COLOMBIA – A bill in the state Senate could pave the way for “advanced recycling” facilities to reach South Carolina, removing some regulations that apply to other garbage handlers.
Supporters say the project would strengthen a still-new plastic smelting industry that could convert waste into something useful. The industry claims that the process, called pyrolysis, is a closed circuit that emits few pollutants.
But environmental advocates and some lawmakers have deep concerns about the legislation. This would eliminate the need for these facilities to have a bail bond that would be used to pay for cleaning in the event of an environmental catastrophe – a requirement for solid waste handlers. It is necessary, they say, in the event that the plastic catches fire in an installation, or the operator is unable to financially support the process and leaves a site.
South Carolina has already waived some of its solid waste rules, particularly in the case of Able Contracting, a company with a facility in Jasper County that handled construction and demolition waste. The site accumulated a pile of garbage so large that it was nicknamed “Mount Trashmore”, which eventually burned and sent toxic smoke hovering over its neighbors. The state had a $ 4.5 million cleaning bill.
This is the kind of scenario that state senator Sandy Senn, R-Charleston, worries about whether these new companies will not be required to pay a bond.
“We have been burned before by industries that we host, and it has always been in rural communities,” said Senn. “We received them there so they can provide jobs, and then we have these terrible incidents and the state is at hand.”
Senn and Senator Thomas McElveen, D-Sumter, contested the bill.
“It is our duty not to rush into anything too quickly,” said McElveen. “We should all be concerned with things like … the quality of the air we breathe and the quality of the water we drink.”
Sponsors of the legislation argue that pyrolysis operators are actually manufacturers because facilities are breaking up plastics to make them something new.
Nine other states have already passed similar laws, according to the plastics industry group American Chemistry Council. The ACC is also employing three lobbyists in South Carolina, according to the SC Ethics Committee.
“It expands in South Carolina’s manufacturing climate,” said Senate majority leader Shane Massey, R-Edgefield. “I understand what (the critics) are saying, but it really is not a question of solid waste.”
Trusting the process
During pyrolysis, the plastics are melted, vaporized in a gas and then distilled into a liquid that can be used to make more plastics, waxes or lubricants. As the process occurs without oxygen, the material does not burn.
There are relatively few facilities across the country doing pyrolysis, but the closest to South Carolina is the Nexus Fuels factory on the outskirts of Atlanta. Nexus says on its website that the process produces “pyrolysis oil” and announced a new deal in early January to send that liquid to plastics maker Chevron Phillips Chemical.
Craig Cookson, ACC’s director of recycling and sustainability, said it is not fair to compare plastic smelters to waste handlers.
Cookson argued that there are protections for the state in the bill, including regular inspections by the SC Department of Environmental Control and a reversal of the rules applied to solid waste companies if a pyrolysis operation does not work with its plastic supply quickly enough.
“Plastics in South Carolina could power four of these facilities,” he said, and potentially improve the state’s plastic recycling rate. About 5% of all recyclables in the state are plastics, according to a 2019 DHEC report.
But environmental advocates such as the Coastal Conservation League and Upstate Forever argue that, as there are relatively few of these facilities in operation, it remains unclear whether a new one in South Carolina would remain financially viable in the long run. The state already has regulations in place for the operation of the pyrolysis facilities, but DHEC has never received an application for an actual license, an agency spokesman said.
Cookson said the process has value, in part, because many companies want recycled material to be part of their packaging. Upstate Forever’s Shelley Robbins was skeptical, especially since the ingredients for virgin plastics are already a by-product of oil processing.
“I don’t trust the economics of the process and I fear that we will be confused in South Carolina,” said Robbins.
Potential commitment
Massey said he is willing to listen to some compromise proposals, such as Senn’s idea to make these recyclers carry a $ 1 million bond.
But he insisted that most of the opposition was about the total elimination of plastic and said he would not be “blackmailed by people who just don’t want to have plastic because I don’t think it is a realistic scenario”.
Senator Dwight Loftis, R-Greenville, is another sponsor of the bill that says it is a worthy goal to recycle more plastic. Knowing the previous cases presented by opponents – at the Able “Mount Trashmore” site or in the thousands of tires accumulated by a separate recycler in Berkeley County – Loftis said he is not yet concerned.
“I understand the examples you gave me, but you are not going to leave this plastic lying around and spreading garbage around the place,” he said. “I can’t conceive of this if (plastic for processing) needs to be a clean product.”
Regarding the concerns of the environmental community, he said: “Chicken Little said the sky was also falling.”
The bill, S. 525, passed the Senate committee, but will not be taken to the floor without a special order because Senn and McElveen challenged it.