As delegates prepare to meet in Busan, Korea next week to hammer out a Plastics Treaty to address the global plastic pollution crisis, IPEN and its participating organizations have developed a new briefing and have researched country-based reports that shed light on the hidden, hazardous plastic waste trade – refuse derived fuel.
Refuse derived fuel (RDF) contains as much as 50% plastic waste mixed with combustible household and industrial wastes. The waste is shredded, baled, or pelletised and shipped to cement kilns, incinerators, thermal power plants, and industrial boilers to be burned as cheap fuel. Exports from the UK to Germany, Sweden, and other European countries rose to new levels in 2023 with 1.53 million tons reported.
The Basel Convention regulates the international trade in hazardous waste and was amended in recent years to include mixed plastic waste exports as material requiring special consideration, including subjecting it to the Prior Informed Consent (PIC) procedure for exports of hazardous waste. This ensures that the importing country is aware of the nature of the shipment and can refuse the shipment if necessary. In addition, the recent Basel Ban Amendment prohibits OECD countries from exporting such wastes to non-OECD countries to prevent wealthy countries dumping on developing countries.
However, RDF has escaped these regulatory controls because there is confusion as to whether it constitutes a “waste” or a “fuel product.” To circumvent the Basel Convention regulations and uphold the RDF trade, industry promotes RDF as a product, but IPEN advocates for an objective, scientific approach that classifies RDF as hazardous plastic waste.
Lee Bell, IPEN Technical and Policy Advisor said, “It is time to end the charade around RDF. The science shows that this material is predominantly toxic plastic. It is currently being traded below the radar of customs officials, leaving the door open for wealthy countries to continue dumping their plastic waste on less developed countries. The Basel Convention must make a clear declaration that RDF should be regulated like other hazardous plastic wastes.”
Ten IPEN Participating Organizations in Asia, Africa, Latin America, the Middle East, and Australia recently completed investigations of domestic policies and trade in RDF and in most cases found government policies that promoted domestic RDF manufacture and use, especially in cement kilns. However, RDF was poorly defined in national laws and regulations, making the RDF trade extremely difficult to track due to contradictory definitions, lack of traceable import/export codes, and trade volumes ‘hidden’ within other classifications that obscure the true extent of the RDF business.
The single exception was Australia which has declared on its Federal Regulatory website that any export of RDF (known in Australia as Process Engineered Fuel) requires a Hazardous Waste Export Permit, due to its mixed plastic waste content. The regulation also confirms that the Y48 classification (waste requiring special consideration) under the Basel Convention must apply, triggering full PIC procedures for export.
In many countries where IPEN projects were conducted, RDF use is being aggressively promoted by government, heavy industry, and even supported by the United Nations Development Programme as a fossil fuels alternative that “reduces carbon emissions.” But science shows this claim is baseless. To make this dubious claim, industry relies on discounting the carbon emissions from the paper, cardboard, and timber fractions of RDF, which they claim are ‘renewable’ energy sources. This creative carbon accounting has long been debunked, because the climate makes no distinction between fossil fuel carbon and RDF carbon emissions.
Bell said, “The irony of this baseless position should not be lost on Plastics Treaty negotiators or Basel Convention delegates. Plastic is almost entirely composed from fossil fuels and petrochemicals. This means that burning RDF, which is up to 50% plastic, does not lower carbon emissions.”
The IPEN RDF projects show that most countries investigated are ramping up their RDF production infrastructure domestically to supply local smokestack industries and to make waste management problems “disappear,” especially for plastic waste that is not recycled.
There is a better solution: some cement kilns are already successfully using green hydrogen for their energy needs. IPEN supports this and other innovations to resolve the plastics crisis, not dirty, unsustainable options like RDF.
Bell said, “The trend is clear: mass conversion of plastic waste to RDF is taking place across the world and the international trade in RDF will grow unhindered unless the Plastics Treaty and the Basel Convention make clear that RDF is hazardous plastic waste that requires a hazardous waste export permit. Burning plastic waste as fuel is unsustainable, polluting, and entirely linear. It has no part in a circular economy and must be phased out.”
Toxic Free Australia’s new report on RDF – An Australian situational report – can be found here – ipen_tfa_rdf_report_final_draft_jb_lb_final1718
The full media release and country reports can be found here – https://stoppoisonplastic.org/blog/portfolio/refuse-derived-fuel-country-based-reports-2024/
