The collapse of REDcycle, once a beacon of hope in Australia’s battle against plastic waste, was nothing short of a scandal.
Launched as the nation’s premier return-to-store soft plastics recovery program, REDcycle promised a future where our shopping bags and snack wrappers would be reincarnated into durable recycled products.
Spinifex is an opinion column. If you would like to contribute, contact us to ask for a detailed brief.
But in November 2022, this dream was shattered when REDcycle announced it could no longer process the mountains of plastic it had collected.
The program buckled under supply chain inefficiencies, stockpile mismanagement, and dwindling public trust, leaving Coles and Woolworths scrambling to suspend their in-store collections and consumers disillusioned.
Initiatives from the Soft Plastics Taskforce
From the ashes of the REDcycle collapse, initiatives have emerged to tackle the systemic flaws that led to its downfall. The Australian Food and Grocery Council is spearheading a National Plastics Recycling Scheme, but it’s the Soft Plastics Taskforce that’s stealing the spotlight.
This ambitious initiative, chaired by the Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water (DCCEEW) and with heavyweights like Coles, Woolworths, and ALDI on board, is focused on developing new processing facilities, piloting innovative in-store collection programs, and managing the notorious stockpiles left behind.
Since its formation in November 2022, the Taskforce has made some headway. It has relocated about 11,000 tonnes of previously stockpiled soft plastics to government approved facilities in five states, including New South Wales and Victoria.
The processing of the materials in New South Wales and Victoria is expected to be completed by late 2024 or mid-2025, while processing facilities are being developed in the other states.
In February 2024, the Taskforce launched a pilot program for in-store soft plastics collection in 12 Melbourne stores, demonstrating promising results.
Initial figures show that the pilot collected 3.058 tonnes of soft plastics from participating stores as of March 2024.
The taskforce has also been instrumental in facilitating the construction of new facilities with enhanced capacities to sort and process mixed soft plastics.
These activities prove that a scalable solution is within our grasp but also reveal the untapped potential of consumer participation and the immense operational muscle required for a nationwide rollout.
With the existing authorisation for the taskforce set to expire on 22 July 2024, Coles applied for a new Authorisation on 24 June to extend the program until July 2025. The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission is currently assessing this application.
This move acknowledges that the initial deadline was overly ambitious, given the complexities involved.
The extension aims to iron out the remaining issues, such as refining processing methods, expanding the geographical scope of collection programs and finalising the establishment of a Producer Responsibility Organisation). This will aim to implement a voluntary, not-for-profit product stewardship scheme for soft plastics across the industry.
The question now is whether this extension will be the lifeline the program needs to rebuild public trust and solve the soft plastics challenge or merely delay another impending disaster.
Why the soft plastics challenge is so hard
The need for an extended timeline in the taskforce’s activities points to the significant challenges that the industry faces in developing scalable solutions for soft plastics.
A recent DCCEEW communique expressed concern over the “slow progress” in resuming soft plastics collection after the collapse of REDcycle. This slow pace demonstrates the inherent difficulties in recycling soft plastics, which have historically hindered the development of local markets for these materials.
Plastics degrade when recycled, limiting their use to low-grade applications such as additives for asphalt roads or material for park benches.
However, soft plastics, in particular, present significant challenges due to their multi-layered composition and blend of different materials and polymers, making recycling more complicated—this complexity, combined with degradation, results in recovered soft plastics having very little economic value. Consequently, only a few recycling companies are willing to take on the risk of processing them.
At its peak, REDcycle collected, equating to an average of 625 tonnes per month, or 156 a week. By contrast, the taskforce’s Melbourne trial collects around a tonne weekly, and it has cautioned consumers not to overwhelm the trial with backlogged soft plastics, as this would strain its two recycling partners, Close the Loop and CDRC.
This clearly illustrates that Australia’s soft plastics recycling capacity remains woefully inadequate for a national scheme anytime soon—a fact that REDcycle realised too late.
Moreover, the taskforce’s timeline for recycling all 11,000 tonnes of stockpiled soft plastics depends entirely on the expansion of Australia’s recycling capacity—a factor that remains uncertain for many states.
The Australian Packaging Covenant Organisation admits that Australia will significantly miss its 2025 target of recycling or composting 70 per cent of plastic packaging, highlighting our recycling challenges.
The taskforce’s “Roadmap to Restart” envisions expanding Australia’s soft plastics recycling capacity to 15,000 tonnes annually over the next few years.
While this would be a significant increase—more than four times the capacity of REDcycle’s three major recycling partners, which collectively recycled an estimated 3200 tonnes per year—it remains unclear whether this boost in capacity is feasible in the short term. This amount would only represent less than 3 per cent of Australia’s annual soft plastics packaging waste even if achieved!
All these factors indicate that we are far from effectively solving Australia’s soft plastics problem. If it fails in its mission, the taskforce risks repeating past mistakes, such as the REDcycle collapse.
The stakes are higher than ever, and with the eyes of the nation watching, the taskforce must navigate this treacherous path with unparalleled precision and innovation. Will Coles and Co rise to the occasion, or will history repeat itself? The answer lies in their ability to learn from past mistakes and adopt stronger governance mechanisms.
We need stronger governance mechanisms for soft plastics
Dealing with the intricate challenges of soft plastics in Australia extends beyond the efforts of the taskforce. It demands stronger governance and collaborative actions from the government, the industry, and other stakeholders.
In June 2024, Australia’s environmental ministers took a significant step by committing to develop a circular economy roadmap for soft plastics. The government has also reaffirmed its plan to develop a new national packaging regulatory scheme to establish recyclability and recycled content requirements.
Our recently published paper examined the critical elements necessary for effective soft plastics waste governance, which must be a cornerstone of this new direction.
One is the implementation of mandatory packaging design standards, particularly the use of single polymers. This approach would simplify the recycling process and significantly enhance the quality of recycled materials. When manufacturers are required to use single polymer materials, contamination is reduced, and the efficiency of recycling operations is increased.
In the meantime, it is crucial to drive market demand for recycled soft plastics.. Government and corporate procurement policies prioritising recycled products can create a steady demand. Extended producer responsibility policies, which hold producers accountable for the entire lifecycle of their products, incentivise manufacturers to incorporate more recycled content into their packaging. This dual approach can help build a sustainable market for recycled soft plastics, ensuring that economic incentives align with environmental goals.
Lastly, developing laws and policies with specific supply chain requirements is essential for substantial progress. For example, mandating that products contain a minimum of 70 per cent recycled soft plastics can significantly change manufacturing practices.
Where this is impossible, alternative packaging solutions should be explored. Such regulations would support the recycling industry and encourage product design and materials science innovation. Policymakers must set clear and ambitious targets to align all stakeholders towards creating a circular economy for soft plastics.
There is still hope in the struggle
Australia’s soft plastics recycling saga is a tale of redemption and resilience, marred by setbacks but propelled by determined efforts to overcome them. As the industry grapples with the remnants of REDcycle’s collapse, the taskforce’s activities signal a promising path forward.
Only time will tell whether the taskforce will mark the turning point towards a resilient and diversified local market for soft plastics recycling or merely delay another impending disaster. Nevertheless, one thing remains clear—Australia’s battle against plastic waste continues, and the stakes have never been higher.
Olamide and Kate lead the Plastics and Packaging Research Stream of the Circular Economy Research Network Asia-Pacific (CERN-APac).
