Overview: Reducing Climate Impact from Plastics Lifecycle

Description:

Effective approaches to reduce climate emissions associated with plastic materials extend from a thorough understanding of the complexity of the plastics product cycle, including supply chain, intended use, and end-of-life strategies. To help activists and elected officials make informed policy or advocacy decisions about how to deal with plastics, this Toolbox webpage provides an overview and introduction to the nuances involved with planning and enacting the most effective strategies for specific circumstances.

An important consideration in this endeavor is understanding the highest and best usage for common waste materials, including plastics. The International Zero Waste Alliance has, for example, described a specific hierarchy of policies and strategies intended to guide investment in responsible production, consumption, reuse, and recovery for various materials. This guide provides context for those wishing to develop systems or products that minimize climate emissions and contribute to a zero waste, circular economy.

Within the zero waste hierarchy, the primary strategy involves systemic change to reduce consumption of raw or unsustainably sourced substrates. The next level strategies aim to reduce material needs and to maximize reuse of finished products. Recycling sits in the middle of the hierarchy and above materials recovery, residuals management, and landfill disposal. In this context, material substitutions or banning unnecessary usage of plastics are the most direct and effective way to eliminate emissions from the plastics lifecycle. Depending on the circumstances, however, plastics bans could potentially reduce or even increase overall emissions. For example, substituting glass for plastic bottles can reduce overall life cycle emissions if the glass bottles are cleaned and reused, and glass can be sustainably recycled whereas most plastics are only recycled a few times before being disposed of as waste. Conversely, the increased weight of glass can increase emissions for necessary transport, and the cleaning process requires significant energy and water usage. Other tradeoffs related to intended use, concerns about toxic chemical release, local markets for recycled materials, emissions from electricity generation used for production, and so on can influence policy decisions when it comes to emissions management with regard to plastics.

It is within this context that this overview and related Toolbox webpages describe examples of different approaches to reducing the climate impacts of the plastics lifecycle. More detailed information on specific approaches is provided in separate webpages on this website:

• Extended Producer Responsibility Legislation
• Small Toiletry Bottle Bans
• Beverage Bottle Deposit Programs and PET and HDPE Recycling (future link to pending action)
• Single Use Disposable (SUD) Foodware Bans (future link to pending action)
• Polystyrene and Plastic Bag Bans (future link to pending action)

Background

While “plastic” is often referred to as a singular material, the reality is more complex. Multiple types of plastic have been developed to serve a variety of different functions in several different economic and industrial sectors. These various types of plastic have different characteristics arising from different polymer structure and chemical additives, but the shared characteristic among different types of plastic is that approximately 99% of all plastic is derived from fossil fuels; and that about 75% of climate emissions associated with plastics are attributable to the manufacture of “primary” or “virgin” plastic (as opposed to plastics recovered in recycling programs and reused for plastics production).

Actualizing the potential of using substitute materials or recycling plastics requires an understanding of how plastics are manufactured, how they are used, and ultimately how they contribute to global warming and climate disruption (see Lawrence Berkeley Lab and World Resources Institute links below):

• 5.3% of global climate emissions arise from plastics production excluding emissions associated with use and end-of-life stages of plastics lifecycle.
• 99% of plastic is derived from fossil fuels.
• 75% of climate emissions associated with plastics are released prior to polymerization during the manufacture of “virgin” or “primary” plastic materials.
• Lack of effective end-of-life policies and processes have resulted in a worldwide plastics waste problem. Globally, only 9% of plastic produced is recycled, while roughly 50% of plastic waste ends up in land fills, 19% is incinerated, and 22% is left to pollute the environment.
• In March 2022, the United Nations Environment Assembly (UNEA) passed a resolution to end all plastic pollution around the world, acknowledging the impacts of plastic production on the triple planetary crisis of climate change, biodiversity loss, and pollution. The aim was to develop an international legally binding instrument (ILBI) by 2024. As of August 2025, negotiations have stalled and not resumed as of August 2026; but local action is still both possible and needed.
• Many countries, as well as several U.S. states and local/regional jurisdictions, have adopted policies intended to reduce plastics use and the release of associated pollutants. Some of the policies are outright bans, while others focus on recycling or circular economy incentives.

About 80% of all plastics fall within the following plastic types, with each exhibiting different properties affecting durability, transparency, ease of forming, and suitability for particular products and recycling:

• Resin #1: Polyethylene terephthalate, PET
• Resin #2: High-density Polyethylene, HDPE
• Resin #3: Polyvinyl chloride, PVC
• Resin #4: Low-density Polyethylene, LDPE and Linear Low-density Polyethylene, LLDPE
• Resin #5: Polypropylene, PP
• Resin #6: Polystyrene, PS
• Resin #7: Other: Polyurethane PU, Styrene Acrylonitrile SAN, and Acrylonitrile Butadiene Styrene ABS

Policy Considerations:

As noted previously, plastic bans offer a direct approach to reducing usage of plastics and providing an incentive for producers to use substitute materials. Unfortunately, substitute materials also have their own product lifecycle with associated climate and environmental impacts that need to be carefully considered.

According to Project Drawdown, plastics recycling is the most effective recycling process (measured in tons CO2e eliminated/ton material recovered for recycling) of the four most commonly used industrial materials which include metals, glass, plastics, and cement. Noting that it may also be less costly than landfill disposal, Drawdown views increased recycling as a highly recommended strategy for reducing climate emissions from plastics production. Considering less than 10% of all plastics are recycled globally, and the high emissions intensity involved in virgin plastics production, future recycling policies can be most effective at reducing climate emissions when properly considering the type of plastic material in question. Many types of plastic are difficult to effectively recycle or cannot be recycled together with other kinds of plastics, making the specific kind of plastic and its potential for recovery, recycling and reuse an important consideration when planning policy. Even when focusing on a readily recyclable type of plastic, the effectiveness of recycling programs is often dependent on a network of interrelated public and private infrastructure and services, including waste collection equipment, transfer stations, material recovery facilities (MRFs) and associated equipment, the markets for recycled plastic materials, and the means of transporting recovered plastics to the relevant markets and the residual, non-recyclable plastics to landfills for final disposal.

While plastics recycling has utility in helping to manage waste and decrease emissions, some activists note that plastics recycling is not truly a sustainable solution on its own. The Plastic Pollution Coalition considers the term “recycling” a misnomer with regard to plastics, preferring instead the term “downcycling,” wherein plastic products of continuously decreasing quality are made from the “recycled” plastic until the resulting outputs ultimately hold no commercial value and must be disposed of in landfills. Chemical or “advanced” recycling, an alternative promoted by the petrochemical and plastics industries, involves applying heat and/or chemical solvents to plastic waste to recover more basic petrochemical products, including those burned for energy or used as jet fuels that release climate-warming greenhouse gases; only a small percentage of these materials can be returned to plastic production processes. Chemical recycling is viewed by many as a form of “greenwashing” for what is truthfully an energy intensive and polluting process.

Whether it involves banning production, promoting recycling, or pursuing even broader systemic shifts, the effectiveness of policies focused on reducing the environmental impact of plastics depends in large part on the type of plastic involved, the details of the policy’s implementation timeline and strategy, and the policy’s ultimate intended outcome.

Banning, Reusing, or Recycling?
Under what circumstances is a ban warranted or helpful? What types of plastics can be effectively recycled? What duties should producers fulfill? What alternative materials can be used instead of plastic? And what other variables influence the effectiveness of a given approach? Answers to these and other questions will help shape effective community and climate friendly approaches to plastics manufacture, recycling and disposal. The paragraphs below provide some general guidance regarding various plastic types, but more detailed solutions depend on local or regional capabilities for enforcement of bans, implementation of recycling or bottle deposit programs, and handling waste. For recycling, the details of program design, availability of markets for reclaimed plastics, and determination of how communities value potential co-benefits–including jobs creation, reduced localized litter and pollution, and improved community health–will also provide essential details that can help guide policy development. Federal or state-level legislation can be effective in limiting industry emissions or advancing regulations and incentives for a zero waste, circular economy.

Polyethylene terephthalate, PET or PETE, Resin #1:

• Common uses: beverage bottles, food containers, and packaging.
• PET is widely recycled and can be turned into a variety of products, such as clothing (polar fleece), carpets, and new plastic bottles. However, PET can absorb odors and chemicals from materials it is in contact with, and high heat exposure may cause harmful chemicals from the plastic to leach into consumables and other materials.
• According to PETRA, the PET Resin Association, approximately 31% of PET in the United States is recycled, compared with a more robust 52% recycling rate in Europe. Other sources note lower U.S. recycle rates of only 15 to 19%. PET can be easily recycled, and is currently the most recycled type of plastic worldwide.

High-density Polyethylene, HDPE, Resin #2:

• Common uses: milk jugs, detergent bottles, and shampoo bottles.
• This rigid, durable plastic is in very high demand and is easily shredded, melted, and molded into new non-food containers or crates. HDPE is known for its strength and durability. Virgin HDPE is generally considered safe for food contact and one of the safest plastics for both people and the environment.
• Recycled HDPE is generally not used for food containers due to risk of chemical contamination. The EPA has determined that liquid products packaged in HDPE containers treated with fluorination technology could leach certain per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) into products from the container walls. HDPE’s recovery rate of about 10% is second only to that of PET, and is commonly accepted at most recycling centers globally.

Polyvinyl chloride, PVC, Resin #3:

• Common uses: pipes, shower curtains, window frames, credit cards, and vinyl flooring.
• PVC can be flexible or rigid, depending on the additives used.
• PVC contains harmful chemicals that make it challenging to recycle; it is rarely accepted in curbside collection programs. When recycled through specialized programs, it is typically used in flooring, paneling, and gutters.

Low-density Polyethylene, LDPE and Linear Low-density Polyethylene, LLDPE; Resin #4:

• Common uses – LDPE: plastic wrap, frozen food bags, and grocery bags.
• Common uses – LLDPE: Flexible and puncture resistant applications (grocery and retail bags, trash and garbage bags, shrink wrap, pond liners, geomembranes, etc.).
• LDPE and LLDPE are difficult to recycle and are rarely accepted in curbside collection programs. Both can be recycled through specific store drop-off programs. Overall recycle rates are slightly above 4 percent.

Polypropylene, PP, Resin #5:

• Common uses: yogurt tubs, takeout containers, and bottle caps.
• Some municipal recycling programs accept polypropylene while others do not.
• While polypropylene can be recycled, it is often discarded due to the cost and complexity of recycling. When recycled, PP is transformed into heavy-duty products like pallets, ice scrapers, and automotive parts.
• Despite the diverse applications and demand for PP, its recycling rate is incredibly low. At just 3%, PP’s recycling rate is dwarfed by that of HDPE and PET.

Polystyrene, PS, Resin #6:

• Polystyrene (styrofoam) is rarely accepted in curbside collection programs; it is often the subject of ordinances that ban its use.
• Technically recyclable but due to bulky, lightweight and fragile characteristics it is rarely recycled.

Other: Polyurethane PU, Styrene Acrylonitrile SAN and Acrylonitrile Butadiene Styrene ABS, Resin #7:

• Common PU uses: Insulating foams (both rigid and spry-on foams), mattresses, upholstery, etc.
• PU may be subjected to mechanical recycling with “rebonding” of scrap (or ground) polyurethane with various bonding agents to form carpet padding or insulating panels. Other recycling processes are more chemical intensive.
• Common SAN uses: Clear food containers, cosmetic jars, plastic pitchers, etc.
• SAN is a mixed resin plastic and is not often recycled; when it is recycled it is often downcycled.
• Common ABS uses: Black pipe.
• ABS is often recycled in specialized industrial and electronic waste centers.

The extensive use of plastic materials and their utility and importance in almost every modern economic sector is undeniable. The emissions and waste associated with plastic’s product cycle, from raw material (fossil fuel) extraction to end-of-life disposal, represents a significant global challenge that negatively impacts both the climate and our everyday lives. Local strategies to ban or reduce plastic use, reuse plastic products when possible, and establish effective recycling programs can make important contributions to addressing the challenges of ubiquitous plastics use.

Goal: 
Reduce GHG emissions from the production, use, and disposal of plastics.