Presentation of the keynote address at the 38th VDI/ITAD Technical Conference on Thermal Waste Treatment now available (in German)
October 7, 2026
Prof. Dr. Uwe Lahl delivered the keynote address on the topic “Potential and Risks of Plastic Recycling” at the 38th VDI/ITAD Technical Conference on Thermal Waste Treatment, held in Würzburg on September 23–24, 2026 (in German). His topic: Broken promises of recycling. His conclusion:
- The promises of recycling and the narrative of the circular economy (for plastics) lull us all into a false sense of security. They act like a sedative in the political debate. “We’re on the right track …”
- What we need is an honest “state of affairs” assessment of what the past 30-odd years of the circular economy have actually achieved. We need real, measurable output figures on efficiency rates and areas of application.
- Because today’s material and mechanical recycling, with its low efficiency rates, is ecologically questionable and can pose risks to people and the environment. Solving these problems will be crucial if the solution is to be more effective and sustainable in the face of the exponential growth of plastic waste.
- Pseudo-solutions (such as downcycling) do not mitigate the accumulation of plastic waste; they merely delay disposal, as products inevitably enter waste-to-energy (WtE) pathways after a single cycle.
- The substitution rates set by the EU Single-Use Plastics Directive (SUPD) and the EU Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation (PPWR) are low (2030: 10–35%), but they represent a start toward increasing high-quality recycling. Implementation is viewed critically, time is running out until 2030, and a review clause is likely.
- WtE currently makes a stable contribution to plastic disposal, but without capacity expansion, it will not be able to cope with the exponential growth of plastic waste either.
- Therefore, it would be appropriate to consider an upper limit on plastic production, especially for “single-use” plastics.
- And new fossil-based plastics continue to be heavily subsidized, which makes recycling uneconomical.
- The integration of fossil-based plastics into the emissions trading system should therefore—contrary to the EU Commission’s proposal—take place not at the end of the chain at the WtE plants’ stacks, but at the beginning of the chain within the plastics industry.
- This would also allow for better tracking of imports of “coal-based plastic,” particularly from China (https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-021-00807-2), whose carbon footprint is two to three times higher than that of plastics produced in the EU. This would also benefit the German chemical and plastics industries.
- Outlook: WtE + CCU is (chemical) recycling! Can it handle the exponential growth of plastic waste? Experience and investment are lacking.
But they offer prospects for a defossilized chemical industry.
