SUSTAINABLE ENERGY PROJECT IN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA

This independent study course provides a unique opportunity to research sustainable energy in Aliso Viejo, Orange County and Southern California.


As consumption of plastic continues to grow, there is an increasing demand to find new ways to use plastic waste to generate energy with limited environmental impact.  In Florida, for example, the Department of Environmental Protection (Florida State Government) estimates that 1.35 MTn of plastic waste are disposed of each year. Roughly 60% goes to landfills, 35% is burned up, and only 5% is recycled.
This independent study course will explore the potential benefits of plants that use thermal anaerobic technology to transform plastic waste (mostly from plastic bottles and other types of containers) into synthetic fuel, thus providing an alternative fuel to coal or natural gas. During the semester, we will explore how plants like these might impact the Orange County area. Together we will investigate possible sites and estimate the environmental effects they might have on our community. Students will visit and interview recyclers and waste managers in the area to determine how they currently dispose of plastic and other types of waste. We will also develop a framework to evaluate and analyze consumption practices in a typical Aliso Viejo home. COURSE SCHEDULE

This is a 3-unit independent study course that will meet twice a week. A maximum of 4 students can be enrolled in this course. This independent study course will meet once a week for three hours. The work for this course has been divided in six phases:
1) Bibliographical and online research 2) Drafting a preliminary report based on the analysis of the literature 3) Field trips and interviews to local government and waste management companies 4) A second draft of the report and uploading of relevant materials to the course website 5) Interviews and research of existing plastic-to-oil companies in Florida 6) Proposal to evaluate the potential to implement a plastic-to-oil waste programme in Aliso Viejo and/or surrounding communities in Orange County 7) Final report uploaded to the website ASSIGNMENTS

Students will work as a group in developing a report and a website highlighting the findings of this research. Work on the report will begin the first week of classes. Students will read pertinent literature and upload a weekly report on the relevance of the arguments in the literature in relationship to the central research question of the course. After each field trip, students will also write reports commenting on our conversations with local authorities, agencies, and waste management personnel.

  • Preliminary report (5 pages) 20% of the grade
  • Interviews and field trip reports (6 pages) 25% of the grade
  • Second draft of report (10 pages) 30% of the grade
  • Evaluation for implementation of plastic-to-oil programme (5 pages) 15%
  • Participation 10%

Students will be assessed based upon the quality of their research, the coherency of their written and oral skills, their ability to work in a group, and their skills at developing a cohesive multi-media presentation. Plastic Energy Resources and Articles Please see table of contents

Report from a plastic pyrolysis plant in Ireland

This is a report from a plastic pyrolysis plant in Ireland. Skip to page 7 for information on the financial aspect of the project (how much money the company saved, how much it earned). http://www.cefic.org/Documents/ResponsibleCare/Awards%202013/Commendation/RC%20Award%202013%20-%20Special%20commendation%20General%20Award%20-%20Diesel%20production%20from%20hazardous%20plastic%20waste%20through%20the%20application%20of%20pyrolysis%27%20-%20Janssen%20Biologics,%20Ireland.pdf

First Report

With the emergence of a global dependence on petroleum, there was an explosion in the production, usage, and waste of plastic products in the latter half of the twentieth century. This emergence has only dramatically increased in the past decade, correlating with the continued exponential growth of the global population and is expected to escalate in the near future. The accessibility and low cost of plastic products has encouraged their recurrent purchase by more and more people worldwide. However, since plastics take millions of years to degrade, our species faces a daunting issue of waste generation and its harmful effects on the environment. This report considers the viability of plastics pyrolysis plants as a solution to the problem of waste generation in Southern California, a densely populated region in which residents are among the largest consumers of plastic globally.

In Why Do We Recycle?: Markets, Values and Public Policy, Frank Ackerman explains how recycling trends began in the United States. He identifies the origin in the 1980s when many Americans believed the country would soon have a “landfill crisis.” This fear pushed many to start and participate in recycling programs. However, when it later became clear that the nation was not facing an immediate crisis, the programs were criticized and labeled as being an “expensive mistake” (Ackerman p. 2).  Ackerman later discusses the relationship between waste prevention and recycling. Although waste prevention is more beneficial, it is easier to create recycling programs and changes because of people’s need to consume and discard cheap materials in order to “feel affluent” (Ackerman p. 6). Ultimately, since the behavior of using materials is considerably much more difficult to change, we must divert our efforts toward a focus on changing technology for a more sustainable future.

Although changing social consciousness may prove to be difficult, there are new technologies that offer incentives for people to recycle. Ackerman discusses the significance of waste composed of packaging materials. He criticizes the sheer mass of packaging waste going straight from factory to landfill constantly. This problem is what our studies will concentrate on. The graph below addresses one aspect of plastic packaging waste:
Figure 1 (CRI)
As the graph indicates, in 2010, approximately 2,700,000 tons of plastic bottles were sold, 70% of which were wasted into landfills, as litter, or in our oceans. This means that only 30% of those plastic containers were recycled. The question is then: how can we motivate more people to recycle plastics by offering something beneficial besides monetary compensation? A possible solution can be found in the efforts of new companies that have centered their work on the conversion of plastics—which would normally end up as waste—to safe and usable diesel fuel through a process called pyrolysis. 
Plastic pyrolysis is one proposed solution to help stifle the negative effects of plastic waste, while simultaneously lowering the need for oil extraction. Two companies on the cusp of this growing technology provide a practical context with which we can see some of the benefits of this process. Agilyx, a company started in Oregon, is “the first company in the world to effectively convert previously non-recyclable and low value waste plastics into crude oil through a patented system that is environmentally beneficial” (Kanellos). Although the price to build one of these plants can be expensive, Agilyx’s system can turn 40,000 pounds of plastic into 130 barrels of oil a day. With this level of output, the amount of plastic waste that can be reduced if exercised on a large scale is extremely significant. In fact, the American Chemistry Council assessed the potential of plastic pyrolysis systems on a national scale and concluded that America could support more than five hundred plants and create up to 6.6 billion dollars in capital investment (ACC).  A separate study conducted at Columbia University determined that plastic pyrolysis could make 6 billion gallons of gasoline in one year. Agilyx is only improving their technologies to make cleaner, more sustainable, and more efficient plastic pyrolysis systems.

Among other companies working to spread the benefits of plastic pyrolysis is P&M Recycling. The recycling plant in Yukon has made use of the Blest Machine invented in Japan in 2010 after being urged to do so by the public. The machine cut costs on labor and heating in the recycling plant by about $18,000 and it also eliminated the plant’s need to ship reused plastics to Vancouver. Shipping and transportation become much less impressionable costs for recycling companies once a plastic pyrolysis system is implemented because of the oil it creates. Surprisingly, the organization of the plastic pyrolysis plant is generally quite basic and is not too difficult to understand when simplified and explained.
Figure 2 (Scheirs)
Pyrolysis is the process of heating up plastic, such as LDPE, PET, and HDPE, from its solid state to a gaseous one. From there it is cooled down and rests in a liquid state as crude oil: (See figure 2). For large production of crude oil from pyrolysis waste plastic must first be collected. The current method of collection of recyclables is single stream. This means all recyclables from plastic, aluminum, glass, cardboard and plastic go into the same bin. Materials are then collected by a waste management company and brought to the recycling facility. At the facility, an MRF or Material Recovery Facility sorts out each category of recyclable through different processes. The MRF utilizes technology like optical scanners that use inferred light to search for HDPE to collect Milk Jugs, triggering air jets to send it flying up to a storage bunker above. The current technology can only do so much. While this process is the most convenient, it is also the least friendly for the end-goal of recycling everything. When everything is mixed together the quality of the materials is bound to decrease and much becomes unusable.

With the process of pyrolysis, thequality of plastic is not as important as the type.  LDPE (plastic bags) produces a higher yield of usable oil as an end product then PET (water bottles) or HDPE (Milk Jugs). If the plastic is cross-contaminated with a food product, the food remains will burn away through in the liquification process and not end up in the final product of crude oil. 

Although reprocessing plastic in order to create crude oil is a responsible solution to the burgeoning landfill problem, there are several barriers that prevent pyrolysis plants from being implemented into communities in Southern California. The first, and perhaps most significant barrier, is the cost of a plant. Companies can easily ship their waste abroad to countries such as China and are less inclined to develop and invest in local solutions that could cost up to five million dollars. Also, because the companies are under the contract of local authorities, they simply abide by local regulations rather than take the initiative to offer better solutions. Therefore, it becomes the responsibility of the community to advocate such ideas to the local authority. 

Another significant barrier is a lack of profitability for companies even if they implement such systems. Our proposal highlights the importance of creating a self-sustaining cycle by allowing companies to use the fuel produced for their trucks. However, we realize that such an incentive is a minor one for companies. Because the companies are making millions and are highly profitable the operation cost of vehicles is not of great significance to them. Also due to a lack of public interest and education companies are not compelled to move in a progressive direction.
Works Cited
1.      ACC “Reaping Oil From Discarded Plastic.” Green Blog. 29 Sept. 2011. Web. 16 Apr. 2015. .
2.      Ackerman, Frank. Why Do We Recycle Markets, Values, and Public Policy. Washington, D.C.: Island, 1997. Print.
3.      CRI “PET Bottle Sales and Wasting in the US.” PET Bottle Sales and Wasting in the US. Web. 15 Apr. 2015. .
4.      Kanellos “Press Release: Waste Plastic to Oil Conversion.” Press Releases.  2014. Web. 15 Apr. 2015. .
5.      Scheirs, John. Feedstock Recycling and Pyrolysis of Waste Plastics: Converting Waste Plastics into Diesel and Other Fuels. Chichester, UK: J. Wiley & Sons, 2006. Print.

CR&R Visit


CR&R Visit

CR&R is a family owned business started in 1963 by Clifford R. Ronnenburg. Today, the company provides service to more than two million customers, of that 88,000 households are in Southern California. They have facilities in places varying from San Juan, CA, to Washington, to Castle Rock, CO. In Southern California the main competitors for CR&R are Waste Management, Republic, and Ware Disposal. CR&R recently beat out Waste Management for the franchise of Lake Forest. When a City is in need of a waste and recycling servicer a city council will put out a Request for Proposal enumerating the requirements to service their city. Companies will than put a bid for the contract. This bid is normally for a franchise which is a contract to service the entire city. A franchise allows for better service and lower rates because they are working with the whole city and a guaranteed to cover their costs. This is contrary to areas in LA where there are multiple companies servicing different residents on the same street. The contracts between the city and waste services usually are for 7-10 years. There are also evergrande contracts where it is 7 years long but each year they add another year so long as they are content with the services. If they are not satisfied with the services they will not add another year and let the contract terminate. After then the city will put our RFP and then the company can bid on it again and may get chosen if they have changed what they did wrong. To process the recyclable produced by their customers CR&R uses Material Recovery Facilities or MRFs.
At the CR&R recycling facility we toured two MRFs where the product is taken and sorted out. The MRF we toured is a ‘Clean MRFs’, as opposed to ‘Dirty MRFs’. The ‘Dirty MRFs’ contain hazardous materials and are completely enclosed; visits are not allowed due to liability reasons. These ‘Clean MRFs’ only deal with recyclable material. This is recyclable material from the recycle carts at homes and the recycle dumpster at businesses brought here for sorting into the different commodities for shipping off into The World Market. The different commodities CR&R deals with are plastic, paper, and aluminum. As for CR&R’s presence in the world market, they sell aluminum, paper/cardboard, and plastic waste. Almost all (if not all) of CR&R’s recyclables sold on the world market are sold to China.
Assembly Bill 341 mandates a state-wide commercial recycling program in order to reduce greenhouse gas emissions as well as to expand recycling facilities and opportunities in California. CR&R as a result must comply with these requirements. Craig Dibley, a public relations employee of CR&R, spoke of three main types of plastics they deal with: Type I plastics, also known as polyethylene terephthalate (PET), which consists of food containers, plastic bottles, as well as packaging trays among others. Type II plastics, or high-density polyethylene (HDPE), are used to make things like milk jugs, detergent containers, and toys. CR&R also recycles a third category of plastics known as thermoplastic olefins (TPOs) that are used to make heavier items like car bumpers. Although these are not the only types of plastic waste created, these three are the main recyclable plastics CR&R concerns themselves with at their Stanton facility. Dealing with other plastics and waste such as batteries and other electronics requires collaboration with alternative recycle centers and waste management companies. Much of these relationships are dependent on the contracts they form with the city and the contracts each waste management company forms with one another.
At the end of the tour of the CR&R recycling center, Craig helped shed some light on issues that the company faces in regards to gas emissions in landfills. He informed us that most of the methane produced in landfills is due to the surprisingly high percentage of trash that is comprised of food waste; some of the largest contributors to the problem are businesses in the food industry. As much as thirty to forty percent of the waste that CR&R collects from businesses like restaurants is food waste. Craig discussed how organic waste is produced both in the kitchen (during preparation) and in the dining room where customers often leave food.  In order to reduce the amount of methane emitted from landfills, Craig explained how the state of California passed Assembly Bill 1826 to reduce the threshold for the amount of waste needed to require food waste collecting services as of April 1, 2016. Whereas before, the threshold was 8 cubic yards, the bill will now require “organic waste generators” (businesses) that produce more than 4 cubic yards of food waste to comply with the local jurisdiction in waste recollection, as well as make them subject to charges imposed by the jurisdiction for the service. CR&R expects to work with local governments in order to help manage the disposal of food waste in a more efficient manner.
To diminish the startling amount of uncontained methane emitted from landfills, CR&R is in the process of planning for the construction of a biogas plant, or a facility dedicated to a more efficient decomposition of organic waste. The innovative technology at play is a tank called an anaerobic digester. The process begins with the waste being broken down to smaller sized piece and then fed into the tank where it is moved around and mixed with microorganisms that convert the waste into a gas that is on average, by some estimates, sixty percent methane. From there, the gas is then transferred to another system to be purified from unusable components. The biogas is then ready to be used by an engine to produce electricity. The implementation of this technology by CR&R would take the state legislation and elevate the effectiveness by not only taking food waste out of landfills but also by decomposing it in a more environmentally-friendly way.
CR & R is the primary waste management service amongst Southern California residents and businesses. The company gained the rights to service the community after working with local authorities to develop an organized system for trash collection and recycling.  Though we were initially skeptical of CR & R’s effectiveness, our interview with Craig put these qualms aside. Craig maintains, and our visit evinced, that the company upholds high ethical standards. Though the company does make large amounts of profit, it functions on stringent regulations that aim towards environmental friendliness and awareness. These regulations are put into place by the local city council engineer and council, who grant the rights of servicing to a single company. Due to this system of checks and balances, CR&R is made to uphold certain standards.
Though the company has developed an effectively means for trash collection and recycling, the amount of trash collected daily should be a cause for alarm. Despite only servicing around 88,000 households, CR&R requires a large network of trucks and daily shipments to transfer the waste. While our waste management systems are efficient, our lifestyle certainly is not. Southern California is composed of several of the richest neighborhoods in the United States and as a result produces vast amounts of waste. While CR&R does involve itself in community outreach and has limited residents to a particular amount of waste, these measures in themselves are not answers to our environmental concerns. We must take initiative and introduce innovative systems such as plastic pyrolysis.

CR&R Visit

CR&R is a family owned business started in 1963 by Clifford R. Ronnenburg. Today, the company provides service to more than two million customers, of that 88,000 households are in Southern California. They have facilities in places varying from San Juan, CA, to Washington, to Castle Rock, CO. In Southern California the main competitors for CR&R are Waste Management, Republic, and Ware Disposal. CR&R recently beat out Waste Management for the franchise of Lake Forest. When a City is in need of a waste and recycling servicer a city council will put out a Request for Proposal enumerating the requirements to service their city. Companies will than put a bid for the contract. This bid is normally for a franchise which is a contract to service the entire city. A franchise allows for better service and lower rates because they are working with the whole city and a guaranteed to cover their costs. This is contrary to areas in LA where there are multiple companies servicing different residents on the same street. The contracts between the city and waste services usually are for 7-10 years. There are also evergrande contracts where it is 7 years long but each year they add another year so long as they are content with the services. If they are not satisfied with the services they will not add another year and let the contract terminate. After then the city will put our RFP and then the company can bid on it again and may get chosen if they have changed what they did wrong. To process the recyclable produced by their customers CR&R uses Material Recovery Facilities or MRFs.
At the CR&R recycling facility we toured two MRFs where the product is taken and sorted out. The MRF we toured is a ‘Clean MRFs’, as opposed to ‘Dirty MRFs’. The ‘Dirty MRFs’ contain hazardous materials and are completely enclosed; visits are not allowed due to liability reasons. These ‘Clean MRFs’ only deal with recyclable material. This is recyclable material from the recycle carts at homes and the recycle dumpster at businesses brought here for sorting into the different commodities for shipping off into The World Market. The different commodities CR&R deals with are plastic, paper, and aluminum. As for CR&R’s presence in the world market, they sell aluminum, paper/cardboard, and plastic waste. Almost all (if not all) of CR&R’s recyclables sold on the world market are sold to China.
Assembly Bill 341 mandates a state-wide commercial recycling program in order to reduce greenhouse gas emissions as well as to expand recycling facilities and opportunities in California. CR&R as a result must comply with these requirements. Craig Dibley, a public relations employee of CR&R, spoke of three main types of plastics they deal with: Type I plastics, also known as polyethylene terephthalate (PET), which consists of food containers, plastic bottles, as well as packaging trays among others. Type II plastics, or high-density polyethylene (HDPE), are used to make things like milk jugs, detergent containers, and toys. CR&R also recycles a third category of plastics known as thermoplastic olefins (TPOs) that are used to make heavier items like car bumpers. Although these are not the only types of plastic waste created, these three are the main recyclable plastics CR&R concerns themselves with at their Stanton facility. Dealing with other plastics and waste such as batteries and other electronics requires collaboration with alternative recycle centers and waste management companies. Much of these relationships are dependent on the contracts they form with the city and the contracts each waste management company forms with one another.
At the end of the tour of the CR&R recycling center, Craig helped shed some light on issues that the company faces in regards to gas emissions in landfills. He informed us that most of the methane produced in landfills is due to the surprisingly high percentage of trash that is comprised of food waste; some of the largest contributors to the problem are businesses in the food industry. As much as thirty to forty percent of the waste that CR&R collects from businesses like restaurants is food waste. Craig discussed how organic waste is produced both in the kitchen (during preparation) and in the dining room where customers often leave food. In order to reduce the amount of methane emitted from landfills, Craig explained how the state of California passed Assembly Bill 1826 to reduce the threshold for the amount of waste needed to require food waste collecting services as of April 1, 2016. Whereas before, the threshold was 8 cubic yards, the bill will now require “organic waste generators” (businesses) that produce more than 4 cubic yards of food waste to comply with the local jurisdiction in waste recollection, as well as make them subject to charges imposed by the jurisdiction for the service. CR&R expects to work with local governments in order to help manage the disposal of food waste in a more efficient manner.
To diminish the startling amount of uncontained methane emitted from landfills, CR&R is in the process of planning for the construction of a biogas plant, or a facility dedicated to a more efficient decomposition of organic waste. The innovative technology at play is a tank called an anaerobic digester. The process begins with the waste being broken down to smaller sized piece and then fed into the tank where it is moved around and mixed with microorganisms that convert the waste into a gas that is on average, by some estimates, sixty percent methane. From there, the gas is then transferred to another system to be purified from unusable components. The biogas is then ready to be used by an engine to produce electricity. The implementation of this technology by CR&R would take the state legislation and elevate the effectiveness by not only taking food waste out of landfills but also by decomposing it in a more environmentally-friendly way.
CR & R is the primary waste management service amongst Southern California residents and businesses. The company gained the rights to service the community after working with local authorities to develop an organized system for trash collection and recycling. Though we were initially skeptical of CR & R’s effectiveness, our interview with Craig put these qualms aside. Craig maintains, and our visit evinced, that the company upholds high ethical standards. Though the company does make large amounts of profit, it functions on stringent regulations that aim towards environmental friendliness and awareness. These regulations are put into place by the local city council engineer and council, who grant the rights of servicing to a single company. Due to this system of checks and balances, CR&R is made to uphold certain standards.
Though the company has developed an effectively means for trash collection and recycling, the amount of trash collected daily should be a cause for alarm. Despite only servicing around 88,000 households, CR&R requires a large network of trucks and daily shipments to transfer the waste. While our waste management systems are efficient, our lifestyle certainly is not. Southern California is composed of several of the richest neighborhoods in the United States and as a result produces vast amounts of waste. While CR&R does involve itself in community outreach and has limited residents to a particular amount of waste, these measures in themselves are not answers to our environmental concerns. We must take initiative and introduce innovative systems such as plastic pyrolysis.

NPR

With ‘Single-Stream’ Recycling, Convenience Comes At A Cost

In many municipalities around the country, the days of sorting your recyclables for curbside pickup are long gone, replaced by a system called «single stream» recycling. But what happens after all those bits of plastic, paper, glass and metal get put in the bin?

Because it’s often collected by the same workers who pick up the garbage, it’s easy to wonder if the recyclables make their way to the dump, too. But single-stream recycling ends up at a place called a materials recovery facility.

An MRF is part warehouse, part industrial plant; a single facility can process hundreds of tons every day, using workers and high-tech machines.

WHAT IS A MRF?


A material recovery facility or material reclamation facility (MRF) is a specialized plant that receives and separates recyclable materials from a waste stream. The plant configuration for a WTE project starts with a MRF. By removing the material that can be recycled (i.e. metals and glass) along with other inert components (i.e. sand and dirt), the raw municipal solid waste (MSW) is processed into refuse derived fuel (RDF) pellets. Using RDF instead of raw MSW makes our energy projects more efficient because we do not heat up the “extra” inert materials that are only to be rejected with the ash. There are two major types of MRF plants, the Clean MRF and the Dirty MRF.

A Clean MRF accepts commingled recyclable materials that have already been separated at the source from municipal solid waste generated by either residential or commercial sources. There are a variety of clean MRF configurations with the most common being single stream, where all the mixed recyclable material is processed through the same series of separation steps. An alternative configuration is a dual stream MRF, where source-separated recyclables are processed through different steps depending on the type of materials delivered (i.e. metals or plastics). Once the desired recyclable (and inert) materials have been separated, the remaining materials are shredded and densified to use as RDF for our WTE projects.

A Dirty MRF accepts a mixed solid waste stream and then proceeds to separate out designated recyclable materials through a combination of manual and mechanical sorting. The sorted recyclable materials may undergo further processing required to meet technical specifications established by end-markets users, while the balance of the mixed waste stream is shredded and densified and then used as RDF to power our conversion technology.
The Large, The Small, The Clean And The Dirty: Equipping MRFs

Erik E. Colville and Nancy J. McFeron

A materials recovery facility, or MRF, by any other name, would still be either clean or dirty. Of course, sorting recyclables is a dirty business, but the terms «clean» and «dirty» refer to the method of collection while the type of MRF is determined by a community’s needs.

Clean MRFs handle commingled or pre-separated recyclables from curbside collection programs, drop-off sites or satellite recycling centers. Dirty MRFs process recyclables from a stream of raw solid waste and are sometimes used in areas with no curbside programs or in communities that are not interested in recycling. Selecting facility size, configuration and equipment differs greatly for the two basic types of MRFs, and it’s important that the consultant recognizes these differences when designing a MRF.

A small, clean MRF processes less than 50 tons per day of recyclables and a large facility processes 200 to 300 tons per day. A small, dirty MRF processes less than 200 tons per day of mixed municipal solid waste and a large facility processes more than 700 tons per day.

More than 90 percent of the material entering a clean MRF is processed and made ready for sale. A dirty MRF recovers between five and 45 percent of the incoming material as recyclables, then the remainder is landfilled or otherwise disposed. Because the material entering a clean MRF typically weighs 50 to 100 pounds per cubic yard and the material entering a dirty MRF weighs about 350 pounds per cubic yard, MRF designs vary significantly.

To read the rest of this article go to:
http://waste360.com/mag/waste_large_small_clean

Jordan Lindsey Energy for Sustainability, John Randolph/Gilbert Masters

Energy for Sustainability is both thematic in the emphasis on sustainability, which is defined as, “…patterns of economic, environmental, and social progress that meet the needs of the present day without reducing the capacity to meet future needs”(3). This definition is applied to sustainable energy by specifying patterns of energy production and the need for energy with the least economic, environmental, and social costs all the while maintaining the capacity to meet future needs. The book focuses on the current problems with global sustainability in the contexts of energy.
            The book elaborates on the issues with achieving energy sustainability, simplifying it into three major components: oil, carbon, and expanding global demand. Oil still provides 37% of the world’s total energy use, and the Earth’s oil reserves are continuing to be depleted. Fossil fuels provide 86% of our energy and are continuing to increase carbon emissions that change the global climate. The ever-present and expanding global demand is also a major hindrance to global energy sustainability. Some complicating factors listed include society’s slow progress in using alternative energy, it is difficult to bring about change because of social norms, vested interest, etc., and time to prevent detrimental consequences is very short. In order to fix these issues the reading proposes that we improve energy efficiency and reduce demand growth, replace oil with alternative energies with less influence on the economy and environment, and finally to increase carbon-free energy sources such as fossil fuels.   
            Some of the means to achieve these goals are also suggested, “Sustainable energy technologies, including efficient production and use, renewable energy systems, and selected clean and safe fossil fuel and nuclear technologies”(27). The section also emphasizes the need for consumer and community choice for efficient and sustainable technologies, as well as public policies to help develop and exercise sustainable technologies.

            Plastic pyrolysis is a solution with an easily accessible fuel source, as well as the ability to create a more sustainable waste and recycling process. Although plastic pyrolysis will not help with the sustainable issue of carbon emissions, it would be a great help in facilitating sustainable energy technologies.  

Amount of Petroleum used to make plastic products in a year

http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=34&t=6


How much oil is used to make plastic?

In the United States, plastics are not made from crude oil. They are manufactured from petroleum products, which include liquid petroleum gases (LPG) and natural gas liquids (NGL), and natural gas. LPG are by-products of petroleum refining and natural gas processing, and NGL are removed from natural gas before it enters transmission pipelines. These fuels are used as feedstocks to make the plastic and as fuels in the manufacturing process.

In 20101, about 191 million barrels of LPG and NGL were used in the United States to make plastic products in the plastic materials and resins industry, which was equal to about 2.7% of total U.S. petroleum consumption. Of those 191 million barrels, 190 million barrels were used as feedstock and 1 million barrels were consumed as fuel to manufacture these products.

In addition to LPG and NGL, about 412 billion cubic feet (Bcf) of natural gas were used to make plastic materials and resins in 2010. This was equal to about 1.7% of total U.S. natural gas consumption. Of the 412 Bcf of natural gas,13 Bcf were used as feedstock, and 399 Bcf were consumed as fuel to manufacture these products.

In addition to petroleum products and natural gas, about 65 billion kilowatthours of electricity were used to manufacture plastics in 2010, equal to about 1.7% of total U.S. electricity consumption.

EIA does not have data on the quantity of plastic materials and resins produced in the United States or on the origin of all the plastic products used in the United States. EIA does not have similar data for other countries.