.
unicor.gov/recycling; 2015.
[75] Gent MR, et al. Recycling of plastic waste
by density separation: prospects for opti-
mization. Waste Management & Research
2009;27(2):175–87.
[76] In: Paul D, Newman S, editors. Polymer blends,
2. New York: Academic Press; 1978.
[77] Satake colour and optical sorting machines.
www.satake.com.au/colour_sorting; 2015.
[78] Lucht H, et al., Plastic separation of automotive
waste by superfast near-infrared sensors. Global
plastics environmental conference proceedings;
2002.
[79] Spectracode, Inc.’s RP-1 Polymer identification
system for sorting plastics. www.epa.gov/ncer/
sbir/success/pdf/spectracode_success.pdf; 2015.
[80] Thermoscientific Gemini™ Analyzer. www.
thermoscientific.com/en/product/gemini-ana-
lyzer.html; 2015.
[81] Beck MH, et al. Electrostatic separation of plas-
tic materials. Patent WO 1993006934; 1991.
[82] Electrostatic separators remove PET-G and PVC
from PET flakes. www.hamos.com/infocenter/
text-archive; 2015: 51, eng, 105.
[83] Tilmatine A, et al. Roll-type versus free-fall
electrostatic separation of tribocharged plastic
particles. Electrostatic joint conference; 2009.
[84] Pomykala JA Jr., Jody BJ, Daniels EJ. Ther-
moplastic separation and recovery for various
mixed scrap plastics by the argonne developed
froth flotation technology. Global plastics envi-
ronmental conference proceedings; 2007.
[85] Material development. Plastics Engineering
2000;56(2):22–27.
[86] Ellis TS. Recycling of polymer blends and mix-
tures. In: Paul DR, Bucknall CB, editors. Poly-
mer blends: performance, 2. New York: Wiley-
Interscience; 1999.
[87] Keinath SE, et al. Advances in automotive plas-
tic recycling. Annual recycling conference pro-
ceedings 1999.
[88] Martin LW. New coupling technology helps ole-
fin-based thermoplastic composites make prod-
ucts “greener.” Global plastics environmental
conference proceedings; 2009.
[89] Guo HF, et al. Prediction and manipulation of
the phase morphologies of multiphase polymer
blends: 1. Tern Syst, Polym 1997;38(4):785–94.
[90] Guo HF, Gvozdic NV, Meier DJ. Prediction and
manipulation of the phase morphologies of mul-
tiphase polymer blends: 2. Quaternary systems.
Polymer 1997;38(19):4915–23.
9:  Recycling of Plastics 189
[91]
Michigan Molecular Institute. Recycling
mixed plastics. NIST-ATP 91-01-0088. status-
reports.atp.nist.gov/reports/91-01-0088PDF.
pdf; 1991.
[92] Guo HF, Merrington, A. Effects of compatibil-
izers and additives on recycled thermoplastics.
Annual recycling conference proceedings;
1996.
[93] Kraton. www.kraton.com; 2015.
[94] Vector. tsrcdexco.com/en; 2009.
[95] Priex coupling agents and compatibilizers.
www.addcompnorthamerica.com/?target
(Coupling_Agents,_Compatibilizers; 2015.
[96] Plastic recycling. Science Progress. Goliath;
2007.
[97] Ciba product guide: Discover our world of ef-
fects for polyolefins. Ciba Specialty Chemi-
cals, Pub. No. 016530.00.040, US Pub. No.
PA-863; 2004.
[98] Egbers R, Wiedeman P. Recycling long glass
fiber reinforced polypropylene instrument
panel trim offal. Global plastics environmental
conference proceedings; 2008.
[99] IGETABOND® grades for polymer modifica-
tion and adhesion applications. www.sumitomo-
chem.co.jp/products/docs/en_b05005.pdf; 2015.
[100] Villalobos MA, Awojulu AA, Turco GP. The
process of recycling polyesters with polymeric
chain extenders. Global plastics environmental
conference proceedings; 2005.
[101] Liu X, et al. Using experimental interpolymers
to upgrade mechanical properties of recycled
thermoplastics. Global plastics environmental
conference proceedings; 2003.
[102] PET recycle—enhance the value of PET flake.
www.kenplas.com/recycle; 2015.
[103] Utracki LA. Polymer blends handbook. Bos-
ton, MA: Springer; 2002.
[104] Edwards B. Why super Nintendos lose their
color: plastic discoloration in classic ma-
chines, vintage computers and gaming. http://
www.vintagecomputing.com/index.php/ar-
chives/189/what-happened-to-my-snes-case-
discoloration-in-classic-machines; 2007.
[105] Lemaire J, et al. Confirming the pinking mech-
anism of PVC profiles in mild climatic condi-
tions. J Vinyl Addit Technol 2004;9(2):54–60.
[106] Dutta U, et al. Laboratory performance of
ASR modified asphalt binders. J Elast Plast
1997;29(4):326–42.
[107] Waste On-Line. www.wasteonline.org.uk; 2014.
[108] Plastics—the facts 2013. Belgium: PlasticsEu-
rope; 2013.
[109] Messenger B. Recycled plastics market set to
triple, but China’s “green fence” hampering
exports. Waste Management World; June 2013.
[110] Exporting recycling and China’s green fence.
vangelinc.com/recycling/exporting-recycling/
what-does-chinas-green-fence-mean-for-the-
recycling-industry; 2015.
[111] Wang J. Dramatic fall in China’s plastic scrap
imports. www.recyclinginternational.com/
recycling-topics/topics/operation-green-fence;
2015.
[112] Carteaux WR. The potential impact of the US
shale gas boom on packaging films. SPI maga-
zine; 2013 (Fall).
[113] United States Center for Automotive Research
(USCAR). www.uscar.org/guest/article_view.
php?articles_id=233; 2015.
[114]
Automotive Recyclers Association, ARA.
www.a-r-a.org 2015.
[115] National Association for PET Container Re-
sources, NAPCOR. www.napcor.com; 2015.
[116] Association of Postconsumer Plastic Recy-
clers, APR. www.plasticsrecycling.org; 2015.
[117] The National Center for Electronics Recycling,
NCER. www.electronicsrecycling.org; 2015.
[118] Institute of Scrap Recycling Industries. isri.
org; 2015.
[119] Global Recycling Network. grn.com; 2015.
[120] MBA Polymers, Inc. www.mbapolymers.com;
2015.
[121] ACI Plastics, Inc. www.aciplastics.com; 2015.
[122] Butler-MacDonald, Inc. www.butlermacdon-
ald.com; 2015.
[123] CarbonLITE®. <www.carbonliterecycling.com>;
2015.
[124] Table reproduced with permission: Greener-
Choices.org is a free website that offers ratings
and recommendations on greener products and
practices. The site is owned by Consumers
Union of U.S., Inc., the nonprofit publisher of
Consumer Reports. www.greenerchoices.org/
products.cfm?product=plastic&pcat=homegar
den; 2015.
[125] Gershman, Brickener and Bratton, Inc. for the
American Chemistry Council. Gasification
of non-recycled plastics from municipal solid
waste in the United States. American Chemistry
Council, Fairfax, VA; 2013. Reproduced from
2007 to 2008 materials recycling and processing
in the United States, yearbook and directory. 5th
ed. Governmental Advisory Associates; 2009.
[126] Professional Plastics, Acronyms. www.profes-
sionalplastics.com/ACRONYMS; 2015.