Interviews

Ton Emans:
The current narrowing of the price spread should not be interpreted as a structural improvement in the competitiveness of European recycled plastics, but rather as yet another reminder of the need to ensure resource independence and to build secure, reliable supply chains in Europe. Previous crises, including the COVID-19 pandemic, have shown that temporary disruptions may alter the price gap for a limited period. However, they do not resolve the underlying structural imbalance in the market. 

If Europe is to improve the long-term competitiveness of its plastics recycling industry, the market must be stabilized through lasting measures. This requires, first, recognizing virgin and recycled plastics as distinct products with different cost structures, rather than allowing the price of recycled material to follow that of virgin polymer. Virgin polymer prices are shaped by global dynamics, including petrochemical overcapacity, low fossil feedstock costs, and international competition, all of which continue to exert downward pressure on prices. On the other hand, recyclers operate in a more localized market, and therefore their cost is dictated by different parameters, including fixed costs of feedstock not linked to virgin prices and fixed collection and sorting costs. 

What is needed now is continued progress in the legislative and policy framework, combined with effective enforcement and market conditions that allow recycled plastics to compete fairly. It is encouraging to see greater attention from EU institutions and tangible advances in legislation to address the current crisis, but sustained effort will be essential if the sector is to regain stability and competitiveness in the long term. 

Platts:

How much investment does Europe’s recycling industry need to restore growth in both output and demand? Do you have any estimates for the level of investment required?

Ton Emans:
Restoring growth in output and demand is not simply a question of mobilizing a specific volume of investment. Investment will follow once demand is stabilized. However, in recent years, the market has not grown because demand for European recycled plastics has remained too weak. What is needed first is a level playing field for European plastics recyclers vis-à-vis low-priced imported plastics, which do not meet the same EU environmental, labor, and safety requirements. Imported materials and finished products placed in the EU market should be assessed using the same calculation methods and verification standards applied to European products, ensuring all parties are subject to the same level of requirements regardless of the origin of the material. This is important because recycled-content targets only create a genuine circular market when the claims are credible and all market participants operate on a level playing field.

In that context, legislative levers will have a decisive role to play. Measures such as “made in Europe” requirements, alongside the effective implementation of the Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation, the End-of-Life Vehicles Regulation, and other relevant legislation, will be essential to stabilize the market and ensure that recycled content targets translate to secured growth of European recycling capacity, rather than further distorting supply chains.

Platts:

Is Europe’s recycling capacity enough to meet the PPWR’s recycled content targets by 2030? And more immediately, is the industry prepared for the PPWR’s implementation, in your opinion?

Ton Emans:
The European plastics recycling industry has the technology, experience and industrial know-how required to support the PPWR recycled-content objectives. The question is not whether recyclers can deliver, but whether upcoming legislation, verification, and enforcement mechanisms are put in place early enough to allow the industry to expand progressively. The PPWR targets are important not only because they can help provide greater market certainty and sustain demand over time, but also because they offer a clearer framework for long-term investment and implementation. The absence of a structural market improvement should not be confused with a lack of technical or industrial capability.  

This is precisely the point raised in a joint letter we addressed to the European Commission together with more than 150 co-signatories, in which we called for the timely and effective implementation of the PPWR as a necessary condition for supporting recycling and advancing Europe’s circular economy objectives. Enforcement should be an indispensable part in implementation, and ensuring that the same rules apply to Europe’s trading partners.

Furthermore, national Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) systems will accelerate the transition by rewarding recycled content through eco-modulated fees. These incentives should operate within a harmonized European framework, so that member states can stimulate demand without creating conflicting compliance requirements. Incentives should reward verified, European recycled content and should recognize both quantity and quality.

Platts:

Do you anticipate greater volumes of recycled and virgin plastic being imported into Europe in the near future? Are there particular materials that are more exposed than others?

Ton Emans:
Without effective enforcement of EU legislation and measures to stabilize current market conditions vis-à-vis third countries, low-priced imports will continue to flow into the European market uncontrolled. There are cases of products with recycled content that enter the single market without any verification. 

Regarding the future import volumes of virgin and recycled plastics into Europe, current customs codes do not allow to distinguish virgin from recycled plastic imports, making it impossible to anticipate future trends with precision, track flows accurately and assess exposure of some materials over others.

Platts:

With so many antidumping cases still waiting to progress, what are your thoughts on the current situation? What measures could help speed up policy implementation and bring more immediate relief to the industry?

Ton Emans:
A growing number of countries are making use of trade defense instruments, including antidumping measures, in response to mounting pressure on their domestic industries. This trend is closely linked to the global oversupply of polymer production and persistent overcapacity, which has led to a growing number of cases worldwide. A representative example is the widely known PET Safeguards duty implemented by Turkey in response to the high volume of imports affecting its market. 

However, the EU cannot rely on antidumping cases alone to address the pressures facing plastics recyclers. While these measures may play a role, they are often slow and limited in scope, and therefore unlikely to provide the relief the industry needs. Their effectiveness can also be weakened when trade flows are redirected through third countries.  

What is required are proper verification systems that ensure any material entering the EU market is subject to the same quality and safety requirements that European producers must adhere to, both for virgin and recycled materials. This should be paired with a broader and more robust EU trade policy approach that can respond more quickly and more effectively to market pressures. 

Platts:

On chemical recycling, following recent setbacks involving Plastic Energy UK, Quantafuel and Pryme’s Rotterdam plant, what is your view of where the sector is heading?

Ton Emans:
These recent setbacks highlight the difficult market environment in which all recycling technologies currently operate. The situations involving Plastic Energy, Quantafuel and Pryme reflect not only company-specific circumstances, but also broader structural pressures affecting the sector. Chemical recycling remains at an early stage of development, and the investment costs associated with scaling these technologies to a commercially viable level make progress particularly challenging under current conditions. 

The development of chemical recycling will therefore depend on the same fundamental conditions as for the recycling industry as a whole, such as fair competition, credible demand, and legal certainty on how output is recognized in the market – all of which are elements that would ensure a suitable environment for continued investments. In that context, chemical recycling should be assessed according to where it can add value within a circular economy and where it can complement mechanical recycling.