Traditionally, when it comes to recycling, environment and the rhetoric of preserving the Earth, the American public has associated such values with the Democratic party, and the states that value liberal ideology. Over the years, the U.S. has seen states like California and New York rising to push for greater environmental policies, such as the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and New York’s unique battle against “environmental racism”, or pollution that is disproportionately placed into minority businesses and living areas of state.
These two states, along with a number of smaller liberal states, have sought to create a better environment, already going beyond simple recycling to get these values to become a reality.
However, many Republican-dominated states have begun opting for recycling and the preservation of the environment, but with a twist. 18 conservative states, including the state of South Carolina, have supported policies promoting chemical recycling.
Chemical recycling is when plastic is made for the first time, it is used for manufacturing and consumed by its user (boxes, cups, plastic, etc), after that, it is thrown away. Most of it ends up in landfills and even the ocean.
The process stops this by melting the chemicals in the plastics under high temperatures, separating the melted materials and re-using them to make new plastic without throwing it out or making more plastics for consumption.
The reason why Republican states are encouraging this can be seen from many positions, but the primary reason is because of economic benefits. When blue states began to push for higher environmental regulations, it became much easier to transport recyclable material to nearby red states, which had lower restrictions and regulations on what can be recycled and what methods are used to do it.
“Companies in blue states have begun sending plastic waste to red states that have embraced chemical recycling, which uses high heat to break down plastics into their fossil-fuel building blocks,” wrote Debra Kahn and Jordan Wolman for Politico.
With lesser regulations and payments from partner states to recycle, conservative legislatures see chemical recycling as a profit to their states, while at the same time preventing more plastic from being created and constantly re-using the materials for manufacturing from old plastic. However, some environmental professionals are concerned with these moves.
“Just from a common-sense understanding, the whole point of recycling is to return materials into the material cycle…we don’t want to see incineration of any kind because of the serious toxic impacts on frontline communities…The idea that companies are going to take plastic waste, use a lot of energy to turn it into fuels that then later get burned is just a tremendously bad plan”, said Veena Singla, a senior scientist for the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC).
“We’re seeing legislators who think that they’re actually doing something that’s good for the environment, but they have bought the industry line. They don’t really understand what these technologies are.” Said Renée Sharp, a strategy advisor for the “Safer States” organization.
the opinion regarding chemical recycling in South Carolina is met with different reactions after the passing of the “Solid Waste Policy and Management Act” of 2021-2022, which approved of pyrolysis use and the acts of chemical recycling. The bill was passed in both chambers and signed by Governor Henry McMaster.
(This bill) “positions South Carolina to foster private sector investment in advanced recycling facilities, new jobs for residents, and increased recycling rates statewide,” said American Chemical Council spokesman Matthew Kastner.
The process of chemical recycling has received mixed opinions and many scientists and politicians, although cautiously enthusiastic, warn that we do not know what effects may follow.
“You’re voting on something today that the majority of us know nothing about in this chamber and the impact it will have on our state and our communities … . On the sixth year, there’s no financial assurance to this state,” Representative John King (D-Rock Hill), said.
