AP-R648-21 Use of Road-Grade Recycled Plastics For Sustainable Asphalt Pavements

Research Report
AP-R648-21
Use of Road-grade Recycled Plastics

for Sustainable Asphalt Pavements
Overview of the Recycled Plastic
Industry and Recycled Plastic Types
Use of Road-grade Recycled Plastics for Sustainable Asphalt Pavements: Overview of the Recycled
Plastic Industry and Recycled Plastic Types
Prepared by Publisher
Associate Professor Filippo Giustozzi and Yeong Jia Boom Austroads Ltd.
Level 9, 287 Elizabeth Street
Sydney NSW 2000 Australia
Project Manager Phone: +61 2 8265 3300
austroads@austroads.com.au
Andrew Papacostas
www.austroads.com.au
Abstract About Austroads

This report provides a comprehensive overview of the type, volume, Austroads is the peak organisation of Australasian road
and price of recycled plastics and their possible uses in asphalt. The transport and traffic agencies.
report presents data, including recycling processes, prices of
recycled plastics, annual production volumes and infrastructure Austroads’ purpose is to support our member organisations to
capabilities. deliver an improved Australasian road transport network. To
succeed in this task, we undertake leading-edge road and
The content was informed by interviews with members of the plastics transport research which underpins our input to policy
industry including associations, councils, material recovery facilities, development and published guidance on the design,
plastic recyclers, and manufacturers. The interviews evaluated the construction and management of the road network and its
current recycling situation in Australia and New Zealand, and associated infrastructure.
identified bottlenecks, opportunities, and capabilities.
Austroads provides a collective approach that delivers value
This is the first report from a project (APT6305) which is examining for money, encourages shared knowledge, and drives
the use of road-grade recycled plastics in asphalt pavements. The consistency for road users.
project is investigating the most suitable types of recycled plastics for
incorporation into asphalt. In addition, new tests and methodologies Austroads is governed by a Board consisting of senior
will be developed to ascertain if the addition of recycled plastics in executive representatives from each of its eleven member
asphalt may produce any detrimental effects for the environment, the organisations:
health and safety of the workers or impact the future recyclability of • Transport for NSW
plastic-modified asphalt. • Department of Transport Victoria
• Queensland Department of Transport and Main Roads
Keywords
• Main Roads Western Australia
Asphalt, road pavements, recycled plastics, bitumen. • Department for Infrastructure and Transport South Australia
• Department of State Growth Tasmania
ISBN ANO to supply on publication • Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Logistics
Northern Territory
Austroads Project No. APT6305
• Transport Canberra and City Services Directorate,
Austroads Publication No. AP-R648-21 Australian Capital Territory
Publication date March 2021 • Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional
Development and Communications
Pages 42
• Australian Local Government Association
• New Zealand Transport Agency.
© Austroads 2021 | This work is copyright. Apart from any use as
permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, no part may be reproduced
by any process without the prior written permission of Austroads.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to express their gratitude to all companies who attended the meetings and contributed with their expert opinions
and supply of raw material to RMIT University. A full list of companies is provided in Appendix A.
This report has been prepared for Austroads as part of its work to promote improved Australian and New Zealand transport outcomes by
providing expert technical input on road and road transport issues.
Individual road agencies will determine their response to this report following consideration of their legislative or administrative
arrangements, available funding, as well as local circumstances and priorities.
Austroads believes this publication to be correct at the time of printing and does not accept responsibility for any consequences arising from
the use of information herein. Readers should rely on their own skill and judgement to apply information to particular issues.
Use of Road-grade Recycled Plastics for Sustainable Asphalt Pavements:
Overview of the Recycled Plastic Industry and Recycled Plastic Types
Summary
Plastic is a significant contributor to Australia and New Zealand’s waste generation. With plastic consumption
increasing significantly around the world, there is a growing interest in exploring the viability of using recycled
plastics in road construction.
Currently, the road industry is investigating the inclusion of various types of recycled plastics in asphalt through
different processes and techniques. However, there is no clear national guidance available that assists in the
selection of the most suitable type of plastic to be used in asphalt and on the specifications that should apply
to plastic-modified bitumen and asphalt. In addition, further guidance is required to assess potential issues that
could arise from the use of recycled plastics in asphalt, such as the generation of microplastics, the future
recyclability of plastic-modified asphalt and fuming and emissions during its manufacture and placement.
The Transport and Infrastructure Council, that brings together Commonwealth, State, Territory and New
Zealand Ministers with responsibility for transport and infrastructure issues, has funded research through
Austroads on the use of recycled plastics and their potential application in asphalt.
Austroads Project APT6305 “Use of road-grade recycled plastics for sustainable asphalt pavements” is an
Australian and New Zealand initiative that investigates the benefits, methodologies, and frameworks for
incorporating recycled plastics into asphalt. The ultimate goal of the project is to identify road-grade plastics
that can be used in the construction and maintenance of asphalt roads.
This is the first report of the APT6305 project. It provides a comprehensive overview of the type, volume, and
price of recycled plastics and their possible uses in asphalt. The report presents data, including recycling
processes, prices of recycled plastics, annual production volumes, infrastructure capabilities and feedback,
obtained from a series of individual interviews and online webinars held with members of the plastics industry
(e.g. associations, councils, material recovery facilities, plastic recyclers, and manufacturers). Interviews were
conducted between September and December 2020.
Based on the information provided through industry consultation (e.g., availability, price, recycling rate etc.)
and a preliminary assessment of desirable characteristics of recycled plastics criteria, eight different types of
plastics, some also obtained from both streams (post-industrial/post-consumer) have been selected for further
detailed testing in the next phases of Project APT6305.
Austroads 2021 | page i

Contents
Summary ......................................................................................................................................................... i
1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 1
1.1 Purpose of the study ........................................................................................................................ 1
1.2 Scope of the study ............................................................................................................................ 2
1.3 Methodology ..................................................................................................................................... 2
1.3.1 Inception webinar ................................................................................................................ 2
1.3.2 Individual meetings .............................................................................................................. 2
1.3.3 Second webinar ................................................................................................................... 2
2. The plastics journey .............................................................................................................................. 3
2.1 The international classification system ............................................................................................. 3
2.2 Waste streams in Australia and New Zealand ................................................................................. 5
2.2.1 Post-consumer stream ........................................................................................................ 5
2.2.2 Post-industrial stream .......................................................................................................... 6
2.2.3 Australian and New Zealand waste and resource recovery system ................................... 7
2.3 Plastic consumption and recycling in Australia and New Zealand ................................................... 8
2.3.1 National recycling scheme .................................................................................................. 9
2.3.2 Incentive-based and product stewardship schemes ........................................................... 9
2.3.3 Price of plastics and recycling technology ........................................................................ 10
2.3.4 Industry feedback .............................................................................................................. 10
2.3.5 Mechanical recycling ......................................................................................................... 11
2.3.6 Chemical recycling ............................................................................................................ 18
2.3.7 Processing Challenges ...................................................................................................... 19
2.3.8 Industry Survey Response – Recycling Processes Used ................................................. 19
3. Australian & New Zealand processing capabilities .......................................................................... 21
3.1 Production Capability ..................................................................................................................... 21
3.2 Annual production rates ................................................................................................................. 22
3.3 Annual production rates breakdown............................................................................................... 24
4. Price range of recycled plastics ......................................................................................................... 26
4.1 Plastic bales ................................................................................................................................... 26
4.2 Plastic flakes .................................................................................................................................. 26
4.3 Plastic pellets ................................................................................................................................. 27
4.4 Plastic powder ................................................................................................................................ 27
4.5 Price of recycled plastics ................................................................................................................ 28
5. Selected recycled plastics for further detailed assessment ........................................................... 29
5.1 Wet method .................................................................................................................................... 29
5.2 Dry method ..................................................................................................................................... 29
5.3 Potential impact on the recycling industry ...................................................................................... 30
5.4 Potential impacts on the environment ............................................................................................ 30
Austroads 2021 | page ii

5.5 Selected plastics ............................................................................................................................ 31

5.5.1 Low Density Polyethylene (LDPE) .................................................................................... 31
5.5.2 Linear Low-Density Polyethylene (LLDPE) ....................................................................... 32
5.5.3 High Density Polyethylene (HDPE) ................................................................................... 32
5.5.4 Polypropylene (PP)............................................................................................................ 32
5.5.5 Commingled Polyethylene/Polypropylene (PE/PP) ........................................................... 33
5.5.6 Commingled Polyethylene (LLD/LD/HD) ........................................................................... 33
5.5.7 Coloured Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET) .................................................................... 33
5.5.8 Acrylonitrile Butadiene Styrene (ABS)............................................................................... 34
6. Potential enhancements to increase viability of using recycled plastics in roads....................... 35
7. Conclusions.......................................................................................................................................... 37
References ................................................................................................................................................... 39
Appendix A List of companies consulted in alphabetical order ..................................................... 41
Tables
Table 2.1: Resin identification code. ............................................................................................................... 3

Table 2.2: Post-consumer stream plastics. ..................................................................................................... 5
Table 2.3: Post-Industrial stream plastics. ...................................................................................................... 6
Table 5.1: Selected plastics for detailed assessment categorised by waste stream. ...................................31
Figures
Figure 1.1: APT6305 reporting structure. ......................................................................................................... 1

Figure 2.1: Lifecycle of ‘plastic’ resources in Australia and New Zealand’s waste and resource
recovery system. ............................................................................................................................ 7
Figure 2.2: Types of plastics reprocessed by the interviewed companies. ....................................................10
Figure 2.3: Overall process of mechanical recycling. ..................................................................................... 11
Figure 2.4: Post-consumer stream plastics are collected through kerbside collection schemes while
post-industrial stream plastics are sent directly to plastic recyclers. ...........................................12
Figure 2.5: Generic ballistic separators employed by most waste management facilities. ............................13
Figure 2.6: Sink float separation tanks collect plastics that float to the surface with a rotating wheel. ..........13
Figure 2.7: Hand-picking is still the most practiced sorting method globally..................................................14
Figure 2.8: NIR sorters utilise optical equipment to differentiate types of plastics. ........................................14
Figure 2.9: Schematic of electrostatic separators. ......................................................................................... 15
Figure 2.10: Generic washing system to clean off contaminants from plastics. ..............................................16
Figure 2.11: State of the art vacuum decontamination unit with an in-built shredder, and extruder. ...............17
Figure 2.12: Plastics are shredded by rotating blades that produce flakes or granules. .................................17
Figure 2.13: Water quenching vs gas quenching. ............................................................................................ 18
Figure 2.14: Recycling processes used by the interviewed companies. ..........................................................19
Figure 3.1: Total Annual Production Capabilities categorised by Post-Industrial vs Post-Consumer. ..........21
Figure 3.2: Location of facilities in Australia and New Zealand...................................................................... 23
Figure 3.3: Annual Production Rates categorised by Post Industrial vs Post Consumer. .............................24
Figure 4.1: Baled plastics ............................................................................................................................... 26
Figure 4.2: Plastic flakes. ............................................................................................................................... 27
Figure 4.3: Plastic pellets. .............................................................................................................................. 27
Figure 4.4: Plastic powder produced from the pulverisation process. ...........................................................28
Figure 4.5: Price range of recycled plastics by shape in Australia and New Zealand. ..................................28
Austroads 2021 | page iii

1. Introduction
The Transport and Infrastructure Council, that brings together Commonwealth, State, Territory and New
Zealand Ministers with responsibility for transport and infrastructure issues, has funded research through
Austroads on waste plastics and their potential application in asphalt.
Austroads Project APT6305 “Use of road-grade recycled plastics for sustainable asphalt pavements” is an
Australian and New Zealand initiative that will investigate the benefits, methodologies, frameworks, and the
development of performance-based specifications for incorporating recycled plastics into asphalt. The goal of the
project is to identify road-grade plastics that can be used in the construction and maintenance of asphalt roads.
This report is the first of four interim reports of the APT6305 project. The report provides a comprehensive
overview of the type, volume, and price of recycled plastics and their possible uses in asphalt. A final project
report will also be produced at the completion of the project. The APT6305 project reporting structure is
described in Figure 1.1.
Figure 1.1: APT6305 reporting structure.
Report 1 outlines the type, volume and price of recycled plastics and their possible use as ‘road-grade’
plastics. Reports 2, 3 and 4 will outline the possibilities and limitations associated with the use of recycled
plastics incorporated into asphalt mixes via various methods and the recyclability, environmental issues and
potential health impacts associated with the use of recycled plastics in asphalt road applications.
1.1 Purpose of the study

The objective of this first part of the project is to provide a detailed overview of the plastics recycling industry
in Australia and New Zealand to help identify specific sources of plastics by category, volume and stream
that can be possibly used in asphalt for road applications.
Austroads 2021 | page 1

1.2 Scope of the study

The analysis in this first part of the project gathered expert opinion sourced from various organisations
operating in the recycling plastics sector in Australia and New Zealand and from published market analysis
reports. Meetings, surveys, and interviews with companies from the plastic reprocessing and manufacturing
industry, material recycling facilities (MRFs), plastics associations and recycling associations were undertaken
from September to December 2020. Information including the availability of plastics by category, processing
capabilities, price range and total annual production capabilities has been collected and analysed in this report.
These data sets have been further analysed to provide a narrative on the shortlisted group of plastics to be
considered for the next experimental assessments under APT6305.
1.3 Methodology
A national survey of plastic recyclers and associations was conducted in this part of the project. A series of
meetings was held to obtain insights about the plastics recycling industry in Australia and New Zealand.
Firstly, a national inception meeting was held to inform and create awareness on the current state and
purpose of APT6305. Meetings were then undertaken with individual plastics-related companies to obtain an
in-depth understanding of their work in the industry. Lastly, a second general meeting was held to present
the data that was gathered during the individual meetings.
1.3.1 Inception webinar

This first inception webinar was held on the 2 October 2020 and was specifically designed for plastics
recyclers, plastics associations, and government organisations. Participants (45 No.) were presented with
the project plan and the general characteristics that recycled plastics should possess to qualify as potentially
‘suitable’ for asphalt road applications. The information was matched with inputs from companies and
associations to define what stream/s and type/s of plastics are to be considered for the experimentation.
1.3.2 Individual meetings

All companies that attended the virtual webinar and others were then interviewed individually and the
information provided was further assessed into individual aspects of waste plastics recycling such as volume,
price, and national availability. The duration of each meeting was between 30 and 45 minutes with numerous
companies being interviewed multiple times.
1.3.3 Second webinar

The second national webinar (38 No. participants) was held on the 25 November 2020. The virtual meeting
outlined the findings from the consultation with the plastics industry (manufacturers, associations, recyclers and
MRFs) and provided a shortlisted group of waste plastic sources selected for asphalt and bitumen testing.
This report draws on the data sourced from key players in the plastic industry (a list of interviewed
companies is provided in Appendix A). Plastic recyclers, manufacturers, MRFs, councils and associations
(40 No. participants) were individually interviewed over the course of two months to gather data that is
presented in this report. The collected data includes:
• the source of plastics (kerbside collection, purchased from industry/MRFs, collection centres)
• stream of plastics (post-consumer or post-industrial)
• type of plastics recycled, manufactured, and reprocessed
• recycling processes available at their facilities (sorting, washing, extrusion, etc.)
• total annual production volume (tonnes/year)
• selling price of recycled plastics
• tests undertaken to characterise waste plastics before/after recycling, and
• future infrastructure works and/or plans in the plastic industry, including their views on the project.

2. The plastics journey
2.1 The international classification system

In an effort to reduce the use of plastics and encourage recycling regulations, the Society of the Plastics
Industry introduced a voluntary resin identification coding system in 1988 (ASTM D7611) (ASTM 2020).
Table 2.1 illustrates the plastics in their respective identification number including their applications in the
post-consumer and post-industrial market.
Table 2.1: Resin identification code.
Identification Product Applications in Recycling Rate* in

Description Properties
Number AU/NZ AUS/NZ
Polyethylene Good thermal Post-Consumer Market Commonly Recycled
Terephthalate properties Water bottles ~20%
(PET) Resistant to most Shampoo/soap bottles
solvents Food containers
High impact and Packaging trays
shatter resistant
Low gas permeability
Post-Industrial Market
Strapping
Storage containers
High Density Higher tensile Post-Consumer Market Commonly recycled
Polyethylene strength in Milk/juice bottles ~15%
(HDPE) comparison to other Food containers
polyethylene resins
Resistant to most
solvents Post-Industrial Market
Low temperature Pipes
resistant Geomembrane covers
Stiff material Chemical drums
Polyvinyl Strong insulating Post-Consumer Market Occasionally recycled
Chloride (PVC) properties Disposable medical equipment ~2%
High durability
Flame retardant Post-Industrial Market
Resistant to inorganic Water pipes
chemicals Insulation pipes
Waterproofing membranes
Cable insulators
Low Density Chemical resistant to Post-Consumer Market Commonly recycled
Polyethylene acids Plastic bags ~15%
(LDPE) Low water absorption Food containers
High impact strength Dispensing bottles
at low temperatures
Thin film-like material Post-Industrial Market
Bulk bags
Tunnel film
Packaging material
Irrigation pipes
Cover films
Water tanks

Identification Product Applications in Recycling Rate* in

Description Properties
Number AU/NZ AUS/NZ
Polypropylene Resistant to cracking Post-Consumer Market Sometimes recycled
(PP) Strong mechanical Kitchen containers ~8%
and electrical Bottles
properties Toys
Good optical Furniture
properties
Appliances
Stiffer than
polyethylene
Post-Industrial Market
Bulk bags
Flowerpots
Packaging material
Crate holders
Chemical drums
Automotive parts
Buckets
Polystyrene Strong insulating Post-Consumer Market Sometimes recycled
(PS) properties Packaging material ~12%
High compressive Food packaging
strength
Resistant to salts and Post-Industrial Market
alkalis
Packaging material
Resistant to aging
Safety equipment (e.g.,
sporting helmets), car seats
Others (PC, Resins that do not fall ABS Sometimes recycled
PLA, ABS, into any of the Electronics ~8%
PA6) categories above are Hygiene stations
listed as category 7
plastics, such as: Car bumpers and automotive
Acrylonitrile Butadiene parts
Styrene (ABS), Household appliances
Polylactic Acid (PLA),
Polycarbonates (PC), Nylon
Nylon (PA6) Fishing nets
High variability in Ropes
chemical and
Clothing
mechanical properties
Carpets
Possible generation of
Bisphenol A and S
(BPA and BPS).
*Data sourced during interviews with plastic companies and available industry reports.

2.2 Waste streams in Australia and New Zealand

Plastic wastes are categorised as either post-consumer or post-industrial plastic waste.
2.2.1 Post-consumer stream
Post-consumer stream plastics include materials that have been reclaimed directly from the
consumer/commercial market. They are commonly obtained from kerbside recycling bins or from drop-off
centres. Water bottles, milk bottles, food containers, food wraps and household items are examples of post-
consumer plastics. Post-consumer stream plastics are generally labelled as ‘dirty’ as they are often
contaminated with foreign materials such as paper, glass, traces of metals, organics and in rare occasions,
chemical solvents. As a result, the recyclability of post-consumer stream plastics yields significantly lower
figures in comparison to post-industrial stream plastics.
Post-consumer plastics are often further reprocessed by individual plastic recyclers up to a certain degree of
consistency to be sold back into the manufacturing market. Kerbside recycling schemes do not include two-
dimensional soft plastics (e.g. cling wrap) from the post-consumer stream. For these soft plastics to be
considered for recycling, people are required to either take them to drop-off centres or have specialised
services collect it. As a result, many soft plastics are put in the general waste bin, which ends up in landfill.
The current arrangements do not foster large scale recycling of mixed plastics from post-consumer streams.
In certain states of Australia and in New Zealand, collection is facilitated through product stewardship
programs. As the generation of waste plastics far exceeds the recycling rates, they could potentially be a
future avenue for road-grade plastics if collection is improved. Table 2.2 summarises various types of waste
plastics from post-consumer streams.
Table 2.2: Post-consumer stream plastics.
Applications Potential benefits of recycling Challenges
• Household consumer goods • Cheaper price point in comparison • Highly contaminated plastics (up
- Drink bottles (e.g., milk, juice, to post-industrial plastics to 5-10% contamination level)
soda, water) • Reduction of plastics going to • Consistency of plastics are based
- Shampoo, detergent, cleaning landfill on market consumption at specific
bottles • Reduce carbon footprint time
- Food containers • Lower quality of plastics if
- Toys
• Reduce usage of fossil fuels as
raw materials exposed to UV degradation
- Clothing
• Possibility for enhancing the • Challenges in mechanical
• Electronics current low recycling rates of post- recycling process
- Appliances consumer plastics in Australia and - Dependant on kerbside
- Lighting equipment New Zealand collection scheme
- Electrical and electronic tools - Difficult to sort
- Computer and - Requires thorough washing
telecommunication parts • Plastics are commingled upon
• Medical devices collection (require high level of
• Dispensers sorting)
• Comes in different forms (both
rigid and flexible plastics, also
mixed together)

2.2.2 Post-industrial stream
Plastics that stem from industrial applications that have not been exposed to consumers are labelled as post-
industrial wastes. These plastics are commonly collected by individual plastic recyclers that repurpose them
into pellets or other forms.
Post-industrial plastics commonly comprise of extra materials, by-products from manufacturing and wastes
from industrial applications. Contamination in post-industrial plastics is controlled and most often related to
simple dirt although, in rare occasions, chemical solvents may also be present depending on the primary
initial use of the plastics. Table 2.3 summarises various types of waste plastics from post-industrial
applications.
Post-industrial plastics employ a simpler approach in the collection phase since they are handled according
to resin type from the beginning to the end of the manufacturing process. The contamination rates of post-
industrial stream plastics are significantly lower in comparison to post-consumer plastics and although the
recycling rates are greater, they are still considered “low” when compared to the annual consumption rates.
This is due to several factors including the lack of end market demand and the lower profitability of recycling
plastics in comparison to other materials such as paper, glass, and metals.
Table 2.3: Post-Industrial stream plastics.
Applications Benefits of recycling Challenges
• Fishing Industry • Low to very low contamination • More expensive in comparison to

- Fishing nets level (<1%) post-consumer plastics
- Covers and shelters • Consistent in quality over time • Lack of end markets hence low
- Fishing equipment parts • Convenience in mechanical recycling rates (below 15-20%)
• Automotive Industry recycling process • Lower quality of plastics if
- Car bumpers - easy to collect exposed to UV degradation
- Car parts - easy to sort
• Piping Industry - minimal washing
- Pipe fittings • Most plastics produced are single
- Irrigation systems stream (require little to no sorting
- Stanchion process)
• Agricultural Industry • Come in single forms (either rigid
or flexible)
- Geomembrane covers
- Packaging material • Potentially exposed to limited UV
degradation
• Miscellaneous
- Chemical drums, buckets, pails,
• Reduction of plastics going to
landfill
flowerpots
- Insulation materials • Reduce carbon footprint
- Water tanks • Reduce usage of fossil fuels as
- Bulk bags/storage bags raw materials
- Storage containers, pallets,
crate holders
- Packaging materials (bags,
wraps, strapping, etc.)

2.2.3 Australian and New Zealand waste and resource recovery system
Figure 2.1 depicts the lifecycle of ‘plastic’ resources in Australia and New Zealand based on post-consumer
and post-industrial streams.
Figure 2.1: Lifecycle of ‘plastic’ resources in Australia and New Zealand’s waste and resource recovery
system.
The ‘plastics’ life-cycle begins with the production of consumer goods (e.g., water bottles, plastic bags, food
containers). Once disposed into the recycling bins, MRFs conduct kerbside collection where the plastics are
gathered and sorted. Kerbside collection schemes are generally conducted by MRFs, therefore the majority
of the waste from the post-consumer stream is undertaken by a limited number of companies in Australia
and New Zealand.
Due to their low bulk density and high volume, waste plastics are generally overlooked in favour of other
priority materials such as metals, glass, and cardboards, which offer greater profitability. However, plastics
that yield end market demands are baled and categorised as ‘recovered plastics’, most commonly single
stream PET and HDPE, while others are sent to landfill (i.e., commingled ‘mixed’ plastics) or are rarely
further separated into their individual category.

Some MRFs also bale ‘mixed’ plastics for downstream recyclers to deal with if they see value in it. The
recovered plastics are either exported abroad to international clients or sold separately to individual
recyclers. This is the first stage (at the gate of the MRF) of recovered plastics pricing.
The plastic recyclers then arrange for transportation to their facility and employ a reprocessing/recycling
plant whereby the plastics will undergo further processing such as sorting, washing, shredding, pelletising, or
pulverising to obtain recycled plastics in shapes of flakes, pellets, or powder. These are then sold to the
manufacturers of recycled plastic goods that make new consumer/industrial products. This is the second
stage of recycled plastics pricing, which includes the cost of purchasing of the raw material plus hauling and
reprocessing.
Mixed or commingled plastics from the post-consumer stream are often sent to landfill due to their limited
usability. In certain cases, MRFs send on these plastics to large scale individual recyclers that justify the
processing of these plastics by large volumes to be repurposed into new raw material for packaging or
industrial purposes. However, the uses of mixed plastics are still very limited due to the variability in the
batches (e.g., 30/70 PE/PP in batch number one, 60/40 PE/PP in batch number two). To date, some councils
and non-profit organisations are tackling these mixed plastics through product stewardship schemes.
However, as stewardship schemes are user-initiated programs (i.e., reliant on self-initiative), the volumes
collected are of a very small magnitude when compared to the total plastics consumed annually.
In order to minimise waste, companies that produce waste plastics in the post-industrial stream often seek
out individual recyclers (not MRFs) to direct their waste to. There is often a ‘local’ (i.e., state-based, or
municipality-based) arrangement whereby the particular company generating waste plastics sells directly to
the recycler, who often arranges for the transportation from the company to its recycling facility. In the case
of major industrial producers of waste plastics, recyclers arrange for interstate transportation and the cost of
long hauling transport is further reflected in the final price of the recycled plastic.
Waste plastic can also be collected at drop off points. For post-industrial waste these drop off points are
essentially large industrial recycling bins that are collected by individual recyclers on a regular basis.
Similarly, for post-consumer plastic, drop off points are via recycling bins specifically dedicated to certain
types of plastics (e.g., soft plastics). The REDcycle initiative is an example of a drop off point for soft plastics
in the Australian post-consumer market. By dedicating specific areas for plastics drop off schemes, it
encourages and educates consumers on the importance of recycling as well as bearing responsibility on
their consumption of these plastics.
Similar to the post-consumer stream, plastics that yield an end market demand will be sorted into the
‘recovered plastics’ category while the rest is landfilled. These plastics are either sent abroad or reprocessed
locally into new raw materials that can then be used to manufacture new products for the industrial or
commercial market.
2.3 Plastic consumption and recycling in Australia and New Zealand

In 2017, Australia consumed 3,407,300 tonnes of plastics – with a recovery rate of only 320,000 tonnes
(9.4%) while the remaining were sent to landfill (O’Farrell 2019). Of the 320,000 tonnes that were recovered,
194,800 tonnes (61%) were exported internationally while the remaining 125,100 tonnes (39%) were
reprocessed locally.
The rate of plastic consumption in Australia saw an increase from 2.8 million tonnes to 3.4 million tonnes
between 2015-16 and 2017-18, yielding an average increase of 10% per year. The recycling rate on the
other hand, saw a decrease from 11.3% in 2015-16 to 9.4% in 2017-18.

Although, annual figures of plastic recycling rates are unavailable for New Zealand, the Royal Society of New
Zealand (Royal Society 2019) reported that plastics made up 8% of the New Zealand municipal waste stream
in the year 2016. Subsequently, the total generation of general waste accounted for 3.405 million tonnes of
weight in 2016 (OECD 2021). However, this figure was only contributed by 45 out of 426 waste management
facilities in New Zealand. The actual figure is not known as current waste legislations do not require waste
management facilities to report annual figures (Ministry for the Environment & Stats NZ 2018). Therefore, the
total plastic consumption weight for 2016 in New Zealand accounted for at least 272,400 tonnes (8%).
According to NRRP (2018), the total recovered plastics in New Zealand accounted for 45,000 tonnes in the
year 2016, of which 90% or 40,500 tonnes were exported. Of the 45,000 tonnes, 55% or 25,000 tonnes of
recovered plastics were contributed from kerbside recycling schemes. Auckland’s Waste Assessment (2017)
reported a total plastic recovery of 7,172 tonnes from kerbside recycling. The plastics were comprised of
57% PET, 15% HDPE and 28% that were categorised as ‘mixed’ plastics.
The low rate of plastic recycling - according to the companies interviewed during the national survey
conducted by the Authors - can be attributed to several factors, including;
• the lack of information and communication in the national recycling scheme
• the small volumes generated by incentive-based collection schemes and product stewardship schemes
• the low cost of manufacturing virgin plastics as opposed to reprocessing recycled plastics, and
• the lack of specific funding for the technological advancement of the recycling industry.
Since 2018, more plastic recycling schemes have been put in place as well as Queensland, Western
Australia, and Victoria introducing single use plastic bag bans. Furthermore, the Australian Government
(2021) states that in 2020, an agreement was reached in Australia to implement export bans for some waste
plastics. From 1 July 2021 exporters will only be able to export plastics that have been either:
• sorted into single resin or polymer type
• processed with other materials into processed engineered fuel.
In addition, from 1 July 2022 exporters will only be able to export plastics that have been either:
• sorted into single resin or polymer type and processed for further use (e.g., flakes or pellets)
• processed with other materials into processed engineered fuel.
2.3.1 National recycling scheme
The national recycling scheme encourages households to recycle materials such as paper, metals, glass,
and rigid plastics in the kerbside collection bin. However, in most states in Australia and in New Zealand, soft
plastics are still categorised under ‘general waste’. In addition, the consistency of these collected plastics
from the kerbside bin is unreliable as there can be a frequent occurrence of households placing wrong items
into the bins.
2.3.2 Incentive-based and product stewardship schemes
Incentive-based and product stewardship schemes are programs that are designed to provide a recovery
initiative for post-consumer soft plastics. Whilst these schemes have been successful in re-directing soft
plastics from landfill, their overall contribution is limited. This is due to incentive-based and product
stewardship schemes being reliant on voluntary-initiatives to return used plastics to collection centres.
According to REDcycle (REDcycle 2020), for instance, the company has been able to collect 3,600 tonnes of soft
plastics since its inception in 2010. Noting that 3.4 million tonnes of plastic is consumed in one year in Australia, a
significant challenge remains to increase the quantity of plastic recycled through product stewardship schemes.
The challenge becomes more difficult where companies that lead collection programs bear 100% of the
operational costs of handling these wastes and the associated financial and commercial risks.

2.3.3 Price of plastics and recycling technology
The price of virgin plastic is heavily correlated to the price of petrol. Therefore, when the price of petrol drops,
the price of virgin plastic becomes cheaper. At the same time, the price of obtaining recycled plastics is
generally fixed due to the numerous manufacturing processes that waste plastics must go through to be
converted into secondary raw materials. As a result, many companies prefer to utilise virgin plastics
whenever possible in comparison to recycled plastics.
In relation to recycling technology, Australia and New Zealand are in the initial stages of achieving an
advanced plastic recycling status in comparison to countries in Europe or the United States. This is due to
the traditional recycling methods that companies in Australia and New Zealand still employ. The sorting
process is an example where companies in Australia and New Zealand sort out one to two types of single-
stream plastics simultaneously compared to the state-of-the-art recycling systems employed globally which
enables the sorting of multiple single-stream as well as commingled plastics.
An increase in the investment into more modern technology can be expected if the demand for recycled end
products increases. Recent incentives from government to expand recycling facilities and create new business
opportunities (e.g. Western Australia Government 2021), together with better collection schemes, are expected
to lead to improvements on the current mechanical recycling program in Australia and New Zealand.
2.3.4 Industry feedback
In an attempt to provide more insights and information about the recycling of plastics in Australia and New
Zealand, interviews were conducted with more than 40 No. plastic organisations including national councils
of waste management businesses, material recycling facilities, waste and recycling associations and
recyclers and manufacturers located in Australia and New Zealand. The input of reprocessed plastics by the
recyclers and manufacturers is shown in Figure 2.2.
Figure 2.2: Types of plastics reprocessed by the interviewed companies.

The key findings from the interviews held are:

• LDPE and PP are the most popular plastics recycled, with more than 90% of the interviewed companies
processing them. The majority of LDPE and PP plastics is contributed from the post-industrial stream at
65% and 56%, respectively.
• PET and HDPE are the most common plastics reprocessed in Australia and New Zealand in terms of
volume, of which 50% and 70% of companies interviewed reprocess them, respectively.
• Many large-scale facilities including MRFs (i.e., facilities with over 20,000 tonnes of annual production rate)
rely solely on reprocessing and recycling of clear PET and HDPE. This is due to the high demand for these
plastics and the profits that these plastics can return from turning them into end-products. As a result, many
small and medium scale facilities focus on other types of plastics.
• In the case of PVC and PS, due to their toxicity characteristics when exposed to heat and the use of
various additives in their production, many recyclers do not repurpose or recycle these plastics.
• In recent years, the demand for recycled PVC has been on the rise as more government initiatives and
grants have been issued to businesses (Vinyl Council Australia 2020). The collected PVC is recycled back
into its respective industries through manufacturing of industrial and commercial goods such as cable
insulation covers, hospital beds, pipes, floor coverings, furniture, and car parts.
• One of the most common plastic categories that has been listed by the companies are plastics labelled
under “commingled plastics” (i.e., PE/PP, PET/PE, PET/PP, LLDPE/LDPE, PE/PA). Numerous facilities
have reported difficulties when working with commingled plastics, of which 71% comes from the post-
consumer stream.
• Challenges with commingled plastics include the malfunction of machineries when working with soft and
flexible two-dimensional plastics such as PE/PP and their inability to be reused into the manufacturing of
new products.
• In the case of single stream plastics that are currently recycled, the vast majority are sent back to the
manufacturing industry to be manufactured into new products. This is driven by the ban on single-use
plastics, while the rest of the recycled plastics are exported.
• Currently the majority of all plastics are landfilled due to the complexity of the recycling process that
arises from the uneconomical processing of recycled plastics and the need for technologically advanced
plants to reprocess the plastics. Many companies thus prefer to only focus on the ‘profitable’ plastics.
Plastic Recycling Methods and Challenges
2.3.5 Mechanical recycling
Mechanical recycling is the most common method used in Australia and New Zealand. This method
repurposes plastic waste into secondary raw materials. The process of mechanical recycling comprises
several steps including collection, sorting, shredding, washing or decontamination, extrusion, quenching and
pelletisation (Figure 2.3). The outputs generally include clean and pellet-form recycled resins.
Mechanical recycling has a relatively lower initial capital start-up, but the operational costs can accumulate
from different factors such as transportation costs for plastics, which is relatively high due to the low bulk
density of plastics.
Figure 2.3: Overall process of mechanical recycling.

Collection
The recycling process starts with the collection of post-consumer and post-industrial plastic waste.
Manufacturing and production companies often engage collection services by recycling companies as a
means of disposal to meet environmental safety standards.
Post-industrial plastic wastes are generally recycled more efficiently as the plastic wastes are collected from
each respective company; the source of the plastic wastes is typically the outcome of the processing of specific
plastic products, which minimises any additional sorting effort. Kerbside collection (Figure 2.4) is the main form
of post-consumer plastic waste collection. Recycling companies often obtain licenses from local councils to set
up collection plants for local households to collect general and recyclable household wastes. Recycling
companies also obtain plastic wastes from council-regulated municipal waste collection drop-off centres that
allows consumers to dispose of personal household plastic wastes as an alternative to kerbside collection.
In some countries (Hornyak 2017, European Commission Communication 2018, Lane 2014), post-consumer
plastic wastes are sorted according to respective identification categories prior to kerbside collection. Most of
the plastics being recycled and reused in Australia and New Zealand predominantly stem from post-industrial
plastic streams rather than post-consumer streams.
Figure 2.4: Post-consumer stream plastics are collected through kerbside collection schemes while post-
industrial stream plastics are sent directly to plastic recyclers.
Sorting
Sorting waste plastics can represent the bottleneck of the entire plastics recycling process depending on the
level of technology at the plant and quality of the waste stream being sorted. Many recycling companies in
Australia and New Zealand use third party sorting facilities due to the lack of in-house technology for
separating specific types of plastics. Whilst there is technology available for separating more problematic
plastics, there is no incentive in investing in such technology due to a lack of demand for recycled plastics
and minimal profits for the recyclers.
Ballistic separators (Figure 2.5) are the simplest form of sorting and are the most commonly used in practice.
They employ mechanical oscillating paddles that rock in a horizontal or vertical direction to separate rigid and
flexible materials. Glass bottles, plastic bottles, containers, aluminium cans are examples of rigid materials
whereas, flexible materials include cardboard, paper, plastic wraps, packaging material, newspapers, and
others. Ballistic separators are also used to sort and distinguish between rigid and flexible plastics.
The work rate of ballistic separators is predominantly determined by the working width of the inlet and the
speed of the conveyor belts. Premium models can process up to 75 tonnes/hr per metre of working width;
they typically range from 1.5 to 2 metres in working width and 1 – 5 m/s of the conveyor belt speed. Ballistic
separators are highly regarded in the general waste recycling industry due to their low operational cost (in
terms of energy consumption, labour intensity, frequency of maintenance and resistance-durability) despite
bearing a cost ranging from $100,000 to $300,000. Additionally, ballistic separators are not capable of
processing two-dimensional plastics, as their soft and film-like form tends to cause malfunctions in rotating
wheels and machineries within the device.

Figure 2.5: Generic ballistic separators employed by most waste management facilities.
Source: CEMAC Technologies.
Traditionally, for large scale manufacturers, a method of separating polyolefins from common waste is to
monitor density differences. The sink float separation method (Figure 2.6) is used for common polyolefins
such as LDPE, LLDPE, HDPE and PP that have a density value lower than water (i.e., < 1 g/cm3). Therefore,
polyolefins can be separated in a large tank of water by submerging waste and collecting whatever floats to
the surface. Conversely, PET plastics can also be obtained from this process as they have average densities
higher than water, so they are most often found at the bottom of the tank. Sink float separation tanks range
anywhere from 4 to 8 metres in length with working widths of 1.5 – 2 metres. In addition to sorting out
plastics, the sink float separation method is also highly regarded for its ability to wash and sort out plastics at
the same time. However, simply using floating principles and density will not assure the quality of the product
as general dirt and debris may be included in the overall mix during the separation process if they happen to
possess similar properties to the plastics. Sink float separation tanks range from $20,000 for the general
models to $50,000 for the premium models.
Figure 2.6: Sink float separation tanks collect plastics that float to the surface with a rotating wheel.
Source: B+B Anlagenbau GmbH.
The simplest form of sorting involves the manual work of hand-picking (Figure 2.7) and recognising plastic
resin codes underneath each plastic product. The viability of this method depends on the scale of operation
due to the intensity of labour required. Some recyclers in Australia use hand-pickers as the processed
volume is not enough to justify greater investments in technology. Others use this method as a second line of
assurance after the waste has been fed through an optical sorter. Plastics such as PVC can be separated
with a technique known as X-ray Fluorescent (XRF), where identifications of chlorine can be traced within the
plastic.

Figure 2.7: Hand-picking is still the most practiced sorting method globally.
Source: San Francisco Public Press.
Optical sorters (Figure 2.8) utilise a series of Near Infra-Red (NIR) cameras to provide Hyper Spectral
Imaging Technology. Upon contact with the plastics, the NIR wavelengths emit specific vibrations at the
molecular level to indicate certain chemical compositions. However, optical sorters can generally only
differentiate single types of plastics at any given time and sometimes two. Additional variants of plastics
require additional machines. Alternatively, the excess that is normally sorted to a ‘mixed’ category is fed back
again into the machine for a different variant of plastic required. These machines can be ‘trained’ to
recognise specific additives used by the plastic manufacturing industry and retain/disregard the single piece
of plastic containing them. This technology can be used, for instance, to remove any source which is deemed
not appropriate (e.g., with high toxicity levels) for recycling. The working rate of NIR sorters ranges between
3 and 5 tonnes/hr per metre of working width when sorting three-dimensional rigid plastics and
2 – 3 tonnes/hr per metre of working width when sorting two-dimensional flexible/soft plastics. Working
widths can range anywhere from 1 to 5 metres depending on the criteria/work rate required. Outcomes from
the industry interviews have shown that the entire plastic recycling process is bottlenecked by the sorting
process due to its capital-intensive requirement ranging anywhere from $150,000 for basic sorting equipment
to $800,000 for high performance sorting equipment.
Figure 2.8: NIR sorters utilise optical equipment to differentiate types of plastics.
Source: Steinert Australia Pty Ltd.

Another method of sorting plastic involves the transfer of electrons from one particle to another. The
electrostatic sorting method (Figure 2.9) employs an electrical charge on to in-fed plastics on a conveyor belt
specific to the materials. The plastics take on a positive or negative charge reaching a high-tension field; it is
then electrostatically separated into pure sorted fractions according to the different charges on each
individual plastic particle. The sorting rate of electrostatic separators ranges anywhere from 2 to 3 tonnes/hr
depending on the working width of the equipment. While electrostatic separators are relatively budget
friendly to install and maintain, they occupy large spaces for operational uses. In addition, electrostatic
separators can only sort particle sizes from 45 microns to 4 mm. For particles greater than 4 mm, additional
processing (and cost) is required to reduce the particle sizes.
Figure 2.9: Schematic of electrostatic separators.
Source: Hamos GmbH.
Decontamination
Size reduction of plastics may be necessary for some recycling facilities due to the size compatibility of
certain reprocessing machineries. Large plastics are commonly shredded into flakes before they are washed
or decontaminated. With the significance in contribution of waste plastic from the food industry, consumers in
the food industry are finding new ways to repurpose plastics to reduce this problem. However, recycled
plastics face a possibility of contamination during its previous use and during production processes. The
contamination of these plastics may be in the form of chemical or microbiological contamination. As a result,
the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has issued certain standards in relation to reusing plastics for food-
contact application (Food Drug Administration 2017). Prior to using recycled plastics into food grade plastics,
manufacturers are required to:
• include an in-depth description of the source of plastics and measures taken to ensure plastic will not be
contaminated during the recycling process
• utilise decontamination equipment or machine that enables the removal of contaminants on recycled plastics
• provide results of tests showing the company’s equipment and capabilities of removing contaminants on
the recycled plastics, and
• inform on the intended use of the recycled plastics (i.e., information on intended temperature, type of
food, duration of contact, single/multiple use application).

Several plastic recycling companies in Australia and New Zealand have taken measures to include an
additional step in their recycling process by installing a decontamination machine after the plastics have
been washed and before the extrusion process. The traditional method of washing plastic with neutralising
detergents has now evolved with the addition of various steps which may include pre-treatment of plastics,
caustic washing, post hot-washing, and many others. Most generic plastic washing systems comprise of bale
openers, conveyor belts, shredders and a washer tank agitated with rotating wheels to clean out all
contaminants (Figure 2.10). Due to the varying capabilities of plastic washing systems, their price can vary
from $20,000 to $100,000 depending on the features included.
The main feature upgrades include hot caustic wash tanks that uses alkaline solutions to remove organics
such as oils and glues, sink float separators to sort out different types of plastics and granulators to shred
plastics into smaller workable sizes. Other additions can include horizontal friction washers, centrifugal
dryers, screw presses and thermal drying systems.
Figure 2.10: Generic washing system to clean off contaminants from plastics.
Source: Neue Herbold GmbH and CEMAC Technologies.
A process known as ‘triple rinsing and drying’ is the most adopted by plastic recycling companies that deal
with chemical containers. Waste plastics are grounded, washed using water and chemical agents for
consecutive cycles and dried. Despite its heavy consumption in energy and water, this process is still widely
used by many recyclers when working with post-industrial chemical contaminated plastics.
An autoclave machine is used to decontaminate certain plastic wastes, by heating shredded flakes to
supercritical conditions using the power of steam. This allows decontaminants to be neutralised and
removed. Similarly, vacuum decontamination (Figure 2.11) uses a thermal process in vacuum atmosphere to
decontaminate plastics in a shredded form. This method yields the highest decontamination efficiency
achieving a ‘food-grade’ plastic standard. While vacuum decontamination is highly regarded for its assurance
of quality, low energy consumption and consistency of products features, it also comes at a capital-intensive
price point ranging from $300,000 to $700,000 with a work rate of 1 – 4 tonnes/hr.

Figure 2.11: State of the art vacuum decontamination unit with an in-built shredder, and extruder.
Lastly, Ethylene Oxide Sterilisation is a method of utilising a carcinogenic chemical compound that is used to
disrupt the DNA of microorganisms, which neutralises and prevents them from reproducing. The use of
Ethylene Oxide in sterilisation is currently limited due to concerns about its toxicity. Other methods of
decontamination include the use of carbon dioxide in supercritical conditions during the extrusion process,
hence eliminating the process of decontamination. The forced extraction of the gas with the contaminants
yields a decontaminated recycled plastic material.
Shredding
The process of shredding involves a series of rotating blades driven by an electric motor with specific grids
for size gradation. Materials are fed into the shredder to produce coarse irregularly shaped plastics sized
between 3 and 12 mm. When soft plastics are shredded, they are more likely to form flakes, while rigid
plastics will produce granulates. As waste plastics come in various forms, predominantly categorised as rigid
and flexible plastics, high-end industrial shredders can be designated for tackling specific plastic types. Rigid
plastics are more commonly found in post-industrial streams and can be easily collected, sorted, and
recycled. Flexible plastics require specific shredders, due to their soft and film-like form. Film plastics tear
and are more likely to carry contaminants within pockets of films. The work rate of shredders is dependent on
the size of the opening, as they determine the number of blades that are required to fill the space (Figure
2.12). The sizes of opening can range between 0.8 m and 2 m in width and blade ranging from 42 blades for
a 0.8 m feed opening to 170 blades for a 2 m feed opening. From a price point perspective, shredders start
from $20,000 to $80,000.
Figure 2.12: Plastics are shredded by rotating blades that produce flakes or granules.

Extrusion/Pelletisation
Extrusion is employed to homogenise and repurpose reclaimed plastics into convenient forms to handle and
work with. The process involves plastic forced along a tubular pipe and shaped through a die mould with an
Archimedes screw. The plastics are put through a feeder and are required to be in form of either flakes,
powder, or pellets. The Archimedes screw may vary in different measurements of diameter depending on the
required output size. Similarly, the shape of the die can be designed differently and interchanged depending
on the outcome requirements of the product. Heating coils are installed on the outer surface of the tubular
pipe to ensure plastics are heated to optimum temperatures to be shaped, which is generally 200°C to
270°C. Temperatures can be adjusted depending on the type of plastics inserted into the machine. The
extrusion procedure precedes the quenching process where the plastics are cooled before pelletisation
(Figure 2.13). The rate of cooling applied ultimately defines the structural form of the pelletised plastics.
Rapid cooling or ‘quenching’ is a process that cools and hardens the plastics rapidly, modifying the molecular
orientation of the plastic by promoting amorphousness, thus increasing hardness. Water quenching and gas
quenching are the two main methods employed in this procedure. Water quenching involves the plastics
being inserted into a cold-water bath while gas quenching rapidly cools the plastic without oxidation to obtain
a higher quality product. Gas quenching is more expensive in comparison to water quenching methods. If the
plastics are cooled at a slower rate, crystallisation begins to occur enabling the molecular orientation of the
plastics to develop a more structured and defined form.
Figure 2.13: Water quenching vs gas quenching.
Source: Genius Machinery Co. Ltd and Erema Group.
The pelletisation process involves hardened plastics fed through an in-feed at a constant line speed, cut
between a rotor and a bed knife into rough cylindrical pellets. The size of the pellets ranging from 2 mm to
5 mm will be dependent on the speed of the rotating blades. However, the shape of the pellets will be
dependent on the die shape of the extruder. Plastic pellets can be subjected to post-treatment processes
such as additional drying if the plastics have undergone a water quench, additional cooling if the plastics
have undergone a slow cooling process, packaging, and storage. Additives are an additional component that
are added into plastic pellets to enhance their characteristics such as anti-oxidation, melt filtration,
mechanical properties and general processability. These are commonly practiced by certain plastic recyclers
in Australia and New Zealand that deal with the modification of resins at a molecular level to provide superior
end products.
2.3.6 Chemical recycling
Chemical recycling is a method to convert waste plastic into energy or feedstock for fuels and chemicals.
There are several types of chemical recycling including pyrolysis, gasification, depolymerisation and
solvolysis. Despite having a potential in achieving lower emission rates in comparison to mechanical
recycling, chemical recycling requires additional processes and materials such as pre-treatment, energy,
chemicals, and solvents prior to the actual chemical recycling process. The process is an extremely capital-
intensive process that requires a significant investment in advanced technology and equipment. Due to the
very small uptake of plastics chemical recycling in Australia and New Zealand, this methodology is just briefly
mentioned in this report.

2.3.7 Processing Challenges
Contamination of plastics is a problem that needs to be addressed. To date, South Australia and Tasmania
are the only Australian states that practices an in-depth and complex separation process between plastics
and organics (e.g., pet waste, food, green waste). While other states of Australia and New Zealand only
practice a generic recycling scheme for garden organics (food and pet waste are not included). As a result,
most of the plastics that are collected in these states are often contaminated with traces of food, pet waste,
green waste, and other contaminants. Educating and encouraging people to sort wastes in the household is
expected to provide efficiency in the overall mechanical recycling of plastics in Australia and New Zealand.
The process of sorting before (in the household) is relatively easier in terms of time, cost and energy
consumed in comparison to sorting after (at MRFs).
2.3.8 Industry Survey Response – Recycling Processes Used
Figure 2.14 plots the recycling processes currently used by the interviewed companies. As previously stated,
although this data is representative of the Australian and New Zealand situation, the survey does not include
the entirety of plastics recycling businesses across the two countries.
Figure 2.14: Recycling processes used by the interviewed companies.
The key findings from the industry interviews relating to recycling processes were as follows:
• 81% of the companies employ a collection line. 77% of these companies obtain their plastics through
drop off centres and direct collection from industry partners. The figures for kerbside collection (23%) are
limited due to the majority of the companies that took part of the survey being individual plastic recyclers
as opposed to MRFs. In general, MRFs operate kerbside collection programs and sort out the collected
plastic.
• Of the 53% of the companies capable of sorting, 64% of the companies employ basic sorting facilities,
such as hand picking and simple ballistic separators. The advanced sorting facilities (36%) are mainly
attributed to large scale individual plastic recyclers. Most medium scale facilities and MRFs employ a
basic sorting line.
• Aside from the capital-intensive aspect of the sorting process that uses highly advanced equipment, the
scope of the business plays a large role in determining if the company will employ an advanced sorting
facility. In most instances, MRFs do not employ advanced sorting facilities as their main objective is to
sort out general waste as opposed to a large-scale individual plastic recycler that solely rely on the capital
stream from selling plastic products.
• The majority of small-scale facilities do not employ any sorting line within their facility and either
outsource sorting to third parties or solely source single stream post-industrial plastics.

• Most large and medium scale facilities employ a basic washing line to remove dirt and debris while small
scale facilities do not employ any washing procedure within their facility.
• 69% of the companies have noted that they employ some sort of washing facility. Of these, 83% have
basic washing facilities, which comprise a wash line that simply rinses and briefly submerges the
contaminated plastic; this is further rotated with a wheel to remove debris, dirt, and other foreign
substances.
• Advanced washing facilities are generally owned by large companies that specifically deal with the supply
of ‘food-grade’ recycled plastics to the manufacturing industry. Advanced sorting facilities include vacuum
heat treatment to fully eliminate contaminants present and achieve ‘food-grade’ plastics, as required by
the Australian New Zealand Food Standards Code and Australian Standard AS 2070-1999 (Food
Standards Australia New Zealand 2014, AS 2070-1999).
• Shredding and pelletisation is undertaken by 56% and 63% of companies, respectively. The shredding
process is predominantly employed by large and medium scale facilities including MRFs, while the
majority of small-scale facilities obtain their plastics directly in a shredded flake form.
• Extrusion and pelletisation is predominantly employed by small and medium scale facilities as this is one
of the final stages in producing new raw material. In most cases, MRFs do not employ an extrusion and
pelletisation procedure within their facility as they often sell their plastics to individual downstream
recyclers in bailed form for further processing.

3. Australian & New Zealand processing

capabilities
3.1 Production Capability

The total annual production capability (plastic waste processing) reported in this section is based on the
annual production rates that each interviewed company supplied to the Authors. Of the 670,000-tonne
annual capability, 34% is from the post-industrial stream with the remaining 66% from the post-consumer
stream (Figure 3.1).
In comparison, the Australian Plastics Recycling Survey (O’Farrell 2019) recorded that a total of 320,000
tonnes of waste plastics was recovered in 2017-18. Of that 320,000 tonnes, 46% was reprocessed locally
while the remaining 54% was exported. Although the survey results were obtained from a representative
number of companies, the potential reprocessing capability of the industry exceeds the ‘recovered’ volume in
the financial year of 2017-18 in Australia by two-fold.
Figure 3.1: Total Annual Production Capabilities categorised by Post-Industrial vs Post-Consumer.

The key findings from the industry interviews relating to the current processing capability were:
• Companies that predominantly reprocess post-consumer stream plastics are consistently larger in terms
of annual production volumes in comparison to companies that reprocess post-industrial stream plastics.
• The volume for post-consumer stream plastics is higher than plastics obtained from the post-industrial
waste stream.
• Post-industrial plastic stream-based companies are generally reliant on other commercial industries to
locate suitable stream of waste plastics to be reprocessed.
• Post-consumer plastic stream-based companies generally accept all forms of plastics despite their
usability, market demand and quality which contributes to the value of the overall processing capabilities.
• In the Northern Territory and Queensland, the recycling market is predominantly absorbed by one or two
large scale companies that mostly work with post-consumer plastic waste. The post-industrial plastic
wastes are sent to recyclers in other states (e.g., Victoria and NSW) where there is recycling capability
from both the post-industrial and consumer markets.
• Whilst precise annual production figures were not available from all companies, and hence the overall
value is an estimate only, all interviewed companies indicated a range of annual plastics reprocessing
volume (e.g., 10,000 -15,000 tonnes). This is further analysed in the following section.
3.2 Annual production rates

The total waste plastics processing capabilities reported in this survey were categorised into three types of
facility:
• Small Scale - up to 10,000 tonnes annually
• Medium Scale - 10,000 to 20,000 tonnes annually
• Large Scale - more than 20,000 tonnes annually
Figure 3.2 exhibits the percentage of small, medium, and large facilities within the interviewed companies
that have been categorised according to their annual production rates. Among the companies that were
interviewed, 36% were categorised as ‘small scale’ facilities, while 35% were categorised as ‘medium scale’
facilities and ‘large scale’ facilities accounted for 29% of the total count of companies. This is a further
depiction of the representative sample of companies that was selected for the interviews. The figure also
plots the areas that are more populated with the respective facilities.

Figure 3.2: Location of facilities in Australia and New Zealand.
The industry interviews identified the following findings:
• Small scale facilities are available in every part of Australia and New Zealand. No medium scale facilities
were recorded in the South Island of New Zealand and the Northern Territory in Australia.
• Large scale facilities are more common in the larger capital cities of both countries with multiple
companies in Victoria, New South Wales, South Australia, and the North Island of New Zealand.
• Tasmania, Queensland, and Western Australia accounted for less than five large scale companies
collectively.
• In comparison to a large company, small companies are more likely to employ ‘simpler’ recycling
systems/processes such as shredding, extrusion and pelletisation processes only. This is largely due to
the financial aspect of obtaining this equipment. Shredders and extrusion systems are relatively budget-
friendly in comparison to other recycling processes such as sorting, decontamination and pulverisation.
• Small companies are less likely to employ a collection scheme as they obtain their waste plastics directly
from industrial partners.
• The recycling process employed by a company is highly dependent on the scope of their business.
Businesses that mainly focus on management of waste will only employ collection and sorting. These
businesses will subsequently sell the plastics to other individual recyclers for further processing.
• Large scale companies are more likely to be equipped with highly advanced recycling systems that
employ every process from collection, sorting, decontamination, shredding, extrusion and pelletisation.
Companies like these often have multiple large facilities in various states, all contributing to a large
amount of recycling capability.

3.3 Annual production rates breakdown

This section presents the breakdown data of the annual production rates categorised into the three
categories: small, medium, and large-scale facilities. Figure 3.3 shows the waste streams contributed either
through post-consumer goods or post-industrial sources.
Figure 3.3: Annual Production Rates categorised by Post Industrial vs Post Consumer.
The key findings from the industry interviews relating to annual production rates are:
• 64% of the plastic waste processed by small scale facilities comes from the post-industrial stream while
the remaining 36% are from the post-consumer stream. This is due to the accessibility of post-industrial
stream plastics being easier to acquire directly from industrial partners - and the lesser technological
processing requirements to quickly obtain end products in comparison to post-consumer plastics (e.g.,
less washing required for post-industrial plastics, due to lower contamination rates).
• Plastics from the packaging, piping, electronic waste industry are key sources to small scale facilities.
• 69% of all plastics that medium scale facilities work with is obtained from the post-industrial stream while
the remaining 31% is from the post-consumer stream. This is due to post-industrial stream plastics being
more consistent with respect to contamination. Therefore, the technological processing requirement
significantly reduces the operational cost of acquiring recycled plastics, which supports the overall
profitability of a facility.

• Plastic manufacturing, agricultural, fishing and packaging industry are the primary sources of plastics for
medium scale facilities.
• Post-industrial plastics yield a higher price point in the end market of recycled plastics due to their
consistency and quality. As a result, the small portion that is nationally recycled is often re-directed back
for industrial applications (i.e., the same industrial purposes and industrial goods they were collected
from) as opposed to the consumer market.
• Due to a number of MRFs in the ‘large scale facilities’ category, most of the plastics are from the post-
consumer market at 78% as opposed to the post-industrial stream at 22%.
• The large-scale facilities category is the only category to yield more post-consumer stream plastics in
comparison to post-industrial stream. Post-consumer plastics are primarily contributed from the consumer
market, from items such as milk, drink, shampoo bottles, food containers and household consumer
goods.
• In the end market for recycled post-consumer plastics, rigid plastics are being manufactured back into
consumer goods such as drink bottles and food containers. On the other hand, post-consumer soft and
flexible plastics (i.e., commingled PE, commingled PE/PP) have very limited uses as their complex shape
and form do not allow for an efficient workability (i.e., high operational costs in decontamination, special
equipment required to process soft plastics to avoid clogging up rotating wheels). Therefore, they are
often landfilled at an unrecoverable cost.
• In recent years, various companies have processed soft plastics by incorporating recycled post-consumer
soft and flexible plastics into the building and infrastructure industry. Examples include decking, flooring,
railway sleepers, bricks, and non-structural concrete.

4. Price range of recycled plastics

One of the main aspects to ensure the economic viability of using waste plastics in roads is the price of
recycled plastics compared to the price of current asphalt components, such as aggregates, bitumen, and
polymers. The price of recycled plastics is dependent on the final shape configuration and the complexity of
the processes that are required to achieve a final product meeting customer demand. Recycled plastics
come in four different forms: baled, flakes, pellets, and powder.
4.1 Plastic bales

Bales generally come from waste plastics that are collected, sorted, and baled by MRFs through kerbside
collection schemes. However, industrial waste plastics are also baled to allow transporting for further
reprocessing at a different recycling facility.
These plastics can be contaminated with materials such as food, paper, and chemicals. As a result, further
processing including washing/decontamination and shredding is often required to allow use for other
applications. Baled plastics are the cheapest form of plastics in the recycled market due to their poor re-
useability in their current form and need for reprocessing. Baled plastics are compiled in sizes varying from
61x91x107 cm to 91x122x183 cm and typically weighing between 340 kg to 545 kg (Figure 4.1).
Figure 4.1: Baled plastics
4.2 Plastic flakes

Plastic flakes (sometimes referred to as ‘chips’) obtain their form after the shredding process, which is
generally undertaken by the individual recyclers (Figure 4.2). Baled plastics are unbaled and inserted into the
shredder through a conveyor belt to cut up large plastics into smaller particles. Flakes are achieved when
plastics have been shredded into smaller pieces during the shredding process regardless of their original
form factor (i.e., two-dimensional, or three-dimensional plastic). Flakes are more easily transported than
other forms, commonly in bags. The size and shape of plastic flakes are variable, ranging from 3 to 12+ mm.

Figure 4.2: Plastic flakes.
4.3 Plastic pellets

Pellets (also referred to as ‘granules’) are formed after the extrusion and pelletising processes (Figure 4.3).
Once the plastic flakes have been washed and/or decontaminated, they are melted at temperatures between
200°C to 270°C depending on the type of plastics, extruded into ‘spaghetti-like’ form, quenched, and cut into
small pellets size ranging from 3 to 5 mm. Pellets are the most common shape configuration that plastic
recyclers produce and sell to the plastic fabrication/manufacturing industry. They rank third in terms of price
due to their greater complexity in processing and energy consumption. During the pelletisation process,
specific additives (e.g., antioxidants) can be added to the plastic to promote or enhance a specific property of
the recycled plastic.
Figure 4.3: Plastic pellets.
4.4 Plastic powder

Plastic powders (Figure 4.4) are the finest and smallest form of waste plastics that can be acquired in the
recycled plastics market. In the process of achieving plastic powders, pellets are inserted into a pulveriser
and grinded into fine powder (commonly below 600 microns). This procedure carries additional costs due to
the greater energy consumption, which results in plastic powder being ranked number one (most expensive)
in terms of price, compared to the other shape configurations.
Plastic powder is commonly used in the fabrication of rotational moulded products. Due to the density profile
of plastic powders, they help in making the processability of rotational moulded products significantly easier.

Figure 4.4: Plastic powder produced from the pulverisation process.
4.5 Price of recycled plastics

The price range of recycled plastics in their respective categories are plotted in Figure 4.5. The data was
acquired from the individual industry companies interviewed. The prices of plastics in the same shape/form
can vary depending on the individual states. For instance, recycled plastics in Victoria and New South Wales
generally cost more than recycled plastics obtained in Tasmania and New Zealand. The price variability of
the recycled plastics in the same shape/form is due to different factors including the demand for the plastics,
purity, chemical modification (addition of additives), level of processing, the location of the sources
(transportation cost) and accessibility.
Figure 4.5: Price range of recycled plastics by shape in Australia and New Zealand.

5. Selected recycled plastics for further detailed

assessment
Based on the information provided through industry consultation and a preliminary assessment of desirable
characteristics of recycled plastics for inclusion into asphalt, candidate groups of recycled plastics were
selected for further detailed testing in the next phases of Project APT6305. Plastics selection was based on
factors such as price, volume, current recycling rate and national availability as per the information provided
from industry representatives who have participated in the project. This section details the selection of the
candidate recycled plastics for further detailed evaluation. ‘Food-grade’ recycled plastic will not be
considered by the APT6305 project as a possible type of plastics to be incorporated in roads due to its
already high recyclability and profitability.
Recycled plastics can be incorporated into asphalt roads through two methods: the wet method and the dry
method.
5.1 Wet method

The wet method incorporates recycled plastics in forms of either flakes, pellets, or powder into bitumen as a
polymer to produce polymer-modified bitumen. With asphalt mixing temperatures commonly above 160°C,
the plastics required for this method need to have a lower melting temperature than the mixing temperature
of the asphalt. The main objective of this method is to obtain a homogenous mix during the mixing process
when incorporating recycled plastics into bitumen. Due to the melting of recycled plastics into bitumen
through this method, the recycled plastics can be incorporated in any shape/form, other than the baled form.
Although the recycled plastics for the wet method do not require to be “food-grade”, they are still required to
be at least essentially free from impurities and foreign materials such as paper, metals, glass, chemicals, and
organics. This is a common requirement of many recycled products currently used by the road construction
industry.
The availability and price point are also key factors when deciding the type of recycled plastics that may be
used in the wet method. The selected plastics will need to be available on a national scale and on an
ongoing basis. The suggested price point of the selected plastics could range up to $1,250 per tonne.
Current virgin polymers used in asphalt have a price range of $2,000+ per tonne although they are
specifically engineered to be used in combination with bitumen and have a long history of successful
applications. In addition to cost considerations, it is suggested that the performance of recycled plastics-
modified bitumen is compared with that of current polymers used to make polymer-modified asphalt to
possibly validate the economic advantage. Further investigation on the performance of recycled plastics-
modified bitumen will be conducted throughout the APT6305 project.
From an environmental and safety perspective, due to the high production and installation temperature,
plastics that generate toxic substances when subjected to high working temperatures (e.g., PVC) are not
considered for further assessment.
5.2 Dry method

The dry method incorporates plastics into the asphalt mix as a replacement of quarry aggregates. Compared
to the wet method, the recycled plastics act simply as a replacement of a non-renewable resource (i.e., the
aggregate) without being expected to provide any substantial benefit in terms of performance. However, the
quantity of plastic that can be incorporated in roads through the dry method is theoretically much larger than
that through the wet method (1-5% by weight of aggregates vs. 1-5% by weight of bitumen). Further
investigation in regard to quantity of plastics to be possibly incorporated is required.

While the working temperatures of the asphalt through the dry method are identical to the wet method, the
incorporating techniques of recycled plastics as an inert aggregate replacement is different. Rather than
achieving a homogenous mix from melting recycled plastics in bitumen, recycled plastic aggregates through
the dry process are required to maintain their shape and bulk density - similar to regular aggregates - at the
high production temperatures. As a result, the selected plastics for this method will require a high melting
temperature (i.e., ≥ 200°C). Additionally, the incorporated recycled plastics can only be in pellet or powder
form, as elongated particles (i.e., flakes) create problems of workability and inadequate resistance to applied
loads. Similar to the requirements for the wet method, the recycled plastics used for the dry method must be
available on a national scale and on an ongoing basis. Whilst they are not required to be “food-grade”, they
must be essentially free from impurities and the selected recycled plastics must be non-toxic. To make the
inclusion of recycled plastics economically viable through the dry method, the suggested price range should
be comparable to that of virgin quarry aggregates (i.e., less than $100 per tonne).
Lastly, it should be noted that the addition of low-melting point plastics (i.e., melting below the mixing
temperature of the asphalt) directly in the aggregate drum at the asphalt plant is one of the additional
methodologies to incorporate recycled plastics through what can be called a hybrid method. This approach
can be seen as an extension of the dry method although, in the hybrid method, the recycled plastics play an
active role.
5.3 Potential impact on the recycling industry

The uses of recycled plastic waste in asphalt road applications can potentially contribute positively to the low
recycling rates in Australia and New Zealand. For instance, the total bitumen consumption in Australia
accounted for 918,400 tonnes in the year 2019 (Granwal 2021). If 4-5% of recycled plastics (by weight of
bitumen) were incorporated via the wet method in all bitumen used on roads, that would result in a demand
of between 37,000-55,000 tonnes (approximately).
However, if recycled plastics were to be incorporated via the dry method, the recycling rates could
significantly increase. The total aggregates consumed according to the annual consumption of bitumen in
2019 would amount to approx. 17.5 million tonnes considering that asphalt mixes commonly consist of 5% of
bitumen and 95% aggregates. If 1-5% of the total aggregate consumption were to be considered for
substitution with synthetic plastic aggregate, using the dry method of incorporating plastics could potentially
use 175,000-870,000 tonnes (approximately) of recycled plastics.
It should be pointed out that any content of recycled plastics added either through the wet or dry process is
still undergoing investigation and will be assessed in the following phases of the project. In addition, the
previous figures on the increased consumption of recycled plastics consider that the entire bitumen and
asphalt volumes consumed annually are modified with recycled plastics; for obvious reasons, this
assumption is not realistic.
5.4 Potential impacts on the environment

Literature on the environmental impacts associated to the use of recycled plastics in asphalt road
applications is still limited to date. As a result, a section of project APT6305 will be dedicated to the study of
possible emissions and microplastics from using recycled plastics in asphalt road applications. Methods and
testing standards for emission thresholds will be scrutinised to obtain an in-depth understanding on the use
of recycled plastics in asphalt road applications. Due to the lack of specific standards for the microplastics
analysis in recycled-plastic asphalt mixes, new testing frameworks will be developed.

5.5 Selected plastics

Based on the criteria described in Sections 5.1 and 5.2 and after consulting with the members of the plastics
industry, a group of waste plastic types has been shortlisted for further detailed testing and assessment. The
shortlisted group of plastics are categorised by their applications for the wet or dry method. In addition to the
aforementioned criteria, price, availability, suitability and form factor, the current use of the recycled plastics
in the end market was also considered, as some waste plastics do not currently serve any purpose or
already yield a high demand in the end market despite having an abundance in annual consumption
volumes. These plastics are often sent to landfill due to their complexity in recycling. In addition to the
requirements of temperature resistance and melting, further investigation of the chemical and physical
characteristics that plastics must be undertaken before their use as road-grade plastics.
The following section and Table 5.1 present the single types of waste plastics that have been shortlisted
together with indications on their geographical distribution in Australia and New Zealand, availability, price,
recycling stream and intrinsic properties.
Table 5.1: Selected plastics for detailed assessment categorised by waste stream.
Annual volume* Average price*

Selected plastics
(tonnes/yr) ($/tonne)
Post-Consumer Plastic Stream
Commingled Polyethylene/Polypropylene (PE/PP) 80,000 500 – 800
Commingled Polyethylene (PE) 8,000 500 – 1,000
Polypropylene (PP) 27,000 500 – 800
Coloured Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET) 5,000 400 – 600
High-Density Polyethylene (HDPE) 14,000 500 – 700
Post-Industrial Plastic Stream
Low-Density Polyethylene (LDPE) 45,000 800 – 1,300
Linear Low-Density Polyethylene (LLDPE) 10,000 700 – 1,200
Polypropylene (PP) 27,000 800 – 1,000
Acrylonitrile Butadiene Styrene (ABS) 5,000 150 – 600
Injection Moulded High-Density Polyethylene (HDPE) 50,000 850 – 1,500
Rotational Moulded High-Density Polyethylene (HDPE) 14,000 500 – 700
*The annual volumes and average prices are extrapolated from the data sourced during the industry consultations and do
not represent the total volume of waste plastics currently available in Australia and New Zealand.
5.5.1 Low Density Polyethylene (LDPE)
The sources of LDPE plastics are predominantly from the post-industrial agricultural, packaging, and
industrial piping stream. Items such as films, packaging, wraps, bags, waste bins, blown films are examples
of LDPE plastics that are commonly sourced in Australia and New Zealand.
The small portion of LDPE that is recycled is currently returned into the manufacturing industry to be
fabricated into other products on a consumer or industrial level. Contamination (e.g., metals, glass, paper,
dirt) levels in LDPE from the post-industrial stream ranges from 1- 5%. Recycled LDPE is widely available on
a national scale with volumes approximating to 45,000 tonnes per year. LDPE is more accessible in South
Australia, New South Wales, Victoria, and the Northern Island of New Zealand according to the information
collected during the interviews.

From a price perspective, recycled LDPE plastics cost between $1000 and $1,300 per tonne in pellet form.
Due to their low melting temperature (~110°C), recycled LDPE plastics are more suitable for use in asphalt
through the wet method. The current recycling rate of LDPE is approximately 15%. Several studies since the
1990s (Little 1993) have proved the feasibility of using LDPE in asphalt.
5.5.2 Linear Low-Density Polyethylene (LLDPE)
LLDPE is sourced from piping, buckets, water tanks, cable insulation covers and packaging materials
predominantly from the post-industrial waste stream. The small portion of LLDPE that is recycled is currently
remanufactured back into consumer and industrial goods, which yields a price point ranging from $700 to
$1,200 per tonne in pellet form.
Similar to LDPE, the contamination levels of LLDPE from the post-industrial waste stream are relatively low
and ranges from 1 to 5%. Recycled LLDPE plastics are more accessible in New South Wales and Victoria
contributing to a total approximated volume of 10,000 tonnes per year. Recycled LLDPE is more suitable for
inclusion in asphalt through the wet method due to its low melting temperature (~122°C). The current
recycling rate of LLDPE is approximately 15%. Several studies (Nizam and Giustozzi 2020, Joohari and
Giustozzi 2020) have proved the feasibility of using LLDPE as a polymer for bitumen modification.
5.5.3 High Density Polyethylene (HDPE)
HDPE plastics are sourced from both post-industrial and post-consumer waste streams. Plastics from the
fishing and packaging industry including containers, chemical drums, blown films are examples of post-
industrial HDPE plastics. Post-consumer HDPE plastics include drink, milk, shampoo bottles and food
containers. Similar to other post-industrial plastics, the contamination levels range between 1 and 5% while
post-consumer plastics are more likely to be contaminated with dirt, food, organics, chemicals, or solvents. In
this latter case, the contamination level ranges between 5 and 10%.
Both post-industrial and post-consumer recycled HDPE plastics are generally repurposed into other
consumer or industrial products as they yield a high demand in the end market. Post-industrial HDPE costs
between $850 to $1,500 per tonne while post-consumer HDPE costs $900 to $1,300 per tonne in pellet form.
Recycled HDPE plastics are widely available across Australia and New Zealand but are more accessible in
South Australia, New South Wales, and Victoria (volumes ~50,000 tonnes per year for post-industrial HDPE
and ~14,000 tonnes per year for post-consumer HDPE). Recycled HDPE plastics could be incorporated into
asphalt through the wet method due to their relatively low melting temperature (~135°C). The current
recycling rate of HDPE is approximately 20%.
Studies into the use of recycled HDPE in asphalt have produced mixed results. It is apparent that other
properties, in addition to the melting temperature, influence the suitability of HDPE in asphalt. Therefore,
several types of HDPE plastic (moulding, injection, and extrusion grades) are required to be also assessed.
5.5.4 Polypropylene (PP)
Sources of PP plastics are contributed from the fishing industry including items such as crate holders, blown
films, chemical drums in the post-industrial stream and items like food containers, bottle caps and flowerpots
from the post-consumer stream. The demand for recycled PP plastics has increased in recent years due to
the high values of other polyolefins such as PE. They are currently repurposed into consumer and industrial
goods as a substitute to PE plastics and cost between $750 and $1,250 per tonne in pellet form.
Recycled PP plastics are widely available (~27,000 tonnes per year) on a national scale but are most
accessible in Victoria. Due to their melting temperature ~160°C, they are most likely to be incorporated into
asphalt mixtures through the wet method. The current recycling rate of PP is approximately 8-10%. A few
studies (Tapkin 2008, Tapkin et al. 2009, Othman et al. 2010) that have investigated the use of PP in asphalt
mixes reported that the addition of polypropylene can improve the asphalt’s overall properties, including its
indirect tensile strength.

5.5.5 Commingled Polyethylene/Polypropylene (PE/PP)
The majority of commingled PE/PP plastics are sourced from the post-consumer stream and to a much
lesser extent from the post-industrial streams. Items such as plastic bags, packaging wraps, films and sheet
covers are examples of commingled PE/PP plastics. The contamination level of these plastics can vary from
different sources, but a general range for post-consumer plastics contamination rates is 5% - 10% and 1% -
5% for post-industrial plastics.
Due to their two-dimensional soft and flexible form factor, commingled PE/PP are more likely to cause
machine malfunctions at recycling facilities and as a result they are often sent to landfill. In addition to
collection and sorting, the challenge in utilising commingled PE/PP lies within the variability of the actual
content of each plastic type. Different respective contents of PE and PP in collected waste materials (e.g.,
Product A is made of 20% PE and 80% PP while Product B is made of 40% PE and 60% PP) do not assure
quality consistency when utilising these plastics for applications in the consumer or industrial market. In
some cases, plastic companies have tried incorporating them into infrastructure applications although a
thorough assessment of the long-term performance of these variable sources of plastic has not been
undertaken.
Commingled PE/PP is widely available on a national scale (approximately 80,000 tonnes per year based on
interviewed companies), however the majority is sent to landfill. The registered prices for commingled PE/PP
from the industry survey ranges from $500 to $800 per tonne in pellet form. Their low melting temperature
(approx. 140°C - 160°C) makes them a suitable candidate for inclusion in asphalt by the wet method. There
is no specific scientific literature on the use of this type of plastic in asphalt.
5.5.6 Commingled Polyethylene (LLD/LD/HD)
Commingled PE is primarily sourced from the post-consumer waste stream from products such as bubble
wraps, packaging materials, shrink wraps and waste bins. Similar to commingled PE/PP, their two-
dimensional form causes recycling problems. The lack of market opportunities for end products also limits
their recyclability and profitability. As a result, they are often sent to landfill.
Commingled PE is currently repurposed into the consumer and industrial market as packaging materials or
containers; however, due to their complex characteristics (i.e., mix of different types of PE), they are often
disregarded and sent to landfill. Commingled PE accounts for approximately 8,000 tonnes per year and it is
predominantly accessible in Victoria. This is due to the fact that recycling plants in other states do not see
any benefit in recycling it, rather than due to the lack of availability of commingled PE plastics in their area.
Prices vary from $500 - $800 per tonne in pellet form and due to their low melting temperature (110-140°C),
they are more likely to be incorporated into asphalt by the wet method. There is no specific scientific
literature on the use of this type of plastic in asphalt.
5.5.7 Coloured Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET)
Coloured PET plastics are sourced from meat trays, shampoo, drink bottles and food containers from the
post-consumer waste stream. Although clear PET yield high end market demands and prices, coloured PET
on the other hand has little use due to their pigmented colours. As a result, they are often sent to landfill.
Sometimes, if the quantity is very small, they are included into the clear PET line of plastics by some
recyclers. Coloured PET costs $600 - $900 per tonne in pellet form.
Similar to all post-consumer stream plastics, the contamination rate of coloured PET ranges from 5 - 10%.
Coloured PET is most accessible in New South Wales and Victoria accounting for over 5,000 tonnes per
year. Due to their high melting temperature (~260°C), coloured PET can be included in asphalt through the
dry method. However, the price range of this plastic may make it uneconomical compared to virgin quarry
aggregates. Further investigation is required to assess its viability as different recycling methods could also
be applied to reduce costs.

5.5.8 Acrylonitrile Butadiene Styrene (ABS)
ABS plastics are predominantly sourced from the post-industrial waste stream from the fishing, automotive
and electronic waste industry. As these plastics are not commonly recycled, they are often landfilled due to
their complex characteristics. With volumes accounting for approximately 5,000 tonnes per year among the
recyclers interviewed, ABS is mostly available in Queensland, Western Australia, New South Wales, Victoria,
Tasmania, and the Northern Island of New Zealand. From a price perspective, they range between $150 -
$600 per tonne in pellet form. ABS plastics are amorphous plastics, and they could be included in asphalt
through the dry method due to their strong and stable mechanical properties when subjected to heat above
160°C and ability to be recycled without significant degradation.

6. Potential enhancements to increase viability of

using recycled plastics in roads
Whilst not directly part of the APT6305 scope, numerous observations arising from the industry interviews
should be considered in planning for future works. These include addressing some of the issues concerning
the current processing of recycled plastics. However, various participants in the recycling/supply chain of
waste plastics would need to decide to make these investments and changes in order for them to be put into
effect.
To date, separation of plastics in the households, kerbside collection and sorting still represent main
challenges for the governments to invest on (O’Farrell 2019). Improvements in this area would lead to a
more consistent product and better quality leading to increased likelihood of use.
As most of the rigid plastics already possess a standard demand in the end market, most recyclers and
MRFs focus mainly on rigid plastics while soft and flexible plastics are still landfilled. However, the need to
improve the recycling of rigid plastics still exists as the overall national recycling rate for plastics is
approximately 10-15% (O’Farrell 2019). Soft and flexible plastics continue to be a significant concern due to
their inability to be repurposed; as a result, incorporating them in asphalt applications is just one of the
methods to tackle this ongoing problem (Austroads 2019). Introducing new kerbside systems to specifically
collect soft plastics will expedite the recycling process and reduce the work required to sort out soft plastics
from rigid plastics; similarly, purple kerbside bins are now being implemented for glass recycling (Victorian
Government 2020).
In addition, participants involved in the manufacturing of packaging goods should consider redesigning the
design of their products in such a way that it is clear, concise, and most importantly made from a single type
of material. All of the mentioned factors will contribute to maximizing the recycling opportunities in Australia
and New Zealand (WasteMINZ 2020).
To ensure a smooth transition of incorporating recycled plastics into roads, plastic councils, recyclers, and
associations could consider specific ‘road-grade’ plastic recycling plants. This type of plant would be
expected to mainly tackle soft commingled PE plastics in an effort to repurpose this problematic grade of
waste plastic in a way that suits the road industry needs.
The enhancement of current sorting facilities for isolating ‘road-grade’ plastics is also a method that should
be explored. Recycling plants should obtain a minimum threshold of technology capable of recycling and
reprocessing plastics properly (Office of the Prime Minister’s Chief Science Advisor 2019). As the survey in
this report shows, 36% of the interviewed companies belong to the small-scale facility category. Due to their
inability to expand, small scale facilities will continue to sort out mainstream plastics such as PET and HDPE
and will continue disregarding all other plastics that do not fall into these categories (O’Farrell 2019, Office of
the Prime Minister’s Chief Science Advisor 2019, WasteMINZ 2020).
Individual plastic recyclers should consider testing the ‘variability’ of the products they work with. As recorded
in the national survey, less than 10% of the companies conduct any sort of testing on the products they sell.
Recycled plastics come in many different forms and factors; for assurance of quality, better categorisation of
plastics and insights to their usability, individual plastic recyclers should run characterisation tests for the
convenience of downstream manufacturers and users (Locock 2017).
Improved and dedicated product stewardship schemes are also a possibility to reduce environmental
impacts from soft plastics (Ministry for the Environment 2019). These types of schemes share the costs of
managing end-of-life products among the consumer market, industries, and governments. The end-of-life
costs associated with these plastics is generally borne by industries, consumers, councils, and governments
in the form of landfill and cleaning costs.

Lastly, as advocated by the Australian Flexible Pavement Association in their Sustainability Strategy
(Australian Asphalt Pavement Association 2019), establishing a sustainability and environmental framework
for ranking of bituminous products that use recycled material should be investigated. Organisations that
partake in this type of framework are expected to adhere to quantifiable metrics that benchmark the
reduction in greenhouse gases and environmental impacts that their products achieve (i.e., through
Environmental Product Declarations).

7. Conclusions
The aim of this report is to provide an overview of the type, volume and price of recycled plastics and their
possible use as ‘road-grade’ plastics and to assess the current recycling situation in Australia and New
Zealand.
Eight different types of plastics have been shortlisted based on specific requirements that have been met by
a series of criteria, (e.g., availability, price, recycling rate and feedback from industry). PP and HDPE are
among those polymers that will be sourced from both post-industrial and post-consumer streams.
Industry feedback that was gathered through individual meetings with representatives from the plastics
industry was fundamental in the development of the report. In summary, the recycling program in Australia
and New Zealand is heavily driven by market demands of recycled products. The low recycling rates are
affected by the lack of end market demands, as recycled plastics can sometimes cost more than virgin
plastics. Post-industrial plastics are more sought after due to improved sorting, less contamination and
overall consistency of the product, when compared to post-consumer plastics. Although data indicates that
the capabilities of recycling post-consumer stream plastics is large, this has not translated into actual
processing rates, as post-consumer stream plastics require more time, effort, and cost to be fully
reprocessed into new materials. As a result, from a commercial point of view, most recyclers tend to steer
toward the recycling of post-industrial plastics.
The industry feedback on the current recycling program in Australia and New Zealand also suggests that
recycling rates from both streams can be improved through investment in processing, however, there must
be confidence that the supply of these plastics can be met with sustainable market demand for the end
product.
Whilst incorporating recycled plastics in roads is one way to increase the recycling rate of plastics in
Australia and New Zealand, the industry feedback suggests that certain plastics already have existing
demand and should be excluded from asphalt road applications from an economic feasibility point of view.
Though, it should also be pointed out that the highest national recycling rate for waste plastics is currently
20% for PET.
APT6305 is intended to provide evidence-based specifications for the incorporation of recycled plastics into
roads. This will therefore assist in contributing to generating the so much needed ‘end product’ many
recyclers advocate for as one of the main issues to increase the recycling rate of waste plastics in Australia
and New Zealand. However, it is important to note that the use of plastic in asphalt will not be able to absorb
the entire portion of plastics that is currently not recycled due to total annual volume of bitumen and asphalt
produced to build and maintain roads.
The analysis of recycled plastic prices across Australia and New Zealand has ascertained the economic
viability of using recycled plastics as a bitumen modifier through the wet process; in fact, the cost of standard
asphalt polymers is at least double the cost of the most expensive recycled plastic. Using recycled plastics
as synthetic aggregates through the dry process limits the type of plastic to be possibly used due to the fixed
costs for processing recycled plastic compared to the cost of virgin quarry aggregates; however, this method
could potentially allow for a greater recycled volume of plastics in roads due to the aggregates being the
predominant fraction of the asphalt mix. In addition to costs, performance and environmental concerns will be
addressed as part of the following stages of APT6305.
The shortlisted plastics for this project have been selected in accordance with several criteria and
consultation with interested parties. The criteria include guarantees around the supply on a national scale
over time, the quality and consistency of the product in terms of contamination and toxicity for safety
purposes, the ability to be incorporated in bitumen/asphalt and the economic feasibility in comparison to
conventional materials (i.e., pure polymer for bitumen modification and virgin quarry aggregates).

Although the sample of industries and associations audited in this report can be considered a representative
sample of the general recycling situation across Australia and New Zealand, some of the remaining
companies declined to participate in discussions or provide information due to commercial sensitivities.
However, the total annual capability of the interviewed recyclers has been shown to largely exceed the
current recycling volumes. By fine tuning the plastics recycling process and fully utilising every opportunity,
Australia and New Zealand’s recycling rate can increase significantly. In addition, the process of
incorporating recycled plastics into asphalt road applications can contribute to tackling the environmental
impacts caused by ‘mixed’ plastics – among other types of plastics – that are currently sent to landfill.

References
Australian Asphalt Pavement Association 2019, National Sustainability Committee – Sustainability Strategy
2018-2020, AAPA, [Online] Available at: https://bit.ly/2LsQfMw [Accessed 8 February 2021]
Australian Government – Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment 2021, Waste exports,
Australian Government, [Online] Available at: https://bit.ly/2NPuKGR [Accessed 28 February 2021]
ASTM D7611 / D7611M-20, Standard Practice for Coding Plastic Manufactured Articles for Resin Identification,
ASTM International.
AS 2070-1999, Plastics materials for food contact use, Standards Australia, Sydney, NSW.
Austroads 2019, Viability of Using Recycled Plastics in Asphalt and Sprayed Sealing Applications, AP-T351-
19, Austroads, Sydney, NSW.
European Commission Communication 2018, A European Strategy for Plastics in a Circular Economy, [Online]
Available at: https://bit.ly/2YRRCHQ [Accessed 8 February 2021]
Food Drug Administration 2017, Recycled Plastics in Food Packaging, FDA, [Online] Available at:
https://bit.ly/3hA1zlO [Accessed 25 December 2020]
Food Standards Australia New Zealand 2014, Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code – Standard 3.2.2
– Food Safety Practices and General Requirements. Canberra, NSW.
Granwal, L. 2021, Import volume of bitumen Australia FY 2011-2019, [Online] Available at:
https://bit.ly/3cDQ1xo [Accessed 5 February 2021]
Hornyak, I. 2017, Plastic fantastic: How does Tokyo recycle its waste?, The Japan Times, [Online] Available
at: https://bit.ly/3cXaNZ7 [Accessed 8 February 2021]
ISO 14025:2006, Environmental labels and declarations – Type lll environmental declarations – Principles and
procedures, International Organization for Standardization.
Joohari, I., & Giustozzi, F. 2020, Chemical and high-temperature rheological properties of recycled plastics-
polymer modified hybrid bitumen, Journal of Cleaner Production, 276, 123064.
Lane, V. 2014, Japan’s Garbage Disposal System Explained, Tofugu, [Online] Available at:
https://bit.ly/3juT6kw [Accessed 8 February 2021]
Little, D. 1993, Enhancement of Asphalt Concrete Mixtures to Meet Structural Requirements through the
Addition of Recycled Polyethylene, In H. Waller (Ed.), STP1193-EB Use of Waste Materials in Hot-Mix
Asphalt, pp. 210-230.
Locock, K. 2017 The Recycled Plastics Market: Global Analysis and Trends, CSIRO, Australia, Accessed 5
February 2021 from CSIRO.
Ministry for the Environment & Stats NZ 2018, New Zealand’s Environmental Reporting Series: Our Land 2018,
[Online] Available at: https://bit.ly/2YSOzPn [Accessed 25 January 2021]
Ministry for the Environment & Stats NZ 2019, National Resource Recovery Project – Situational Analysis
Report, [Online] Available at: https://bit.ly/2LsPS4M [Accessed 5 February 2021]

Nizamuddin, S., Jamal, M., Gravina, R., & Giustozzi, F. 2020. Recycled plastic as bitumen modifier: The role
of recycled linear low-density polyethylene in the modification of physical, chemical, and rheological
properties of bitumen, Journal of Cleaner Production, 266, 121988.
OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) 2021, Municipal Waste (Indicator), OECD
Data, [Online] Available at: https://bit.ly/369eMNH [Accessed 25 January 2021]
O’Farrell, K. 2019, 2017-18 Australian Plastics Recycling Survey - National Report, Australian Government
Department of the Environment and Energy, [Online] Available at: https://bit.ly/3a4hoxs [Accessed 25
December 2020]
Office of the Prime Minister’s Chief Science Advisor 2019, Rethinking Plastics in Aotearoa New Zealand,
[Online] Available at: https://bit.ly/3aDvrKY [Accessed 5 February 2021]
Othman, A., M. 2010, Impact of Polypropylene Application Method on Long-Term Aging of Polypropylene-
Modified HMA, Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, 22(10), 1012-1018.
REDcycle 2020, Frequently Asked Questions, REDcycle, [Online] Available at: https://bit.ly/3nXPRne
[Accessed 25 December 2020]
Royal Society of New Zealand 2019, Plastics in the Environment: Te Ao Hurihuri – The Changing World, Royal
Society of New Zealand, [Online] Available at: https://bit.ly/3cevW0x [Accessed 25 January 2021]
Tapkın, S. 2008, The effect of polypropylene fibers on asphalt performance, Building and Environment, 43(6),
1065-1071.
Tapkın, S., Uşar, Ü., Tuncan, A., & Tuncan, M. 2009, Repeated Creep Behavior of Polypropylene Fiber-
Reinforced Bituminous Mixtures, Journal of Transportation Engineering, 135(4), 240-249.
Victorian Government 2020, Four-bin waste, and recycling system, [Online] Available at: https://bit.ly/3aG1lX2
[Accessed 5 February 2021]
Vinyl Council Australia 2020, A PVC industry recycling strategy for Australia, [Online] Available at:
https://bit.ly/2MmpNVb [Accessed 25 December 2020]
WasteMINZ 2020, Our Plastic Packaging: Our Business – The Truth About Recycling Plastic Containers,
[Online] Available at: https://bit.ly/3roPVxF [Accessed 5 February 2021]
Western Australia Government 2021, Plastics and tyres processing infrastructure fund, [Online] Available at:
https://bit.ly/2YUNPcF [Accessed 8 February 2021]

Appendix A List of companies consulted in

alphabetical order
• Advanced Circular Polymers (Victoria)

• Agrecovery (New Zealand)
• Aoteroa NZ Made Limited (New Zealand)
• Applied Machineries (Victoria)
• Astron Sustainability (Victoria, New South Wales, Western Australia, Queensland, New Zealand)
• Australian Packaging Covenant (New South Wales)
• Australian Recycled Plastics (New South Wales)
• Citywide Solutions (Victoria)
• Compound Specialist (New Zealand)
• Corex Plastics Australia (Victoria)
• Dow Chemicals (Victoria)
• Duromer Products (Australia, New Zealand)
• Ecocycle (Australia, New Zealand)
• Envorinex (Tasmania)
• Green Machines Lab (Western Australia)
• GT Recycling (Victoria)
• Integrated Recycling (Victoria, South Australia)
• JK Plastics (New South Wales)
• Martogg Group (Victoria, Queensland, New South Wales, South Australia)
• National Waste and Recycling Industry Council (Australia)
• Northern Adelaide Waste Management Authority (South Australia)
• Olympic Polymers (Victoria, South Australia)
• Paintback (Victoria)
• Plastic Police (Australia)
• Plastics New Zealand (New Zealand)
• Polymer Processors (Victoria)
• Polytrade Recycling (Victoria, New South Wales, Queensland)
• Qenos (Victoria, New South Wales, New Zealand)
• Rainbow Plastics (Western Australia)
• Re-Group (New South Wales)
• RECAN (Queensland)
• Recycling Plastics Australia (South Australia)
• Repeat Plastics (Australia, New Zealand)

• Steinert Australia (Victoria, Western Australia)

• Vanden Recycling (Victoria)
• Veolia (Australia, New Zealand)
• Victoria Waste Management Association (Victoria)
• VISY Recycling (Australia, New Zealand)
• Waste Management and Resource Recovery Association of Australia (New South Wales)
• YCA Recycling (South Australia)


AP-R648-21 Use of Road-Grade Recycled Plastics For Sustainable Asphalt Pavements

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

AP-R648-21 Use of Road-Grade Recycled Plastics For Sustainable Asphalt Pavements

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Research Report

Use of Road-grade Recycled Plastics

Abstract About Austroads

Austroads 2021 | page i

Austroads 2021 | page ii

5.5 Selected plastics ............................................................................................................................ 31

Table 2.1: Resin identification code. ............................................................................................................... 3

Figure 1.1: APT6305 reporting structure. ......................................................................................................... 1

Austroads 2021 | page iii

Figure 1.1: APT6305 reporting structure.

1.1 Purpose of the study

Austroads 2021 | page 1

1.2 Scope of the study

1.3.1 Inception webinar

1.3.2 Individual meetings

1.3.3 Second webinar

Austroads 2021 | page 2

2. The plastics journey

2.1 The international classification system

Table 2.1: Resin identification code.

Identification Product Applications in Recycling Rate* in

Austroads 2021 | page 3

Identification Product Applications in Recycling Rate* in

Austroads 2021 | page 4

2.2 Waste streams in Australia and New Zealand

2.2.1 Post-consumer stream

Table 2.2: Post-consumer stream plastics.

Applications Potential benefits of recycling Challenges

Austroads 2021 | page 5

2.2.2 Post-industrial stream

Table 2.3: Post-Industrial stream plastics.

Applications Benefits of recycling Challenges

• Fishing Industry • Low to very low contamination • More expensive in comparison to

Austroads 2021 | page 6

Austroads 2021 | page 7

2.3 Plastic consumption and recycling in Australia and New Zealand

Austroads 2021 | page 8

2.3.1 National recycling scheme

2.3.2 Incentive-based and product stewardship schemes

Austroads 2021 | page 9

2.3.3 Price of plastics and recycling technology

2.3.4 Industry feedback

Figure 2.2: Types of plastics reprocessed by the interviewed companies.

Austroads 2021 | page 10

The key findings from the interviews held are:

2.3.5 Mechanical recycling

Figure 2.3: Overall process of mechanical recycling.

Austroads 2021 | page 11

Austroads 2021 | page 12

Source: CEMAC Technologies.

Source: B+B Anlagenbau GmbH.

Austroads 2021 | page 13

Source: San Francisco Public Press.

Source: Steinert Australia Pty Ltd.

Austroads 2021 | page 14

Figure 2.9: Schematic of electrostatic separators.

Source: Hamos GmbH.

Austroads 2021 | page 15

Source: Neue Herbold GmbH and CEMAC Technologies.

Austroads 2021 | page 16

Source: CEMAC Technologies.

Source: CEMAC Technologies.

Austroads 2021 | page 17