Metals associations in North America, Europe and Japan also tout recycling aspects of the industry beyond China.
Aluminum associations representing producers in the United States, Europe, Canada and Japan are calling on G7 governments “to provide leadership in support of ambitious multilateral and plurilateral negotiations to discipline trade-distorting government support and state ownership in industrial sectors.” The G7 (Group of Seven) countries are Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom and the United States.
The coalition states, “There is clear and compelling evidence today that existing multilateral subsidy rules are inadequate to remedy the scale and scope of state intervention in aluminum markets.” The groups point to a recently released report from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) that found during the past decade, “governments provided considerable support in the form of below-market borrowings, the vast majority of which went to Chinese firms.”
The report estimates the value of China’s governmental support to have ranged between 4 and 7 percent of the annual revenue of these firms, which the cooperating aluminum producers call “in stark contrast to other firms in the sample which received support in the vicinity of 0.2 percent of their annual revenue.”
Over that same period, the North American, European and Japanese producers say, “China has accounted for most of the increase in global production capacity.”
In the joint statement, the top officers of the U.S.-based Aluminum Association, European Aluminium, the Aluminium Association of Canada and the Japan Aluminium Association also point to recycling and emissions-friendly aluminum production as being a victim.
They write in part, “Energy-efficient production and recycling systems in the U.S., Europe, Canada and Japan can make a major contribution to sustaining good jobs in rural areas, ensuring reliable supplies of strategically important materials, and realizing a low-carbon economy–but only if international markets along the aluminum value chain are free, fair and open.”
Metals producer will be the subject of a probe by the Serious Fraud Office in the U.K.
An investigation being undertaken by the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) of the government of the United Kingdom could shed light on to what extent metals producer the GFG Alliance has been affected by the former Greensill Capital, or to what extent the two firms worked in tandem to create financial irregularities.
According to online reports from The Guardian and other U.K.-based media, the announcement by the SFO that it was looking into GFG “immediately caused the collapse of a rescue deal for Liberty Steel and raised fears over thousands of British jobs.”
That potential rescue involving a San Francisco-based investment firm may not have proceeded all that far, as it was announced in late April with a timeframe involving several weeks of due diligence ahead. The Guardian quotes the San Francisco firm, White Oak Global Advisers, as stating, “As with any regulated financial institution, we are not in a position to continue discussions with any company that is under investigation by the Serious Fraud Office for money laundering.”
On its website, the SFO says it is “investigating suspected fraud, fraudulent trading and money laundering in relation to the financing and conduct of the business of companies within the Gupta Family Group Alliance (GFG), including its financing arrangements with Greensill Capital UK Ltd.”
GFG Alliance, which includes steel and aluminum production facilities under the names Liberty Steel, Alvance and InfraBuild, said it would co-operate fully with the investigation, according to an online report from the BBC. The company’s many facilities, acquired by GFG and its Chair Sanjeev Gupta in the previous several years, include plants in the U.K., Australia, France and the United States.
The SFO describes itself as “a specialist, independent law enforcement agency set up by Parliament and overseen by the attorney general, forming part of the criminal justice system with jurisdiction in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. The agency’s mission is to tackle only the most complex and serious cases of fraud, bribery and corruption and money laundering.”
Adds the agency, “The SFO has teams of intelligence specialists, investigators, lawyers and forensic accountants all working with a single focus–to solve these high-profile, high-risk cases. When an investigation begins, we do not always immediately publicly declare it for operational reasons. It is the director who authorizes all investigations.”
The supply chain financing techniques carried out by Greensill Capital and GFG have received much of the attention in the financial press reporting on the collapse of Greensill and the doubts about GFG’s future.
Less remarked upon has been the end result of any questionable financing used and what happened to money that Greensill and GFG creditors are pursuing. An April 27 online article by BBC Business Editor Simon Jack, however, did include the comment that sources the broadcaster would not identify indicate “the creditors’ real concern is [that] no one seems to be able to locate £3 billion ($4.1 billion) that creditors allege Greensill advanced to Gupta and remains unpaid and unaccounted for.”
Employees of Liberty Steel, Alvance and InfraBuild, meanwhile, have concerns about which facilities will pull through the incident and remain productive and which ones may face a bleaker future.
In late April, Liberty Steel announced the formation of a Restructuring & Transformation Committee (RTC) to review those considerations, and earlier this month, GFG said it was likely to sell two steel plants in France.
When Liberty purchased the two French mills last year, GFG referred to the “national significance” they have for that nation’s rail infrastructure, so it’s possible the French government has encouraged the selloff by GFG.
In mid-March, a director of the Australian InfraBuild business unit referred to those steelmaking and scrap recycling assets as “Greensill-free.” As of mid-May, the InfraBuild logo and name is not listed in the “GFG Alliance Industry Brands” portion of the website. The GFG Alliance name is not mentioned on the home page of the InfraBuild website, although the “About Us” section indicates the firm is “a Liberty Steel Group brand, and part of the GFG Alliance.”
When it comes to advanced plastics recycling, many variables can determine an operation's success.
Tremendous attention has been focused on the plastic waste problem—specifically what manufacturers and major brands are doing about it. Concurrently, there’s been a similar focus on the environmental, social and governmental (ESG) actions businesses are taking, with pressure coming from consumers, regulators and politicians. This, in turn, has resulted in a wide array of announced solutions that “solve” the plastic waste problem, among them molecular recycling—aka advanced or chemical recycling—of which there are believers and, rightly so, doubters.
Many agree, after basic observation, that plastics are valuable as they are hygienic, low cost, flexible and abundant. These benefits mean plastics will continue to be in great demand and production. We also can all agree that proper disposal has been and must remain a top priority for consumers as well as producers and brand owners.
However, in the last few years, global leaders have set outsized aspirational recycling goals as they seek to achieve a significant reduction of the 79 percent of waste plastics currently going to landfills or, worse, into the oceans.
One way to tackle this head on is with molecular recycling, which is a technically proven way to put postuse plastics back into circulation as virgin plastics. While the technology often is referred to as chemical recycling, and sometimes advanced recycling, molecular recycling is more accurate because many of the processes use neither chemical additives nor catalysts, only carefully balanced heat and flow to ensure efficiency and profitability. The concept has been around since the 1960s. Further, postuse plastic is reduced to its molecular origin in the process. Therefore, molecular recycling is a 100 percent circular solution that can infinitely convert end-of-life plastics back into virgin material that can be used as feedstocks to make plastic precursors.
In theory, with enough molecular recycling capacity for the landfill-bound 79 percent of postuse plastic, all plastics currently above ground would be all we would ever need since this material could be infinitely returned to virgin uses. But it should be noted that among other important issues, “technically proven” is not enough. Execution of molecular recycling is complex and reaches beyond technology.
The business side of this recycling encompassing collection infrastructure upstream and processing infrastructure downstream must meet strict regulatory requirements and requires experience in chemistry, technology, operations, safety and administrative execution to balance the myriad variables to consistently produce high-quality volumes. Above all, it must be profitable to be sustainable.
Numerous recycling companies worldwide have made announcements about future plants, production, partnerships, breakthroughs and more. All of them, Nexus included, are focused on how best to reduce waste plastics for the betterment of all.
There is no winner-take-all scenario. There is ample space for successful companies; however, these companies will emerge only if technologies are economic and are surrounded by an end-to-end business that is well-executed.
So, with so many players, technologies, approaches and more out there, how does one know who might succeed?
Here are some suggested questions for anyone—from consumer brands to investors and manufacturers in between—to ask. These questions are meant as a starting point; based on the answers provided, probing deeper is highly recommended. Getting to the right answers can help the industry begin to resolve the waste plastics problem quickly, globally and economically.
It should be noted that complex industries do not lend themselves to today’s soundbite style if important information is to be conveyed. Combining engineering and finance, by its nature, requires details suggested below.
Q: Is molecular recycling an end-to-end business or just a technology?
A: An innovative technology is at the center of any successful company. However, to migrate from a “science project” pilot to a commercial-scale operation that is profitable and, therefore, sustainable requires cross-disciplinary skills. Molecular recycling is no different.
Entrepreneurial spirit infused with a passion to solve a worldwide problem must be coupled with expertise in engineering, operations, software, regulation/policy, strategy, marketing/communications, legal and human resources, which are all driven by financial and performance metrics. Ideally, with a leadership and implementation team that is scientifically, technically, operationally and financially literate, success is achievable with strict cost-control limitations. When assessing companies, one should ask if such resources are in place or must they be bolstered by additional support?
A: Converting plastics to marketable products, consistently at high volumes, requires doing a few things well and thousands of little things very well. Molecular conversion is only one part of that equation. Also required is upstream handling of a diverse feedstock, logistics to identify and aggregate these feedstocks, ability to remove undesirable contaminants, both obvious (metals, nonplastics and undesired plastics) and less obvious (inks, glues, labels, fillers and fire retardants moisture).
Companies can claim to take Nos.1 to 7 plastics, but the chemistry is unyielding--only Nos. 2,4,5 and 6 convert into marketable products. Removal of the others (which add costs) is a necessity. Final products must meet strict specifications, preferably, without cost-adding efforts like hydro-treating and postproduction cleaning or distillation.
Q: Is it operationally economic without grants or incentives?
A: Like any business, recycling is unsustainable unless it is financially profitable for all parties.
This may seem obvious, but discussions often focus narrowly on the technology either working or not. Cost and economics of operating the technology is too often secondary. Grants and incentives cannot be relied upon for commercially scalable projects for the simple reason that they run out and expire.
Plastic feedstocks are not free unless they are so contaminated (which adds costs) that they become unusable anyway. Yes, there are lots of “free” waste plastics, but the free sources are so contaminated they cannot be recycled sustainably.
Q: Are operations efficient and output consistently high-quality at commercial volumes?
A: Efficiency dictates economics. For example, the energy returned over energy invested (EROEI) number captures all inputs (feedstock, energy and others) and compares them to the energy value of the off-take produced.
The higher the EROEI, the better and more economic, but this parameter does not stand alone. Product quality measured as the ability of a produced feedstock to meet a certain specification consistently and at scale is just as important as efficiency. The two need to be taken into consideration together.
Q: Does it meet all regulatory requirements and is it reasonably insurable?
A: End-to-end air, water, safety, transportation, product load-out, area classification, electrical and piping compliance require proper review, approval and implementation at the federal, state and local levels.
Insurance companies are shying away from established recycling operations and even some refineries while requiring minimum engineering, technical and environmental compliance to established standards. A single significant accident could have a chilling effect that would ripple throughout the industry.
Larger buyers also insist on minimum operating standards from the companies they do business with to ensure their own interests are protected. The best product will be rejected if produced in conditions inconsistent with their corporate standards.
Q: Are hardware, software and other systems integrated to address complex operating parameters?
A: Hardware is only part of an end-to-end solution. Adjusting temperatures, flows, pressures and residence times on the fly is just as important within any operating scenario. In some cases, artificial intelligence (AI) linked to the production system’s numerous input/output points may be required to achieve consistent and reliable performance.
Plastics-to-oil is an imperfect science given the broad array of inputs and cannot rely solely on human reaction. A combination of soft and hard solutions is necessary to achieve desired production and economics.
Q: Is the company’s profit model about licensing its chemical recycling technology?
A: The current state of molecular recycling is not well-suited to licensing the technology to nonexperts. There are simply too many technical and operational nuances and “soft” factors to reliably and economically run a plant unless one possesses specialized skills and knowledge. Unfortunately, some past licensing efforts have proven this out.
Over time, at the point when all the elements above have been compiled within system software and detailed operational and maintenance procedures, licensing will no doubt prove to be a powerful tool for scaling within the industry.
Q: What is in-house versus third-party driven?
A: Institutional knowledge is critical for developing and deploying any early-stage technology. Rapid innovation and improvement are the norm. Outsourced software development, engineering, plant operation, feedstock sourcing and even construction do not allow for the rapid iteration required to keep any novel business on course when changes or improvements are needed.
Possessing an in-depth knowledge of every aspect of the business can only come from actually “doing it,” which goes a long way toward increasing the odds of that business surviving and thriving.
This knowledge is not easily obtained, and while it may be found in detailed operations manuals, those manuals are only rarely read and more . is the information in them assimilated, which can ultimately slow growth and even destroy the business (See the point about licensing above.)
Eric Hartz is president and co-founder of Nexus LLC. Nexus is an Atlanta-based operational, commercially scaled converter of waste plastics to feedstocks that are used to create virgin plastics. So far, the company has diverted 3 million pounds of landfill-bound plastics into new materials. For more information, email jjordan@nexusfuels.com.
The solid waste management consulting and planning firm has added staff in an effort to expand its sustainability planning services team.
Gershman, Brickner & Bratton Inc. (GBB), McLean, Virginia, has announced the addition of four members to its team of solid waste management professionals.
“We’re excited to add a group of new consultants and staff members to GBB’s dynamic and entrepreneurial team,” says GBB President Steve Simmons. “While these four women come from different academic and professional backgrounds, together they have a common passion for sustainability and complement our growing team of professionals who focus on helping clients solve solid waste management issues by providing innovative, responsible, sustainable and economical strategies and solutions for the benefit of communities and the environment.”
Jennifer Porter, vice president of GBB, adds, “I am especially happy to announce that with our recent new staff additions, we are greatly expanding our sustainability planning services team, building on our base of other experienced solid waste, recycling and sustainability consultants at GBB.”
A well-versed planning practitioner with more than 10 years of experience in sustainability, resilience, community engagement and training/education, Manwelyan joins the GBB team as a senior consultant. She most recently held the role of senior planner at Sullivan County, New York, and has experience as a consultant, nonprofit executive director and entrepreneur. Through her multidisciplinary background, she has worked with municipalities on resilience planning and sustainability compliance; is adept at working with diverse constituent groups including staff, boards, committees, volunteers and external audiences; and has initiated and strengthened community and institutional partnerships.
Manwelyan earned a Master of Science degree in urban planning from Columbia University and founded an environmental leadership training program with 500 alumni where she developed, implemented and taught programs and curricula.
As a sustainability professional with eight years of public-sector experience for a resource recovery agency, Evans joins GBB as a senior consultant. She comes to GBB from the Onondaga County Resource Recovery Agency in Central New York, where as a recycling specialist she worked on a wide range of projects and programs, including award-winning recycling and composting initiatives; collaboration with a waste-to-energy facility turning nonrecyclable trash into electricity and recovering metal for recycling; trash and recycling drop-off sites; and numerous collection programs for recycling and proper disposal of hard-to-manage materials.
A former board member of the New York State Association for Reduction, Reuse and Recycling, Evans is based in Syracuse, New York, and earned a Bachelor of Science degree in environmental studies from the State University of New York College of Environmental Science and Forestry.
A recent graduate of Binghamton University with a Master of Science in sustainable communities as well as a Bachelor of Science in environmental studies, Moyer joins GBB as a Consultant I. Since graduating from her master’s degree program, Moyer was a project coordinator at Binghamton University’s Living Building project, which aims to design and construct a “Living Building Challenge Certified” environmentally friendly classroom and research facility. At GBB, Moyer leverages this experience as an integral team member working on GBB’s sustainability projects focused on achieving zero construction and demolition waste for a large retail company’s portfolio of real estate projects. Her knowledge of Living Building principles will additionally assist the GBB team with making recommendations early in the building design stage that contribute to future improvements and success in fostering a circular design and construction industry.
Allyson Del Rosario, business manager
A CPA and CFE (certified fraud examiner), Del Rosario joins GBB as its new business manager. She has been working in public and private accounting for 28 years in the D.C. area. She has experience providing financial oversight for various small businesses including law firms, lobbying firms, real estate developers, software companies, retail businesses, nonprofits and trade associations. In the environmental space, Del Rosario has provided the controller function for a large recycling company in the D.C. area. She has a B.S. in business management from Brigham Young University (BYU) and is a member of the Virginia Society of CPAs, the Association of CFEs and the AICPA.
Eldan offers an array of shredding solutions to meet a variety of customer needs.
The Eldan solutions for profitable cable recycling are robust and reliable machinery, which is the result of 65 years of innovation and collaboration with customers.
Eldan specialize in complete solutions, including filter systems for the cleanest working environment and output purity including aspiration, ventilation, automatic cleaning of bags, etc.
With a Quality Upgrading System from Eldan you can achieve a purity of 99.9 percent pure black rubber granules, also known as black gold.
Get the purest metal fraction and the highest recovery of metal fines from the plastic fraction with the complete Eldan cable recycling solutions.
The Eldan tire separation equipment ensures the purest rubber granulate according to ASTM-standards, liberated from steel and textile.
The Super Chopper double shaft is Eldan's largest and most powerful primary shredder and can process up to 40 metric tons per hour, depending on input.
Eldan specializes in complete tire granulation solutions with the highest purity and cleanest working environment because of pneumatic material transports.
The Eldan plants are customized to fit into your buildings or site, in this instance it’s a tire chip plant for a recycler in the U.K.
For producing 50 or 100 millimeter TDF (tire-derived fuel) chips used in cement kilns, the Twin-Shaft Clean-Cut Tire Shredder with frequency drive is ideal.
The new knife system on the Multi Purpose Rasper ensures up to 10 percent higher efficiency and a lower running temperature.
Feeding silos enable operation with as little as two operators, ensuring a profitable investment. Feeding silos can be installed in existing setups too.
The Super Chopper features very few knives, designed to ensuring lowest maintenance costs and maximum cutting force with each rotation.
Experienced Eldan technicians ensure the best installation, startup and operator training at a tire recycling customer in Italy.
The Super Chopper is your No. 1 solution for primary shredding of all types of whole tires and precut mining truck tires without debeading.
This large double-shaft primary shredder was recently installed at an aluminum recycling customer in Spain.
Make the purest tire chips ideal for pyrolysis at the lowest running costs with the Eldan Super Chopper and Multi Purpose Rasper.
With a complete Eldan e-scrap plant, you can achieve recovery of many different metal fractions and the highest metal purity.
With a Ring Shredder from Eldan, you get the ideal primary shredder for profitable e-scrap recycling, liberating plastic and metal for highest purity.
6311 Inducon Corporate Dr., Unit 14, Sanborn, New York 14132