A recycling technology selection framework for evaluating the effectiveness of plastic recycling technologies for circular economy advancement

Idowu O. Kunlere, Kalim U. Shah
{"title":"A recycling technology selection framework for evaluating the effectiveness of plastic recycling technologies for circular economy advancement","authors":"Idowu O. Kunlere,&nbsp;Kalim U. Shah","doi":"10.1016/j.cec.2023.100066","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Despite progress in plastic waste recycling technologies, global plastic waste recycling rates remain disappointing. This issue not only suggests an underutilization of existing recycling technologies but also hinders resource utilization, the circular economy, and sustainable manufacturing. Several studies have proposed to address this issue, such as by evaluating the efficiency of recycling technologies based on the volume of recycled waste. However, such single-indicator methods often overlook other critical factors and, thus, may not provide holistic assessments. Additionally, existing methods for evaluating or comparing different recycling technologies are often complex and time-consuming. Meanwhile, several other studies have proposed hundreds of indicators for assessing the effectiveness and suitability of recycling technologies, which often complicates the selection process. Consequently, recyclers and other stakeholders often struggle to select effective and suitable recycling technologies for different plastic waste types and under specific conditions. To address these challenges, we propose the recycling technology selection framework (RTSF), a simple tool that enables easy visualization of relevant recycling indicators under five key pillars: economic, technical, environmental, social, and policy. By allowing recyclers and stakeholders to quickly identify, select, and visualize factors of interest from a large pool, the RTSF enables qualitative comparison and enhances the evaluation of the effectiveness and suitability of multiple plastic recycling technologies. Lastly, the RTSF can serve as a preliminary tool and be used in conjunction with other approaches to enhance the effectiveness of plastic recycling technologies.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":100245,"journal":{"name":"Circular Economy","volume":"2 4","pages":"Article 100066"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2773167723000432/pdfft?md5=d47b7580938de439e2fb470d66b243b9&pid=1-s2.0-S2773167723000432-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Circular Economy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2773167723000432","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Despite progress in plastic waste recycling technologies, global plastic waste recycling rates remain disappointing. This issue not only suggests an underutilization of existing recycling technologies but also hinders resource utilization, the circular economy, and sustainable manufacturing. Several studies have proposed to address this issue, such as by evaluating the efficiency of recycling technologies based on the volume of recycled waste. However, such single-indicator methods often overlook other critical factors and, thus, may not provide holistic assessments. Additionally, existing methods for evaluating or comparing different recycling technologies are often complex and time-consuming. Meanwhile, several other studies have proposed hundreds of indicators for assessing the effectiveness and suitability of recycling technologies, which often complicates the selection process. Consequently, recyclers and other stakeholders often struggle to select effective and suitable recycling technologies for different plastic waste types and under specific conditions. To address these challenges, we propose the recycling technology selection framework (RTSF), a simple tool that enables easy visualization of relevant recycling indicators under five key pillars: economic, technical, environmental, social, and policy. By allowing recyclers and stakeholders to quickly identify, select, and visualize factors of interest from a large pool, the RTSF enables qualitative comparison and enhances the evaluation of the effectiveness and suitability of multiple plastic recycling technologies. Lastly, the RTSF can serve as a preliminary tool and be used in conjunction with other approaches to enhance the effectiveness of plastic recycling technologies.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
一个评估塑料回收技术对循环经济发展有效性的回收技术选择框架
尽管塑料废物回收技术取得了进展,但全球塑料废物回收率仍然令人失望。这个问题不仅表明现有回收技术的利用不足,而且阻碍了资源利用、循环经济和可持续制造。一些研究建议解决这个问题,例如根据回收废物的数量来评价回收技术的效率。然而,这种单一指标方法往往忽略了其他关键因素,因此可能无法提供全面的评估。此外,现有的评估或比较不同回收技术的方法往往是复杂和耗时的。与此同时,其他几项研究提出了数百项指标来评估回收技术的有效性和适用性,这往往使选择过程复杂化。因此,回收商和其他利益相关者往往难以为不同的塑料废物类型和特定条件选择有效和合适的回收技术。为了应对这些挑战,我们提出了回收技术选择框架(RTSF),这是一个简单的工具,可以在经济、技术、环境、社会和政策五个关键支柱下轻松可视化相关回收指标。通过允许回收商和利益相关者快速识别、选择和可视化感兴趣的因素,RTSF可以进行定性比较,并增强对多种塑料回收技术的有效性和适用性的评估。最后,RTSF可以作为一个初步工具,并与其他方法一起使用,以提高塑料回收技术的有效性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Status and development trends of phosphogypsum utilization in China Progress on the adsorption characteristics of nZVI and other iron-modified biochar for phosphate adsorption in water bodies Using solid waste from the leather tanning industry to produce a mixed calcium/zinc thermal stabilizer for polyvinyl chloride Carbon footprint impact of waste sorting on the municipal household waste treatment system: A community case study of Hangzhou Formulating efficient P-rich biobased starter fertilizers: Effects of acidification and pelletizing on fertilizer properties
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1