4.7 Article

Closing the loop on plastic packaging materials: What is quality and how does it affect their circularity?

期刊

SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT
卷 630, 期 -, 页码 1394-1400

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.02.330

关键词

Circular economy; Plastic packaging; Recycling; Resource recovery; Technical implications; Waste

资金

  1. UK Natural Environment Research Council (NERC) [NE/L014149/1]
  2. UK Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) [NE/L014149/1]
  3. NERC [NE/L014149/1] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

While attention on the importance of closing materials loops for achieving circular economy (CE) is raging, the technicalities of doing so are often neglected or difficult to overcome. These technicalities determine the ability of materials, components and products (MCPs) to be properly recovered and redistributed for reuse, recycling or recovery, given their remaining functionality, described here as the remaining properties and characteristics of MCPs. The different properties of MCPs make them useful for various functions and purposes. A transition, therefore, towards a CE would require the utmost exploitation of the remaining functionality of MCPs; ideally, enabling recirculation of them back in the economy. At present, this is difficult to succeed. This short communication article explains how the remaining functionality of MCPs, defined here as quality, is perceived at different stages of the supply chain, focusing specifically on plastic packaging, and how this affects their potential recycling. It then outlines the opportunities and constraints posed by some of the interventions that are currently introduced into the plastic packaging system, aimed at improving,- plastic materials circularity. Finally, the article underpins the need for research that integrates systemic thinking, with technological innovations and policy reforms al all stages of the supply chain, to promote sustainable practices become established. (C) 2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据