WEBVTT - Chemical Recycling: Break It Down

0:00:00.280 --> 0:00:02.160
<v Speaker 1>So I was out with my kids the other day

0:00:02.200 --> 0:00:05.720
<v Speaker 1>when they spotted these granola bars that they love, probably

0:00:05.760 --> 0:00:09.240
<v Speaker 1>because they have chocolate on them, they asked. I agreed,

0:00:09.440 --> 0:00:12.200
<v Speaker 1>bought them from my kids. One of them dug right

0:00:12.240 --> 0:00:16.279
<v Speaker 1>in and the other just stood there staring at the

0:00:16.280 --> 0:00:20.759
<v Speaker 1>bar for several seconds. Noticing that my kid was particularly

0:00:20.840 --> 0:00:24.200
<v Speaker 1>pensive over a granola bar, I asked him when he

0:00:24.239 --> 0:00:26.680
<v Speaker 1>was thinking, and was pretty shocked to find that he

0:00:26.720 --> 0:00:30.280
<v Speaker 1>was actually thinking about waste management. He turned to me

0:00:30.360 --> 0:00:32.919
<v Speaker 1>and he said, Mom, I'm going to eat this granola

0:00:32.960 --> 0:00:35.640
<v Speaker 1>bar and throw the wrapper in the trash. The trash

0:00:35.720 --> 0:00:38.000
<v Speaker 1>will go to the landfill, but it might not stay there.

0:00:38.040 --> 0:00:40.760
<v Speaker 1>It might fall into the ocean, and once in the ocean,

0:00:40.800 --> 0:00:43.200
<v Speaker 1>it will break into tiny bits and get eaten by fish.

0:00:43.720 --> 0:00:47.000
<v Speaker 1>Then I'll eat the fish. So I'm just thinking I

0:00:47.080 --> 0:00:49.000
<v Speaker 1>might as well eat the granola bar with the rapper

0:00:49.040 --> 0:00:52.040
<v Speaker 1>still on it and get it over with. My kid

0:00:52.200 --> 0:00:55.280
<v Speaker 1>is seven, so I was pretty floored by this off

0:00:55.280 --> 0:00:58.800
<v Speaker 1>the cuff life cycle analysis. But the truth is he

0:00:58.880 --> 0:01:02.200
<v Speaker 1>might be right. That's one of the reasons why companies

0:01:02.200 --> 0:01:06.160
<v Speaker 1>are looking in innovative ways of recycling today. On Bloomberg

0:01:06.200 --> 0:01:09.080
<v Speaker 1>switched on, we speak with il Han Savut, who is

0:01:09.120 --> 0:01:13.440
<v Speaker 1>a bienn f analyst focused on clean manufacturing and sustainable materials,

0:01:14.080 --> 0:01:18.280
<v Speaker 1>joined by Julia Atwood, who leads our Advanced Materials team.

0:01:18.319 --> 0:01:22.840
<v Speaker 1>They wrote a research note titled Chemical Recycling Technologies, Costs

0:01:22.840 --> 0:01:26.720
<v Speaker 1>and Capacity, which bienny f subscribers can access on bienf

0:01:26.840 --> 0:01:29.320
<v Speaker 1>dot com, on the benny of mobile app, or the

0:01:29.319 --> 0:01:33.759
<v Speaker 1>Bloomberg terminal at biennyf Go. As a reminder, b any

0:01:33.800 --> 0:01:36.319
<v Speaker 1>F does not provide investment or strategy advice, and you

0:01:36.360 --> 0:01:38.480
<v Speaker 1>can hear our full disclaimer at the end of the show.

0:01:39.240 --> 0:01:42.040
<v Speaker 1>I'm Dana Perkins and you're listening to Switch It on

0:01:42.319 --> 0:01:49.040
<v Speaker 1>the bienf podcast. Hi il Han, Hi Julia, thank you

0:01:49.120 --> 0:01:52.760
<v Speaker 1>for joining us today. Thanks for having us, Dana, thanks

0:01:52.800 --> 0:01:56.440
<v Speaker 1>for having us. We are going to talk about chemical

0:01:56.520 --> 0:02:00.760
<v Speaker 1>recycling today. And I must admit when I first looked

0:02:00.760 --> 0:02:03.480
<v Speaker 1>at this research note, I was thinking of being in

0:02:03.520 --> 0:02:06.440
<v Speaker 1>my chemistry class and I was thinking about, Oh, there's

0:02:06.440 --> 0:02:09.680
<v Speaker 1>going to be these chemical molecules floating around, and surely

0:02:09.840 --> 0:02:12.960
<v Speaker 1>somebody off in some obscure place needs to recycle those

0:02:13.040 --> 0:02:17.080
<v Speaker 1>for their business need. And then I got into reading

0:02:17.080 --> 0:02:21.480
<v Speaker 1>this note prepping for today and realized that actually we're

0:02:21.520 --> 0:02:24.360
<v Speaker 1>talking about the real waste dream that you and I

0:02:24.440 --> 0:02:28.359
<v Speaker 1>and everybody we know actually participates in. So let's start

0:02:28.440 --> 0:02:31.880
<v Speaker 1>talking about chemical recycling. But let's rewind and talk about

0:02:31.919 --> 0:02:34.919
<v Speaker 1>what is recycling and then how does chemical recycling fit

0:02:35.000 --> 0:02:37.960
<v Speaker 1>into all of this. I think that's a great place

0:02:38.000 --> 0:02:40.119
<v Speaker 1>to start, because there are a bunch of different types

0:02:40.160 --> 0:02:43.560
<v Speaker 1>of plastics that I think we as consumers don't really appreciate,

0:02:43.680 --> 0:02:47.200
<v Speaker 1>and currently most plastic waste is recycled mechanically, and mechanically

0:02:47.200 --> 0:02:50.040
<v Speaker 1>recycling is a very simple process where you kind of

0:02:50.080 --> 0:02:54.000
<v Speaker 1>just sort plastic. You shed it, wash it, melt it,

0:02:54.040 --> 0:02:56.359
<v Speaker 1>and make new plastic. So I put in the bin

0:02:56.720 --> 0:02:59.480
<v Speaker 1>and then at some plants somewhere they take it and

0:02:59.600 --> 0:03:02.400
<v Speaker 1>kind of sorted out by type. Yeah, but because it's

0:03:02.440 --> 0:03:05.240
<v Speaker 1>a simple process, it means that it has to be

0:03:05.320 --> 0:03:08.320
<v Speaker 1>meticulously sorted, right, So you have to sort by grade

0:03:08.320 --> 0:03:11.520
<v Speaker 1>and type. And I think a good analogy is so

0:03:11.639 --> 0:03:14.960
<v Speaker 1>imagine that different colors of plato are different types of plastic, right,

0:03:15.400 --> 0:03:18.480
<v Speaker 1>and if you're a recycler, you essentially receive a giant

0:03:18.520 --> 0:03:21.120
<v Speaker 1>ball of play dough that has a bunch of different colors.

0:03:21.520 --> 0:03:24.519
<v Speaker 1>Nobody likes plato that's all mixed together. That's the worst

0:03:25.040 --> 0:03:27.480
<v Speaker 1>hate that, And what you have to do is separate

0:03:27.480 --> 0:03:30.120
<v Speaker 1>the play dough by different types of colors, because you

0:03:30.160 --> 0:03:34.120
<v Speaker 1>want high purity and high quality plastic output, recycled output

0:03:34.560 --> 0:03:37.440
<v Speaker 1>that's of only one color. But what complicates it even

0:03:37.440 --> 0:03:40.120
<v Speaker 1>more is that most plastics have a bunch of chemicals

0:03:40.120 --> 0:03:43.920
<v Speaker 1>and additives that are added during production. So imagine that

0:03:43.960 --> 0:03:48.480
<v Speaker 1>your play though also has glue and glitter and pieces

0:03:48.480 --> 0:03:50.640
<v Speaker 1>of paper. So even if you manage to kind of

0:03:50.680 --> 0:03:53.680
<v Speaker 1>separate it out by color, separated out by color, you

0:03:53.760 --> 0:03:56.760
<v Speaker 1>have to then remove all this stuff that's in it.

0:03:57.440 --> 0:04:01.000
<v Speaker 1>And with mechanically recycling, you essentially have a spoon to

0:04:01.080 --> 0:04:04.480
<v Speaker 1>do all this is that the primary reason most things

0:04:04.600 --> 0:04:07.840
<v Speaker 1>don't get recycled because it's some alarmingly low figure of

0:04:07.960 --> 0:04:11.360
<v Speaker 1>things that go into the recycling bin don't actually make

0:04:11.400 --> 0:04:14.360
<v Speaker 1>it out. I mean, what is it seven something like that,

0:04:14.400 --> 0:04:17.800
<v Speaker 1>Depending on the country, Yeah, it really depends. In the

0:04:17.839 --> 0:04:21.600
<v Speaker 1>EU they do much better. So for some plastics it's

0:04:21.600 --> 0:04:25.960
<v Speaker 1>as much as but there can also be some funny accounting.

0:04:25.960 --> 0:04:31.320
<v Speaker 1>Their incineration with energy recovery is sometimes considered recycling. One

0:04:31.360 --> 0:04:33.760
<v Speaker 1>of the other issues is obviously collection right, you have

0:04:33.800 --> 0:04:35.720
<v Speaker 1>to be able to recover the waste and get it back.

0:04:36.200 --> 0:04:38.200
<v Speaker 1>But then a huge part of the problem is that

0:04:38.720 --> 0:04:42.120
<v Speaker 1>sorting and decontaminating the plastic waste is so hard and

0:04:42.160 --> 0:04:45.440
<v Speaker 1>so expensive, which makes it really hard for recyclists to

0:04:45.560 --> 0:04:49.560
<v Speaker 1>kind of produce high quality, high purity recycled material. And

0:04:49.600 --> 0:04:52.279
<v Speaker 1>when you don't have high purity and high grade recycled output,

0:04:52.400 --> 0:04:55.720
<v Speaker 1>it kind of limits its applications and also is sold

0:04:55.760 --> 0:04:59.080
<v Speaker 1>at a a discount. So the limited applications. For example, recycled

0:04:59.080 --> 0:05:01.800
<v Speaker 1>plastic can't really be used in food packaging, which is

0:05:01.839 --> 0:05:05.920
<v Speaker 1>a main application of flexible packaging for example. So those

0:05:05.960 --> 0:05:09.080
<v Speaker 1>kinds of limitations really prevent the market from taking off.

0:05:10.080 --> 0:05:13.680
<v Speaker 1>So what is chemical recycling as compared to mechanical recycling. So,

0:05:13.760 --> 0:05:16.800
<v Speaker 1>chemical recycling is a pretty broad term that refers to

0:05:17.480 --> 0:05:21.080
<v Speaker 1>these new recycling technologies that use some sort of chemical

0:05:21.160 --> 0:05:24.120
<v Speaker 1>process to take waste plastic and make it into virgin

0:05:24.200 --> 0:05:28.840
<v Speaker 1>quality material. And there are two types. One is monomer recycling,

0:05:29.200 --> 0:05:32.000
<v Speaker 1>where you take a plastic and kind of go back

0:05:32.040 --> 0:05:34.920
<v Speaker 1>to the base unit or the monomor, and the other

0:05:35.040 --> 0:05:38.119
<v Speaker 1>is feedstock recycling, where you heat up the plastic waste

0:05:38.160 --> 0:05:41.200
<v Speaker 1>to a high temperature in the absence of oxygen and

0:05:41.520 --> 0:05:45.400
<v Speaker 1>go back to the original feedstock that was used to

0:05:45.480 --> 0:05:47.680
<v Speaker 1>make the plastics. So we are back to my chemistry

0:05:47.720 --> 0:05:49.920
<v Speaker 1>lab in high school. Now. Yeah, but we can also

0:05:50.000 --> 0:05:53.080
<v Speaker 1>go back to the play though analogy. Okay, so in

0:05:53.200 --> 0:05:56.120
<v Speaker 1>monomer recycling, you still have to sort the waste by

0:05:56.200 --> 0:05:58.960
<v Speaker 1>type of plastic, so you're still sorting your play though

0:05:59.000 --> 0:06:02.880
<v Speaker 1>by color, but you can leave some of the glue

0:06:02.920 --> 0:06:04.839
<v Speaker 1>and the glitter and that stuff in it, so it

0:06:04.920 --> 0:06:08.679
<v Speaker 1>has a higher contamination tolerance because you're chemically or thermally

0:06:08.720 --> 0:06:12.159
<v Speaker 1>breaking down the plastic to its base unit, so that

0:06:12.240 --> 0:06:15.160
<v Speaker 1>kind of gets rid of all the contaminants that mechanically

0:06:15.160 --> 0:06:17.560
<v Speaker 1>recycling can't get rid of. This is mostly done for

0:06:17.640 --> 0:06:21.080
<v Speaker 1>PT and polystyrene. In the case of feet stock recycling.

0:06:21.279 --> 0:06:24.320
<v Speaker 1>There you have your play though, but you can basically

0:06:24.360 --> 0:06:27.120
<v Speaker 1>have multiple colors in it and leave the stuff inside

0:06:28.120 --> 0:06:30.520
<v Speaker 1>and then you pyrolyze or your feet soccer recycled the

0:06:30.720 --> 0:06:33.640
<v Speaker 1>entire giant play doll ball and you get a play

0:06:33.640 --> 0:06:35.600
<v Speaker 1>doball that has no color that can be made into

0:06:35.640 --> 0:06:39.279
<v Speaker 1>any plastic in the recycling world. This sounds pretty fancy.

0:06:39.480 --> 0:06:43.200
<v Speaker 1>Therefore expensive, is it an expensive process? It is. It's

0:06:43.240 --> 0:06:47.000
<v Speaker 1>more expensive than mechanical recycling, but it is profitable. There

0:06:47.000 --> 0:06:49.560
<v Speaker 1>are two main reasons why it is profitable. Is that

0:06:49.600 --> 0:06:52.480
<v Speaker 1>your feet stock costs is extremely low because you're using

0:06:52.640 --> 0:06:56.640
<v Speaker 1>waste plastic that's being incinerated or land filled. And the

0:06:56.680 --> 0:06:59.520
<v Speaker 1>other is that because you're producing virgin quality material, you

0:06:59.520 --> 0:07:02.160
<v Speaker 1>can sell at a high price, so you can get

0:07:02.200 --> 0:07:06.440
<v Speaker 1>the price that virgin plastic is being said, theoretically, the

0:07:06.560 --> 0:07:11.080
<v Speaker 1>chemically recycled products could be used for food in some circumstances,

0:07:11.640 --> 0:07:14.320
<v Speaker 1>and then the feedstocks do they first go through mechanical

0:07:14.320 --> 0:07:17.200
<v Speaker 1>recycling and then the chemical recycling gets what's left, or

0:07:17.360 --> 0:07:21.560
<v Speaker 1>are these different recycling plants altogether that are buying the

0:07:21.640 --> 0:07:25.560
<v Speaker 1>same waste material and then doing what they want with it.

0:07:25.680 --> 0:07:29.240
<v Speaker 1>So it's still a pretty new markets, so we still

0:07:29.320 --> 0:07:32.120
<v Speaker 1>don't know how the logistics will play out in terms

0:07:32.160 --> 0:07:35.960
<v Speaker 1>of waste management and the waste management infrastructure and how

0:07:36.040 --> 0:07:38.840
<v Speaker 1>they'll interact with these new types of recycling plants. But

0:07:39.000 --> 0:07:41.880
<v Speaker 1>ideally what you would have is you would sort it

0:07:41.880 --> 0:07:45.480
<v Speaker 1>out for mechanically recycling, because mechanic clearly recycling has a

0:07:45.480 --> 0:07:49.160
<v Speaker 1>lower costs and has a lower carbon footprint, and then

0:07:49.280 --> 0:07:52.800
<v Speaker 1>whatever you can mechanically recycle, you would chem and clear recycle.

0:07:53.600 --> 0:07:55.800
<v Speaker 1>So let's go back into the economics and you're saying

0:07:55.800 --> 0:07:58.080
<v Speaker 1>this is profitable. Do we have an idea of what

0:07:58.160 --> 0:08:02.200
<v Speaker 1>these margins look like? So the margins are pretty big.

0:08:02.200 --> 0:08:06.400
<v Speaker 1>They're double digits around for pyrolysis, a bit higher for

0:08:06.640 --> 0:08:10.280
<v Speaker 1>e polymerization, so monumo recycling. So you're saying that it's

0:08:10.280 --> 0:08:13.080
<v Speaker 1>the waste treatment facilities that are making money in this?

0:08:13.520 --> 0:08:18.120
<v Speaker 1>Is that a highly fragmented market. Are these big companies

0:08:18.280 --> 0:08:20.680
<v Speaker 1>or are they small companies that are part of our

0:08:20.920 --> 0:08:25.200
<v Speaker 1>typical municipal waste collection. It's the recyclers that are making

0:08:25.200 --> 0:08:29.040
<v Speaker 1>the money, which isn't necessarily the waste management facility, depends

0:08:29.040 --> 0:08:31.440
<v Speaker 1>on how the supply chain is kind of set up,

0:08:31.840 --> 0:08:34.320
<v Speaker 1>but it would be the recycling. But again it's a

0:08:34.440 --> 0:08:38.360
<v Speaker 1>quite new market. And usually these new recyclers, which are startups,

0:08:38.400 --> 0:08:42.079
<v Speaker 1>are partnering with big corporate names, either brand owners or

0:08:42.160 --> 0:08:46.480
<v Speaker 1>chemicals companies, so it's probably a bit of profit sharing. Okay,

0:08:46.920 --> 0:08:49.839
<v Speaker 1>who are the brand owners that are getting involved? Really

0:08:49.880 --> 0:08:53.800
<v Speaker 1>interesting thing is that there are so many very different

0:08:53.840 --> 0:08:56.720
<v Speaker 1>and very disparate companies that are getting involved in this.

0:08:57.280 --> 0:09:01.120
<v Speaker 1>Because the technology is held by really small startups. You're

0:09:01.160 --> 0:09:04.160
<v Speaker 1>not seeing the huge recycling companies that we would think

0:09:04.200 --> 0:09:08.719
<v Speaker 1>of like Veolia or Waste Management who are investing in this.

0:09:08.960 --> 0:09:12.319
<v Speaker 1>It's much more people like Coca Cola who really care

0:09:12.640 --> 0:09:16.199
<v Speaker 1>about what happens to their waste because that's important to

0:09:16.240 --> 0:09:20.720
<v Speaker 1>their consumers. So Coca Cola, together with PepsiCo and Corrig

0:09:20.760 --> 0:09:24.720
<v Speaker 1>Dr Pepper putting a hundred million into recycling. And then

0:09:24.880 --> 0:09:27.240
<v Speaker 1>you have the chemicals companies that have a massive stake

0:09:27.280 --> 0:09:30.319
<v Speaker 1>in this because they make these plastics, like Indo Rama

0:09:30.480 --> 0:09:34.800
<v Speaker 1>they've put one point five billion into recycling over five years.

0:09:35.400 --> 0:09:37.800
<v Speaker 1>And then you also have the oil companies who are

0:09:37.800 --> 0:09:40.199
<v Speaker 1>starting to worry about whether or not they're going to

0:09:40.240 --> 0:09:42.680
<v Speaker 1>be able to sell what they've been selling for a

0:09:42.720 --> 0:09:45.160
<v Speaker 1>hundred years. So you have people like BP who have

0:09:45.200 --> 0:09:47.840
<v Speaker 1>actually invested in house and are going to build a

0:09:47.880 --> 0:09:51.800
<v Speaker 1>twenty five million pilot plant as a chemical recycler. So

0:09:52.480 --> 0:09:54.880
<v Speaker 1>there is money in this market, but it's not going

0:09:54.920 --> 0:10:00.000
<v Speaker 1>to the traditional waste management sources. Yeah, like the partnerships

0:10:00.000 --> 0:10:02.280
<v Speaker 1>I think can be put into two. You have the

0:10:02.320 --> 0:10:05.560
<v Speaker 1>brand owners that are mostly involved with PT recycling just

0:10:05.640 --> 0:10:08.400
<v Speaker 1>because it's a very visible plastic product. That they use.

0:10:08.880 --> 0:10:11.520
<v Speaker 1>For example, Coca Cola has made a very public commitment

0:10:11.600 --> 0:10:16.360
<v Speaker 1>about using hundred percent recycled pt by so in order

0:10:16.400 --> 0:10:18.480
<v Speaker 1>to kind of meet those targets, they really have to

0:10:18.559 --> 0:10:21.880
<v Speaker 1>make sure that these technologies are commercialized and can produced

0:10:21.920 --> 0:10:25.880
<v Speaker 1>a scale. On the other hand, for pyrolysis and police

0:10:25.880 --> 0:10:29.760
<v Speaker 1>starting depolymization, you have more chemical companies, as Julia mentioned,

0:10:29.840 --> 0:10:34.040
<v Speaker 1>being involved because they're they're both scared of policy risk,

0:10:34.160 --> 0:10:36.400
<v Speaker 1>but at the same time they can also see fall

0:10:36.440 --> 0:10:41.040
<v Speaker 1>in their feedstock costs if they buy these recycled based chemicals.

0:10:42.120 --> 0:10:45.040
<v Speaker 1>Let's talk a little bit about the feedstocks that are

0:10:45.360 --> 0:10:47.320
<v Speaker 1>you know, this waste that goes into it, and I

0:10:47.360 --> 0:10:49.440
<v Speaker 1>think it was the movie The Graduate where they set

0:10:49.480 --> 0:10:52.800
<v Speaker 1>the futurist plastics and we're definitely seeing that. So I

0:10:52.800 --> 0:10:54.440
<v Speaker 1>think you guys point out in the note that the

0:10:54.520 --> 0:10:57.960
<v Speaker 1>production of the six major plastics that reason for most

0:10:58.000 --> 0:11:00.920
<v Speaker 1>of the stuff we we interact with has actually doubled

0:11:01.040 --> 0:11:04.640
<v Speaker 1>since two thousand, so the last twenty years twice as

0:11:04.720 --> 0:11:08.400
<v Speaker 1>much plastic and we're seeing that actually being a pretty

0:11:08.559 --> 0:11:12.720
<v Speaker 1>big growth area going into the future. So there's space

0:11:12.760 --> 0:11:15.520
<v Speaker 1>for virgin feedstock, but then there's a lot of space

0:11:15.640 --> 0:11:19.800
<v Speaker 1>for recycled I would assume what are the drivers that

0:11:20.080 --> 0:11:24.960
<v Speaker 1>causes someone aside from the obvious consumer and brand awareness stuff,

0:11:25.200 --> 0:11:29.360
<v Speaker 1>they cause someone to choose virgin versus recycled materials. So

0:11:29.440 --> 0:11:32.280
<v Speaker 1>from our analysis, what we see is that the break

0:11:32.360 --> 0:11:36.839
<v Speaker 1>even price for these recycled plastics are actually lower or

0:11:36.920 --> 0:11:40.559
<v Speaker 1>at parody with virgin with virgin plastics. So if you're

0:11:40.559 --> 0:11:43.160
<v Speaker 1>an off taker, it's kind of in your interest to

0:11:43.200 --> 0:11:46.320
<v Speaker 1>decrease your feedstock costs to kind of partner up and

0:11:46.360 --> 0:11:50.120
<v Speaker 1>buy these recycled plastics. And because the recycling process uses

0:11:50.200 --> 0:11:54.920
<v Speaker 1>waste plastics, it's kind of insulated from commodity price volatility

0:11:55.080 --> 0:11:57.679
<v Speaker 1>because it's more decoupled from the price of crewed. Right,

0:11:57.720 --> 0:12:00.800
<v Speaker 1>you're using waste plastic as you're as your input into

0:12:00.800 --> 0:12:04.320
<v Speaker 1>your recycling system. So yeah, those would be the two

0:12:04.360 --> 0:12:07.640
<v Speaker 1>main drivers. You can decrease your plastics costs but at

0:12:07.640 --> 0:12:10.839
<v Speaker 1>the same time avoid than the hedge for future volatility.

0:12:10.920 --> 0:12:12.880
<v Speaker 1>Is there a market for this that everybody goes to

0:12:13.000 --> 0:12:16.720
<v Speaker 1>or is it all done on a handshaken? And actually

0:12:16.760 --> 0:12:20.760
<v Speaker 1>those those handshakes and those contracts are providing a barrier

0:12:20.880 --> 0:12:24.880
<v Speaker 1>to more chemical recycling that has come up time and

0:12:24.920 --> 0:12:27.760
<v Speaker 1>time again. So when I've been speaking to small recyclers,

0:12:28.160 --> 0:12:31.800
<v Speaker 1>they've told me that they are getting contracts with municipalities

0:12:31.880 --> 0:12:34.680
<v Speaker 1>that are for like ten or twenty years, and the

0:12:34.720 --> 0:12:36.880
<v Speaker 1>cities are trying to convince them to take thirty years

0:12:37.200 --> 0:12:40.199
<v Speaker 1>because nobody wants to deal with waste. They just want

0:12:40.200 --> 0:12:42.960
<v Speaker 1>to give it to someone and forget about it. The

0:12:43.040 --> 0:12:46.200
<v Speaker 1>reason why that's a problem is because if you can't

0:12:46.200 --> 0:12:48.959
<v Speaker 1>get hold of the feedstock reliably, so if you don't

0:12:49.000 --> 0:12:51.720
<v Speaker 1>have a city that you're partnered with, what are you

0:12:51.760 --> 0:12:54.920
<v Speaker 1>going to do. It's a big problem for chemical recyclers

0:12:54.960 --> 0:12:58.560
<v Speaker 1>in the developed world. Now what's really interesting is what

0:12:58.679 --> 0:13:02.320
<v Speaker 1>happens in the developing world because everything we've seen about

0:13:02.679 --> 0:13:06.720
<v Speaker 1>the plastic waste crisis, it's all coming from these rivers

0:13:07.400 --> 0:13:11.240
<v Speaker 1>um in the developing world. So the question is, if

0:13:11.240 --> 0:13:14.480
<v Speaker 1>you're a chemical recycler, do you set up in the

0:13:14.600 --> 0:13:18.160
<v Speaker 1>US where or the EU or there's policy to support,

0:13:18.880 --> 0:13:21.640
<v Speaker 1>or do you go to a place like Thailand or

0:13:21.720 --> 0:13:25.760
<v Speaker 1>India or the Philippines and do you either try to

0:13:25.960 --> 0:13:32.000
<v Speaker 1>make that recycling feedstock infrastructure for collection yourself, do you

0:13:32.040 --> 0:13:34.079
<v Speaker 1>go to the government and is that going to give

0:13:34.080 --> 0:13:37.160
<v Speaker 1>you a more secure supply and there's potential there to

0:13:37.240 --> 0:13:40.040
<v Speaker 1>do it in a very decentralized way because if you

0:13:40.080 --> 0:13:43.199
<v Speaker 1>have things like you know, small deposit scheme that the

0:13:43.280 --> 0:13:46.240
<v Speaker 1>company is running itself, you're creating a price signal to

0:13:47.040 --> 0:13:50.400
<v Speaker 1>you know, individual waste pickers to say, bring us your

0:13:50.400 --> 0:13:53.640
<v Speaker 1>plastic bottles, will give you a couple of cents, and

0:13:53.679 --> 0:13:56.360
<v Speaker 1>then they can put that into their profitable process and

0:13:56.480 --> 0:13:59.240
<v Speaker 1>come out with something that they can sell. Let's talk

0:13:59.280 --> 0:14:01.760
<v Speaker 1>about MIDS and how they fit into this, because I

0:14:01.800 --> 0:14:05.280
<v Speaker 1>think there is somewhat of a misconception among the general

0:14:05.320 --> 0:14:09.600
<v Speaker 1>public regarding the fact that emissions and waste are actually

0:14:09.600 --> 0:14:12.720
<v Speaker 1>two very different things, and while they do converge in

0:14:12.760 --> 0:14:14.880
<v Speaker 1>this space, it would be great for you to talk

0:14:14.920 --> 0:14:20.040
<v Speaker 1>about maybe the virgin feedstocks and the recycled feedstocks are

0:14:20.120 --> 0:14:23.280
<v Speaker 1>compared to one another from an emission standpoint. I think

0:14:24.160 --> 0:14:27.359
<v Speaker 1>you have to think about what is the gold standard,

0:14:28.080 --> 0:14:31.240
<v Speaker 1>because that's what people ask us a lot, is what

0:14:31.360 --> 0:14:35.560
<v Speaker 1>should I do. Now we've done some calculations on l

0:14:35.640 --> 0:14:38.760
<v Speaker 1>C A S. And if you think of a plastic

0:14:38.800 --> 0:14:42.400
<v Speaker 1>bottle and you think about the carbon footprint of making

0:14:42.440 --> 0:14:45.200
<v Speaker 1>a new plastic bottle, a recycled one is half that.

0:14:45.760 --> 0:14:48.800
<v Speaker 1>But if you can then recycle that recycled bottle again

0:14:48.920 --> 0:14:52.040
<v Speaker 1>and again and again, then you're shrinking the carbon footprint.

0:14:53.000 --> 0:14:56.840
<v Speaker 1>Now you also have to take into account the emissions

0:14:56.840 --> 0:15:00.320
<v Speaker 1>of each individual process, and that's what il Han's note

0:15:00.560 --> 0:15:05.520
<v Speaker 1>looks at. Yes, so mechanical recycling is less carbon intensive

0:15:05.520 --> 0:15:10.360
<v Speaker 1>than chemical recycling, but recycling processes are still carbon emitting processes, right,

0:15:10.400 --> 0:15:13.440
<v Speaker 1>They're not net zero. They still emit carbon and have

0:15:13.440 --> 0:15:18.360
<v Speaker 1>a carbon footprint. So even though by displacing virgin material,

0:15:18.640 --> 0:15:23.040
<v Speaker 1>recycling can offer emissions reductions, at the end of the day,

0:15:23.080 --> 0:15:27.680
<v Speaker 1>what really makes your industry decrease its total emissions is

0:15:27.840 --> 0:15:32.560
<v Speaker 1>either reducing demand or finding more sustainable options like bioplastics

0:15:32.600 --> 0:15:36.000
<v Speaker 1>for example. We have this waste stream, though, and the

0:15:36.040 --> 0:15:41.040
<v Speaker 1>alternative is incineration in some circumstances has its stack up

0:15:41.080 --> 0:15:45.560
<v Speaker 1>compared to incineration much better because you're extending the lifetime

0:15:45.560 --> 0:15:48.200
<v Speaker 1>of the material and you're at the same time you're

0:15:48.360 --> 0:15:51.760
<v Speaker 1>obviously avoiding the embodied carbon in the product that is

0:15:51.800 --> 0:15:54.480
<v Speaker 1>released into the atmosphere when you end up incinerating the

0:15:54.520 --> 0:15:57.360
<v Speaker 1>plast And we ant be any after Nazi incineration as

0:15:57.400 --> 0:16:00.000
<v Speaker 1>part of the circular economy, do we know, we definitely

0:16:00.080 --> 0:16:02.640
<v Speaker 1>we do not that is a kind of second life

0:16:02.680 --> 0:16:07.320
<v Speaker 1>for plastic. It's it's definitely not circuling. This seems like

0:16:07.960 --> 0:16:12.400
<v Speaker 1>chemical recycling is a pretty good option and and dare

0:16:12.440 --> 0:16:14.400
<v Speaker 1>I say, it's even feeling a little bit like a

0:16:14.400 --> 0:16:17.360
<v Speaker 1>silver bullet. So I want to know how much of

0:16:17.880 --> 0:16:21.680
<v Speaker 1>the plastics waste stream can actually go into chemical recycling

0:16:21.720 --> 0:16:24.880
<v Speaker 1>and can we feasibly get rid of everything and reuse

0:16:24.960 --> 0:16:29.200
<v Speaker 1>it all? I think for the highest quality output, you

0:16:29.240 --> 0:16:34.080
<v Speaker 1>still need sorting. If waste isn't being collected properly or

0:16:34.160 --> 0:16:37.320
<v Speaker 1>at all, then you still have a feedstock issue. And

0:16:37.400 --> 0:16:42.440
<v Speaker 1>collection is an extremely decentralized problem to try and fix,

0:16:42.960 --> 0:16:46.360
<v Speaker 1>whereas using a more sustainable material is completely within the

0:16:46.400 --> 0:16:49.320
<v Speaker 1>remit of one company. They can make that decision themselves

0:16:49.400 --> 0:16:52.200
<v Speaker 1>and control the whole thing. So in terms of silver

0:16:52.280 --> 0:16:57.040
<v Speaker 1>bullets as a technology, maybe, um, but there's a much

0:16:57.120 --> 0:17:01.000
<v Speaker 1>wider system around this that is difficult to conquer. You know,

0:17:01.120 --> 0:17:03.480
<v Speaker 1>something that we we could talk about that we haven't

0:17:03.880 --> 0:17:08.320
<v Speaker 1>is the recycling capacity gap. So a lot of companies

0:17:08.359 --> 0:17:11.080
<v Speaker 1>and a lot of countries have put targets in place,

0:17:11.160 --> 0:17:15.800
<v Speaker 1>and pretty aggressive ones, you know, for completion. In they've

0:17:15.840 --> 0:17:18.199
<v Speaker 1>said this is how much of our packaging or our

0:17:18.280 --> 0:17:20.640
<v Speaker 1>waste that we want to recycle. And when we look

0:17:20.680 --> 0:17:23.919
<v Speaker 1>at how much recycling capacity both mechanical and chemical in

0:17:23.920 --> 0:17:28.320
<v Speaker 1>the pipeline is there, it's not enough. And we show

0:17:28.440 --> 0:17:31.600
<v Speaker 1>that gap in the note, and that's a pretty clear

0:17:31.720 --> 0:17:34.000
<v Speaker 1>signal to a lot of these industries that they need

0:17:34.040 --> 0:17:36.880
<v Speaker 1>to invest more, they need to build more, and we're

0:17:36.920 --> 0:17:38.919
<v Speaker 1>just not seeing that yet. So to us, it's going

0:17:38.960 --> 0:17:41.360
<v Speaker 1>to be a really interesting few years. Because you can

0:17:41.359 --> 0:17:45.679
<v Speaker 1>build these plants fast, they're already profitable. It could be

0:17:45.960 --> 0:17:49.720
<v Speaker 1>a very cool three four five years for recycling in general.

0:17:50.440 --> 0:17:52.359
<v Speaker 1>So the question might not be whether or not you

0:17:52.440 --> 0:17:56.359
<v Speaker 1>set up in facility in Europe or the US, or

0:17:56.440 --> 0:18:02.040
<v Speaker 1>you set it up in Asia. Maybe there's an opportunity everywhere. Exactly. Yeah, definitely.

0:18:02.880 --> 0:18:05.720
<v Speaker 1>While on that note, I think that we should come

0:18:05.720 --> 0:18:07.560
<v Speaker 1>back to this in a couple of years time and

0:18:07.600 --> 0:18:10.000
<v Speaker 1>take a sense check. Are we going to continue to

0:18:10.040 --> 0:18:16.560
<v Speaker 1>write research about recycling going forward? We're just getting started. Yes, Okay,

0:18:16.640 --> 0:18:19.960
<v Speaker 1>I'm really happy to hear that. Uh. Julia Ilhan, thank

0:18:20.000 --> 0:18:29.200
<v Speaker 1>you so much for joining us today. Thanks Dana bloombergin

0:18:29.280 --> 0:18:31.520
<v Speaker 1>e F is a service provided by Bloomberg Finance LP

0:18:31.600 --> 0:18:34.560
<v Speaker 1>and its affiliates. This recording does not constitute, nor should

0:18:34.560 --> 0:18:37.919
<v Speaker 1>it be construed, as investment advice, investment recommendations, or a

0:18:37.960 --> 0:18:41.680
<v Speaker 1>recommendation as to an investment or other strategy. Bloomberguinnia should

0:18:41.720 --> 0:18:44.320
<v Speaker 1>not be considered as information sufficient upon which to base

0:18:44.359 --> 0:18:47.879
<v Speaker 1>an investment decision. Neither Bloomberg Finance LP nor any of

0:18:47.920 --> 0:18:50.919
<v Speaker 1>its affiliates makes any representation or warranty as to the

0:18:50.960 --> 0:18:54.200
<v Speaker 1>accuracy or completeness of the information to contained in this recording,

0:18:54.240 --> 0:18:56.560
<v Speaker 1>and any liability as a result of this recording is

0:18:56.600 --> 0:19:02.720
<v Speaker 1>expressly disclaimed. H