How can we shift to the circular economy?

Last month, many Europeans (and those of us in the field of
sustainability) were in an uproar over the withdrawal of a popular
waste reduction proposal from the European Commission’s 2015
work program. The proposed plan would have established new
recycling standards across the EU, pressuring all member-states
to divert all recyclables from landfills by 2025 and hit a 70
percent solid waste recovery rate by 2030. Dubbed the “circular
economy” package, it could have been one of the first
substantial systematic shifts by a government entity to end
waste generation and improve a huge region’s recycling
infrastructure.
News of the plan’s withdrawal is certainly disappointing, but the
media frenzy roused by this announcement gives us the
opportunity to revisit a concept that was once familiar only to the
most ardent environmentalists and sustainability experts (and
evidently members of the European Parliament) — the circular
economy. It’s a concept that’s slowly been receiving more
attention as of late, but most consumers still seem to be
unaware of what it is or its significance.
What is the circular economy exactly, and why should we be
trying to make the transition?
What is the circular economy?
While the origins of the term “circular economy” aren’t entirely
clear, Swiss architect Walter Stahel is often credited as being a
forefather of the concept. In the 1970s, he coined the idea of a
“cradle-to-cradle” production structure — simply put, a
framework of industry where inputs and outputs of production
are valued as raw materials that can be cyclically reused. In this
cyclical model, manufacturing waste is valued as a nutrient to
production, not a useless output with a negative value.
Stahel’s idea was a reaction to the “cradle-to-grave” production
and consumption model that still dominates, which predestines
the vast majority of products and resources to landfills and
incinerators.
In the linear model, materials are extracted from the
environment, processed, and refined, then turned into consumer
products that are inevitably disposed of in a landfill or
incinerator. This ultimate form of disposal completely abandons
the energy spent extracting raw materials and manufacturing
products, while simultaneously wasting the refined outputs of the
manufacturing process (for example, producing a highly refined
plastic only to have it wasted in a landfill). The result is a
consumer products industry focused on cheap, endlessly
replaceable products, and a dwindling supply of finite resources.
A circular system rejects the linear model outright, favoring
quality products and materials that can be reused rather than
thrown away. Useless outputs are eradicated, as products would
be designed with the intention of being reused in the supply
chain and refurbished again for consumer use. Cradle-to-cradle
production is just a component of the circular economy, the
ultimate goal of which is for products themselves to be reused
cyclically. Companies would be responsible for reacquiring post-
consumer products, refurbishing them for reuse so no waste is
generated and the high-quality materials in the product are
maintained. The biggest advantage is that this model
systematically eliminates waste altogether — post-consumer and
production waste alike.
A sense of urgency, and barriers to entry
The need for such a circular system is more urgent than it might
seem. We have a limited bank account of raw materials on this
planet, and around the world we’ll be seeing the rise of close to 3
billion additional product-hungry middle-class individuals within
the next 15 years. By the middle of the twenty-first century, there
will be 9 billion people on the planet.
Without any serious systemic changes, we can’t hope to
maintain enough supply to meet that kind of demand.
Besides, we don’t even recycle what would be necessary to start
seriously offsetting virgin material dependencies. The U.S.
recovers about 35 percent of solid waste generated annually.
China’s rate hovers around there as well. Some European
countries have recovery rates of around 50 or 60 percent
(Austria, Germany, Switzerland, the Netherlands), while others
are in the single digits. Many developing regions, especially in
parts of South America and Africa, don’t even have a recycling
infrastructure to speak of. Making more circular practices
feasible starts with collecting the recyclable material we are
already generating.
Consumerism and socially ingrained materialism have also been
roadblocks to progress, prompting many consumers to develop
incredibly wasteful attitudes towards products and otherwise
useful materials. The average American, for instance, throws
away more than 60 pounds of clothes each year, most of which
is not recycled. Products like plastic utensils are even
manufactured with disposal as one of its functions. Incredibly
cheap products can just be replaced, after all, so there is no real
incentive for most consumers to change their habits.
The future of the circular economy
The benefits of circular production models and circular solutions
to waste are far too attractive to ignore. Manufacturers would
benefit from greater supply chain security, as they would have
direct control over their raw material inputs and outputs.
Unsustainable raw materials like fossil fuels would be
abandoned in favor of renewable ones. With a system in place to
properly collect and reprocess a company’s pre- and post-
consumer waste, manufacturing costs could also plummet, the
savings from which would then be passed on to consumers.
Manufacturers would be more mindful the quality of a product as
it will ultimately end up being remanufactured or refurbished,
favoring the use of highly refined materials with fewer toxins and
greater durability. It’s a win for consumers, producers, and the
environment.
Still, all of this wishful thinking begs the question, how do we
make a circular economy viable? First, we need to seriously
reduce our levels of consumption and our demand for disposable
products. Nondurable plastics are one of the biggest concerns — 
the 5 trillion pieces of plastic floating in all of the earth’s oceans
should be example enough of that. Lowering demand for
disposables in favor of durable alternatives could drastically
increase the average lifespan of our products and strength the
durable product market.
We also need to begin improving our current recycling
infrastructure and developing new circular strategies for waste.
One way to facilitate this is through government action; extended
producer responsibility legislation, landfill taxes, and state-
funded waste management programs are all viable ways to
incentivize alternatives to absolute disposal in landfills and
incinerators. This could empower and bring jobs to the recycling
sector and lead to greater innovation in the industry as a whole.
Circular solutions to waste are also critically important, no
matter how limited they may initially be. As an example, my
company, TerraCycle, can develop recycling programs for post-
consumer waste not typically accepted by municipal recycling
programs. In our partnership with 3M, for instance, old tape
dispensers and related waste (tape cores, packaging, etc.) are
collected and sent back to 3M for reprocessing into new
products. It starts with the consumers, who join the recycling
program for free and start collecting their tape dispenser waste
and packaging at home. Once they have accumulated enough
waste, they ship it for repurposing. The program is sponsored by
3M, so shipping is even free for consumers. It’s a small-scale
strategy for the time being but shows that there is indeed a
method and incentive for companies to start closing the loop.
There are other examples today that show we’re taking steps in
the right direction. Renault, the French car manufacturer, already
refurbishes and reuses car parts like engines and gearboxes.
Most electronics manufacturers already offer take-back
programs for their devices, which usually contain valuable
metals and electrical components. In San Jose, California,
anaerobic digesters are turning the organic waste from local
businesses into a form of renewable energy. Imagine if every
business had the opportunity to turn their organic waste in
energy.
The examples above are relatively small and limited in scope,
but they show where the cracks in the current linear system are
starting to show. And if the failed EU circular economy package
has anything positive to tell us, it’s that political and industrial
actors are finally starting to take note of the urgency that we are
(and have been) facing on this planet.