The Fraud of Plastic Recycling

The report details how the plastics industry promoted recycling as a false solution to plastic waste despite knowing it was technically and economically unviable. It outlines a history of industry tactics, from promoting disposability in the 1950s to the current promotion of 'advanced recycling' as a means to avoid bans and maintain virgin plastic production.

• The vast majority of plastics are not recyclable due to technical and economic limitations. Viable markets only exist for polyethylene terephthalate (PET) and high density polyethylene (HDPE) plastic bottles and jugs, and the U.S. plastic recycling rate was estimated at only 5-6% as of 2021.
• Plastic recycling is economically unviable because the cost of producing recycled plastic is significantly higher than producing virgin plastic. Furthermore, 'advanced recycling' is inefficient, with only 1-14% of processed material used for new plastic products, while 86-99% becomes fuel or waste.
• Starting in the 1950s, the plastics industry intentionally shifted toward disposability to ensure growing demand. By the 1960s, packaging grew from 10% of total plastic production to 25% by the end of the decade.
• In the mid-1980s, the industry promoted mechanical recycling as a response to public backlash and threats of bans, despite internal knowledge that it was not a permanent solution. The Vinyl Institute stated in 1986 that 'recycling cannot be considered a permanent solid waste solution.'
• The industry implemented the Resin Identification Codes (RICs) in 1988 to create a perception of recyclability. The report claims this system was designed to 'prevent bans' and mislead consumers into believing plastics were recyclable, even though recyclers and government agencies warned the codes were unnecessary or confusing.
• Petrochemical companies made performative investments in recycling research and facilities to deflect regulation, often shutting them down once public pressure subsided. For example, the National Polystyrene Recycling Company (NPRC) failed to meet its 25% recycling goal, recycling under 2% as of 1995.
• Since 2017, the industry has promoted 'advanced recycling' (chemical recycling) as a new solution. The report asserts this is an old technology that is not actually recycling, as it primarily produces fuel or oil rather than new plastic products.
• The plastics industry has used front groups and trade associations, such as the American Chemistry Council (ACC) and the Alliance to End Plastic Waste, to disseminate disinformation and co-opt the term 'circular economy' to justify expanded plastic production.

APA

Allen, D., Linsley, C., Spoelman, N., & Johl, A. (2024). The Fraud of Plastic Recycling. Center for Climate Integrity. https://climateintegrity.org/uploads/media/Fraud-of-Plastic-Recycling-2024.pdf

Chicago

Allen, Davis, Chelsea Linsley, Naomi Spoelman, and Alyssa Johl. The Fraud of Plastic Recycling. Center for Climate Integrity, 2024. https://climateintegrity.org/uploads/media/Fraud-of-Plastic-Recycling-2024.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Allen |first1=Davis |last2=Linsley |first2=Chelsea |last3=Spoelman |first3=Naomi |last4=Johl |first4=Alyssa |title=The Fraud of Plastic Recycling |publisher=Center for Climate Integrity |date=February 2024 |url=https://climateintegrity.org/uploads/media/Fraud-of-Plastic-Recycling-2024.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{allen2024fraud, author = {Allen, Davis and Linsley, Chelsea and Spoelman, Naomi and Johl, Alyssa}, title = {{The Fraud of Plastic Recycling}}, institution = {Center for Climate Integrity}, year = {2024}, month = feb, url = {https://climateintegrity.org/uploads/media/Fraud-of-Plastic-Recycling-2024.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }