Scholarlink

<p>Plastic waste poses a major environmental challenge that calls for effective circular economy strategies. This study presents a comparative techno-economic assessment framework for evaluating a range of recycling technologies—including mechanical, solvent-based, glycolysis, methanolysis, and enzymatic hydrolysis—for commonly used polymers such as polyethylene terephthalate (PET), high-density polyethylene (HDPE), low-density polyethylene (LDPE), and polypropylene (PP) - in a circular economy framework. The techno-economic framework was developed in Microsoft Excel to compare total production cost (TPC), minimum selling price (MSP), and profitability indicators across recycling technologies under standardized assumptions. In addition, sensitivity analysis and worst-case scenario analysis were incorporated to evaluate economic robustness under uncertain operating conditions. The results indicate that mechanical recycling remains the most economically favorable pathway for all investigated polymers due to its relatively low capital and operating requirements. Solvent and enzymatic-based recycling produced higher-purity materials but at substantially higher production costs—approximately 1.91 and 3 times that of mechanical recycling, respectively. Among the chemical recycling routes, glycolysis was identified as the most economically viable option with a production cost 3.26% and 72.32% lower than methanolysis and enzymatic hydrolysis, respectively. Enzymatic hydrolysis exhibited the weakest economic performance because of high enzyme and capital costs. Sensitivity analysis demonstrated that product yield, feedstock bale price, and plant capacity are the dominant economic drivers across all pathways, whereas utility-related parameters exert comparatively smaller effects. Additionally, the worst-case scenario analysis showed that mechanical recycling of PET remains profitable under pessimistic assumptions, which include the highest historical feedstock and electricity prices, alongside the most stringent carbon pricing and regulatory measures. The findings support strategic decision-making for industrial stakeholders and policymakers seeking economically resilient circular economy solutions for plastic waste management.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Comparative Techno-Economic Analysis of Mechanical, Solvent-Based, and Chemical Recycling of Plastics

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2026年7月27日

查看全文
  • Rawa K. Farah,
  • Lama G. Elhassan,
  • Haneen H. Ali,
  • Mustafa A. Mustafa

摘要

Plastic waste poses a major environmental challenge that calls for effective circular economy strategies. This study presents a comparative techno-economic assessment framework for evaluating a range of recycling technologies—including mechanical, solvent-based, glycolysis, methanolysis, and enzymatic hydrolysis—for commonly used polymers such as polyethylene terephthalate (PET), high-density polyethylene (HDPE), low-density polyethylene (LDPE), and polypropylene (PP) - in a circular economy framework. The techno-economic framework was developed in Microsoft Excel to compare total production cost (TPC), minimum selling price (MSP), and profitability indicators across recycling technologies under standardized assumptions. In addition, sensitivity analysis and worst-case scenario analysis were incorporated to evaluate economic robustness under uncertain operating conditions. The results indicate that mechanical recycling remains the most economically favorable pathway for all investigated polymers due to its relatively low capital and operating requirements. Solvent and enzymatic-based recycling produced higher-purity materials but at substantially higher production costs—approximately 1.91 and 3 times that of mechanical recycling, respectively. Among the chemical recycling routes, glycolysis was identified as the most economically viable option with a production cost 3.26% and 72.32% lower than methanolysis and enzymatic hydrolysis, respectively. Enzymatic hydrolysis exhibited the weakest economic performance because of high enzyme and capital costs. Sensitivity analysis demonstrated that product yield, feedstock bale price, and plant capacity are the dominant economic drivers across all pathways, whereas utility-related parameters exert comparatively smaller effects. Additionally, the worst-case scenario analysis showed that mechanical recycling of PET remains profitable under pessimistic assumptions, which include the highest historical feedstock and electricity prices, alongside the most stringent carbon pricing and regulatory measures. The findings support strategic decision-making for industrial stakeholders and policymakers seeking economically resilient circular economy solutions for plastic waste management.