The location factors for plastic to oil companies
A new circular opportunity for Dutch seaports
By Nizette Couzy
Master Thesis
2015
Erasmus school of Economics
Msc Urban, Port and Transport Economics
Student number: 335967
University Supervisor: Dhr. Michiel Nijdam
Company Supervisor: Dhr. Coen Peelen
Preface
When I was starting my thesis the only certainty was that my master thesis would be about a
port related subject. I was able to do a research for the department Seaports from Maritime
Affairs from the Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment. They provided me with the
opportunity to influence the research topic. After many interviews and a brainstorm session the
subject became the circular ability of plastic to oil. This subject triggered my mind, because it
was practical, much to learn and challenging.
1
Abstract
This research is done for the department of Maritime Affairs form the Ministry of Infrastructure
and the Environment. In this research the location factors for worldwide plastic to oil companies
are gathered and compared with the location factors needed for the Dutch plastic to oil
companies. The Dutch location factors contribute to find and explain possible locations for Dutch
plastic to oil companies.
From the theory a list with possible location factors is created. Those 14 location factors are
tested with worldwide plastic to oil companies, from the US, Europe, and Japan. The location
factors are classified in three different categories: necessary, conducive and negligible. The
necessary location factors are highway distance, to locate on a business park, the availability of
feedstock, and the availability of a sales market.
Interviews are held with four different Dutch plastic to oil companies to investigate the location
factors for Dutch plastic to oil companies. From the interviews a list with location factors for
Dutch plastic to oil companies is created. The same classification is used for the location factors:
necessary, conducive and negligible. The necessary location factors for Dutch plastic to oil
companies are highway distance, port distance, to locate on a business park, the availability of
feedstock, certified demand, the availability of a sales market, and the willingness of a seaport.
Three of the location factors are not necessary according to the worldwide plastic to oil
companies, namely port distance, certified demand and willingness of a seaport. Most of the
Dutch plastic to oil companies wants to establish in a seaport. The largest seaports are compared
for the availability of the necessary location factors for Dutch plastic to oil companies. The
results show that Dutch seaports can provide all the necessary location factors. This difference
between the location factors of Dutch and worldwide plastic to oil companies can be explained
by the importance from seaports for the Dutch economy. At the same time the seaports are
investing in new circular technologies and therefore a great willingness to attract plastic to oil
companies to their port can be explained.
Besides the location factors, other factors influence the Dutch plastic to oil companies. An
uneven level playing field between waste-to-energy and plastic to oil makes it more difficult to
close the business case for Dutch plastic to oil companies. Dutch government policy can create
an extra step on the Ladder of Lansink and so plastic to oil is seen as feedstock recycling.
Although many Dutch governmental policies are based on recycling, circular economy, green
growth and use waste as a resource, plastic to oil is not mentioned in those policies. Pyrolysis is
only mentioned by MIA and Vamil that are fiscal arrangements. To achieve the recycling targets
sets by the EU and the Dutch government other ways of the waste collection methods need to be
investigated, because they could contribute in the willingness of separate waste in households.
2
Table of Content
1.
Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 5
1.1 Problem introduction .................................................................................................................... 5
1.2 Research questions........................................................................................................................ 7
1.3 Research strategy .......................................................................................................................... 7
1.4 Research structure ........................................................................................................................ 8
1.5 Relevance ...................................................................................................................................... 8
2.
Theory Framework ........................................................................................................................ 10
2.1 Circular economy......................................................................................................................... 10
2.1.1 The change towards a circular economy .............................................................................. 10
2.1.2 Circular economy .................................................................................................................. 11
2.2 Circular economy in the Netherlands.......................................................................................... 12
2.3 Circular economy in Dutch seaports ........................................................................................... 14
2.3.1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 14
2.3.2 The current situation in Dutch seaports............................................................................... 15
2.3.3 Threats and opportunities in Dutch seaports....................................................................... 16
2.3.4 Port vision on circular economy ........................................................................................... 17
2.4 Plastic to oil versus waste-to-energy........................................................................................... 18
2.4.1 Options for non-recyclable waste plastics ........................................................................... 18
2.4.2 Plastic to oil versus waste to energy .................................................................................... 18
2.4.3 Expanding the plastic loop ................................................................................................... 20
2.4.4 Opportunities plastic to oil ................................................................................................... 20
2.5 Location factors for chemical industry ........................................................................................ 21
2.6 Comparative advantages ............................................................................................................. 24
3.
Research methodology .................................................................................................................. 27
3.1 Research context ......................................................................................................................... 27
3.2 Research method ........................................................................................................................ 27
3.3 Research material ........................................................................................................................ 28
4.
Location factors ............................................................................................................................. 30
4.1 Worldwide plastic to oil locations ............................................................................................... 30
4.1.1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 30
4.1.2 Worldwide plastic to oil companies ..................................................................................... 30
4.2 Location factors per country ....................................................................................................... 32
4.2.1 Chosen location factors ........................................................................................................ 32
3
4.2.2 Plastic to oil companies per country .................................................................................... 33
4.3 Location factors plastic to oil companies worldwide .................................................................. 36
4.4 Location factors Dutch plastic to oil companies.......................................................................... 43
4.4.1 Dutch Plastic to oil companies ............................................................................................. 43
4.4.2 Conclusion from the four Dutch plastic to oil companies .................................................... 45
4.5 Available location factors Dutch seaports ................................................................................... 47
4.6 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................... 49
5.
Other factors influencing plastic to oil companies ........................................................................ 51
5.1 Other factors influencing plastic to oil companies ...................................................................... 51
5.2 Government policies ................................................................................................................... 51
6.
Conclusion and discussion ............................................................................................................. 54
6.1 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................... 54
6.2 Discussion .................................................................................................................................... 56
7.
Recommendations......................................................................................................................... 57
8.
References ..................................................................................................................................... 58
Appendix 1 - Interviews ......................................................................................................................... 63
Appendix 2 – Total list plastic to oil companies .................................................................................... 64
Appendix 3 – List with plastic to oil companies left out of the research .............................................. 66
Table 3.1: Plastic to oil companies technique only ........................................................................... 66
Table 3.2: Plastic to oil companies without location of the factory .................................................. 66
Table 3.3: Plastic to oil companies left out although in ACC list (Holmes, 2011).............................. 67
Appendix 4 – Location Factors worldwide pto companies ................................................................... 68
Appendix 5 – Location Factors Dutch plastic to oil companies ............................................................. 75
Appendix 6 - Plastic to oil figures United States and Europe ................................................................ 77
Figure 6.1: Plastic to oil location United States ................................................................................ 77
Figure 6.2: Plastic to oil location Europe .......................................................................................... 77
Appendix 7 - Standard question form Dutch Plastic to oil companies .................................................. 78
4
1.
Introduction
1.1 Problem introduction
1.1.1 Introduction
The world population is still growing and therefore, our consumption is still increasing
according to the Planbureau voor de Leefomgeving (PBL) (PBL, 2011; Kok, Wurpel & Ten Wolde,
2013). The welfare of a large part of the people, the middle class, is also increasing, as stated by
the Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment (I&M) (I&M, 2013a). This is leading again to
increasing consumption. Up until now, this increasing consumption was not a huge problem,
because production was relatively easy to increase (Ellen MacArthur Foundation [EMF], 2013).
Waste was not seen as a real problem. However that changed, because a growing number of
countries has limited land available for landfill, and the pollution and the environmental risks
appeared to be damaging. Nowadays, resource scarcity (Kok et al., 2013) is one of the new
problems arising in the production sector (PBL, 2011). The reasons are that prices are
increasing and raw materials are getting more scarce. Because of the scarcity and environmental
problems there should be a decoupling between economic activity and the environmental
impact. The way countries are retrieving their welfare should change (United Nations
Environment Programme, 2011). Recycling, green alternatives, and generating a more circular
economy can contribute to this decoupling. Putting the incentive to industry, will contribute in
creating a more professional recycling industry, this is seen as the solution (Bakker, Dimaio &
Rem, 2013).
The linear economy, also called the take-make-waste (Kok et al., 2013; I&M, 2013a) or takemake-dispose (Ellen MacArthur Foundation [EMF], 2012) economy, existed for many decades.
However, recently it is on its return. Raw materials are getting scarce, and in many countries, the
waste landfill is piling. In 1979, Lansink made his preference for a waste management model ‘de
Ladder van Lansink’ (Bergsma, Vroonhof, Blom & Odegard, 2014). This was an important insight
in the waste sector. This waste management model is also important if the entire economy
wants to be more sustainable. According to the EMF (2012), the trend is to change from this
linear economy to a more circular economy, which includes a bio cycle for biomass and techno
cycle for inorganic materials (EMF, 2012; Kok et al. 2013). Therefore, reforming the entire
supply chain to create a loop with as little waste as possible (EMF, 2013), and with limited
material destruction (Bastein, Roelofs, Rietveld & Hoogendoorn, 2013). Other possibilities to
create more closed loops are re-use, recycle, and repair materials and products (Kok et al.,
2013). Another circular step is to see what the possibilities are with the waste coming from
every step in a supply chain. This waste can be an input for other companies, to avoid landfill. Of
course, this is the ideal situation and it takes many small, but important, steps to get the closed
loop.
The European Union (EU) is supporting green programs for more resource efficiency (European
Commission, 2011). The EU countries base their own programs and legislation on the EU
legislation. The European Commission (2014) will turn Europe in a more circular economy and
boost recycling. Therefore, sustainability is an important subject in the Netherlands. The Dutch
government has legislation for separated waste collection in households and companies. Large
quantities of paper, glass, biodegradable waste, electrical devises, and plastics are collected
separately (Hanemaaijer, Rood & Kruitwagen, 2014). The paper and glass industry has high
recycling rates and cooperating companies changed the supply chains many years ago, to do so.
1.1.2 Plastics
Plastic consumption is still increasing (Panda, Singh & Mishra, 2010) and the lifetime expectancy
of plastic is less than a month for 37.2% of the plastics in Europe and 35% of the plastics
worldwide (Al-Salem et al., 2009; Panda et al., 2010). Therefore, recycling those plastics will
have a positive impact on the material scarcity and the environment. Reusing plastics has
5
numerous advantages, namely, conservation of fossil fuels, reduction of energy, reduction of
carbon-dioxide (CO2), reduction of other greenhouse gasses like nitrogen-oxides (NOx) and
sulphar-dioxide (SO2) (Al-Salem et al., 2009).
At this moment, only a part of this plastic waste is recyclable. This has multiple reasons, some
are contaminated, or the condition of the plastics makes it nearly impossible to recycle (Holmes,
2011). For some plastics, it is technically not possible to recycle them or it is not cost efficient to
do so (Panda et al., 2010). Those non-recyclable plastics end up like waste on landfill locations
(Panda et al., 2010) or they are burned in waste-to-energy installations.
There are four different categories of plastics. The first group is the thermoset plastic that are
non-recyclable, examples are powder coatings, repair resins, and insulating foams. The second
group contains of elastomers and foam, which are partly recyclable, examples are expanded
foams for building and furniture. The last two categories, the thermoplastics are roughly 80% of
the total plastic consumption (Al-Salem et al., 2009). The third group is the single-polymer
plastics, which can be divided in thermoplastics with a density bigger than water, examples are
cups, pipes, plastic bottles, compact disc covers and food storage containers. The last group is
the plastic with a density lower than water; examples are yoghurt containers, syrup bottles,
supermarket bags and six pack rings. Both of the thermoplastics are completely recyclable
(Panda et al., 2010).
The last few years, the recycling of plastic is growing and the supply chain is still under
reconstruction. Pointed out by Bergsma et al. (2014) is that the preferred option is to recycle as
much plastics as possible. He points out that in the ‘Ladder of Lansink’ it is preferable to use the
highest step possible or available on the ladder (Bergsma et al., 2014). A possible solution would
be to make oil out of the plastic waste. This means that the plastics can be re-used instead of
burned, which is expected to be a better alternative (Panda et al., 2010). About 25% of the
plastics are recycled in the Netherlands. Calculations of a recycling specialist from the TU Delft1
showed that 900-mega kilo of plastics are burned in the waste-to-energy installations on this
moment. The expectation of this is that 400-mega kilo of plastics is capable for pyrolysis.
Therefore, adding pyrolysis will create an extra step in the plastic loop.
1.1.3 Plastic to oil
Plastic to oil, also called pyrolysis, is the process where non-recyclable plastic waste is cracked
into oil. As pointed out by Panda et al. (2010), the plastic to oil process is “the controlled burning
or heating of a material in the absence of oxygen”. The high quality of this oil makes it useful for
multiple purposes. The oil is useful as shipping oil, car fuel or fuel for other machinery. In the
future, it seems possible to re-use the oil to make new plastics.
The feedstock used in plastic to oil factories can be a mixture of plastics. After sorting and
cleaning this mixture of plastics, it is ready for the pyrolysis process. Nowadays there is
technology available for the full automatic sorting process of plastic waste. By using various
techniques, like x-ray fluorescence, spectroscopy, flotation, electrostatics, and infrared, the
sorting process is automated (Panda et al., 2010). This sorting can be necessary to obtain a high
quality of the oil. This is because the mixture of plastics is not contaminated and some plastics
can only be used in smaller percentages. For example, only small percentages of PVC are aloud.
Although this plastic to oil technique exists for decades, commercial companies use it since the
last 15 years. More and more worldwide companies are unfolding factories. Internationally
those companies seem viable, so therefore it could be an opportunity for Dutch companies as
well. A research to the quantity and size of the plastic waste flows will be further investigated to
gain more knowledge about the recycling, waste-to-energy and disposed plastics flows (I&M,
2014e).
1
Interview with recycling and resources professor at the TU Delft, interviewed at the 3 rd of October 2014.
6
1.1.4 Location
The possible location of a plastic to oil installation is not a random point in space, but a wellmade choice. Different locations in the Netherlands can be preferred to build a plastic to oil
installation. A plastic to oil company is a chemical company and chemical companies tend to
cluster (Porter, 2000). In the Netherlands, there are five chemical clusters. Three of those
clusters are located in Dutch seaports. A location in a port with a chemical cluster could have
advantages over other locations, like good infrastructure for facilitating large flows of materials,
the availability of plastics and knowledge spillovers (Roelandt. Hertog, Sinderen & Hove, 1999).
However, we have little knowledge what the best location in the Netherlands would be to build a
plastic to oil installation. It seems possible that a chemical cluster will be favored over other
locations, because plastic to oil is a chemical process. This is because those clusters provide
advantages for all the companies in the cluster.
In this research, the possible location factors that influence the location decision for a plastic to
oil factory are combined with the available location factors of Dutch seaports with chemical
clusters. Besides the location factors, other more general factors could also influence the
founding of Dutch plastic to oil companies and therefore they are included as well.
1.2 Research questions
In this paragraph, the research questions are explained which are used for this research. The
main question of this research is:
Which location factors are stimulating or obstructing the founding of plastic to oil companies in
Dutch seaports?
In order to answer the main question, this research is composed of a theoretical framework and
empirical research answering several sub-questions. The theoretical framework will discuss the
definition of a circular economy, the circular economy in the Netherlands, in Dutch seaports and
the advantage of plastic to oil over waste-to-energy. Subsequently, some basic models for
location theories are discussed. This is discussed in chapter two.
To answer the main question from this research, the following sub questions have been
identified:



To what extent is the technique of plastic to oil developed and desired?
Which location factors are conducive or necessary for plastic to oil companies and are
they present in Dutch seaports?
What kind of governmental policies are conducive or obstructive to the founding of
plastic to oil companies in the Netherlands?
1.3 Research strategy
In this research, multiple research methods are used to answer the main and sub questions. A
desk research is combined with multiple interviews. First, in scientific journals, background
information about plastic to oil and the pyrolysis technique is gathered, to gain more knowledge
of the subject. Then, additional interviews within government research institutes2 and the
Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment (I&M) are done to establish the research
problem.
To write the theoretical framework, more information about the circular economy in general,
previous researches done by government institutes, and researches done by independent Dutch
Interview with a researcher of the Climate change, Energy and Environment department at CPB
Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis, interviewed at the 6th of June 2014.
2
7
institutes are combined with an interview with a policy advisor3. In the literature some basic
location factor models will be discussed and further location factors will be found by searching
for previous research to the location factors of chemical industry.
The core from the empirical research is a desk research combined with multiple interviews with
Dutch starting plastic to oil companies, experts on plastic to oil and recycling, combined with
information about worldwide plastic to oil companies. A data-triangulation is applied to ensure a
validity of the outcomes of this research.
The next step starts with a continuous search in scientific journals to location factors for plastic
to oil and general chemical industry. This can be combined with the available location factors in
Dutch seaports.
Another desk research to previous governmental policies will be executed to compare possible
obstructive policies with the needed location factors for founding plastic to oil companies in the
Netherlands.
1.4 Research structure
The first chapter gives a brief introduction, explains the research problem, and identifies the
main question and the sub questions of this research. The scientific relevance and research
structure are discussed as well. In the second chapter the theoretical framework is explained to
identify the importance of the change into a more circular economy. In the last few years, this
change is started to get visible in the Netherlands and in the Dutch seaports as well. Additionally,
the location factors from prior researches are identified and previous research about plastic to
oil is discussed as well. In the third chapter the research methodology is presented.
The first part of the empirical research, chapter four, identifies what location factors are
conducive or necessary for plastic to oil companies and if those location factors are available in
Dutch seaports. In chapter five, the government policies which contribute and could be
conducive or obstructive for the founding of plastic to oil companies are identified.
In chapter six the conclusions of the sub questions is stated and contributes to answer the main
question of this research, so what factors are stimulating or obstructing the founding of plastic
to oil companies in Dutch seaports. Chapter seven is the last chapter and concludes with the
desired location factors and recommendations for the Ministry of Infrastructure and the
Environment.
1.5 Relevance
More and more research is available from institutes and companies about plastic to oil and the
circular economy. The reason for this is the growing interest from companies and governments.
Companies have two reasons why their interests in a circular economy have developed quickly
in the last decade. First, higher costs of raw materials have a huge impact on future strategies,
and second, from an environmental perspective. The main point of multiple international
organizations like the EMF and the Plastic Soup foundation are to stimulate green alternatives,
the circular economy and to tackle the plastic waste problems.
In the Netherlands, many researches by PBL, Raad voor de Leefomgeving en Infrastructuur
(RLI), TNO, and the Circularity Center are done. These researches provide knowledge in creating
a more circular economy, and how it can influence the Netherlands in the future. Those Dutch
research institutes are in favor of a more circular economy, and plastic to oil seems to be a great
Interview with a policy advisor at the directorate Sustainability, about the circular economy, interviewed
at the 16th of May 2014.
3
8
opportunity. Up until now, there is not a working plastic to oil installation in the Netherlands.
Apparently, there are still issues and bottlenecks unsolved. Therefore, the Ministry of
Infrastructure and the Environment is supporting this research to discover the bottlenecks. For
example, none of those researches considers a location choice, which is a shortfall in the
scientific literature. Therefore the scientifically relevance is stated.
Besides a scientific relevance, there is a social relevance. Multiple companies are working on the
establishment of a plastic to oil factory. In the Netherlands, it seems that seven companies are
interested in plastic to oil. All those companies could have the same bottlenecks or different
ones. Therefore, a research can provide insights to this bottlenecks and the location choice of
those companies.
For the government, companies, and the wider public, establish plastic to oil companies can
provide benefits, namely less pollution, more employment options, and green growth. The aim of
governmental policy is stimulating green alternatives, recycling, and lowering waste, for the
health of the wider public. Advantages for companies are buying this cheaper oil, use byproducts
or they can easily get rid of their plastic waste.
Different ports, like the Port of Rotterdam and the Port of Amsterdam are stimulating the case of
plastic to oil. In their port visions, green methods and sustainability are important subjects (Port
of Rotterdam, 2011; Port of Amsterdam, 2014a). They see future possibilities and growth for
techniques, like plastic to oil in their ports. From the government, multiple divisions have
interest in the plastic to oil as well. The Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment (I&M)
have the directorate of Sustainability and Maritime affaires, which support this research. For
PBL, RLI, TNO, and the Circularity Center this could be an interesting case as well.
In the Netherlands multiple researches are done in the last decade to understand what the
challenges and the opportunities are for the Dutch economy (PBL, 2011; Bastein, 2013; RLI,
2013; CPB, 2014). To promote this circular economy in the Netherlands the Circularity Center is
established in 2014, further aims of this centre will be discussed in section 2.3.2. The popularity
of circular economy is growing and worldwide visible. In 2006 in the US, the Centre for Life
Cycle Analysis (n.d.) is established. In China is ‘the China Association of Circular Economy’
(CACE) established (China sets up, 2013). In India the Research Centre for Fuel Generation (n.d.)
is established in Mumbai. In Japan the Niigata Plastic Liquefaction Centre is already established
in 1997 in Nigata city, for extra attention to plastic to oil (Plastic Waste Management Institute,
2009). Another institute located in Japan is the International Environmental Technology Centre
(IETC). For the UNEP they execute research and it leads to a Policy Brief on Waste Plastics in
2013 (IETC, 2013). Many countries are further supporting circularity and in developing plastic
to oil companies. Nevertheless, the Netherlands are following this trend.
9
2.
Theory Framework
In this chapter, the theory that substantiate to the empirical research is provided. First, the
beginning principles and the definition of the circular economy are covered. Then, the circular
economy in the Netherlands is explained, and the circular economy in Dutch seaports. Followed
by the explanation why plastic to oil is important for the plastic loop. Subsequently, the location
factors for the chemical industry are identified and comparative advantages as well.
2.1 Circular economy
2.1.1 The change towards a circular economy
As stated before in section 1.1 ‘The take-make-waste economy is on its way back”. For many
decades, this seemed to be an optimal solution due to the growth of the population and the
lower prices of raw materials. The turning point for the increasing prices is around the year
2000. From this moment on, prices were increasing which is stated by McKinsey’s Commodity
Price index for 2011, which is seen in Figure 2.1.1.1 (EMF, 2012). The figure shows the turning
point, with the following reasons: the effect of the quick growth in population, growth of
consumption, growth of consumption options, and growth of wealth. All those reasons together,
are an assault on our earth. The consequence is an increase in demand for raw materials. With
business-as-usual, so not even a forecast of demand growth, the consequence is that within a few
decades a lot of raw material sources are exhausted (Kok et al., 2013). Since the start of the new
millennium, the prices of resources are inclining, because of the resource scarcity (EMF, 2012).
The expectations are that this will be the new trend even with business-as-usual. Besides the
increase in prices, also the risk of volatile prices improved the drive to reform the economy
(EMF, 2012; Kok et al., 2013; RLI, 2013).
Figure 2.1.1.1: McKinseys’s Commodity Price index for 2011
Source: (EMF, 2012)
Another problem that arises with the linear economy is the waste problem. Every product or
input ends up like waste. We burn a substantial part of this waste to recover energy,
nevertheless, still a lot of waste is piling up. Besides waste created by products that have
reached their end of life, there is waste in the production chain. Significant volumes are lost in
the supply chain, by poor efficiency, spills or leakage during production process or transport
(EMF, 2012).
A third problem with the take-make-waste economy is the environmental problem. Producing
all those products has a negative byproduct, namely pollution. This pollution is not taken into
10
account in the product price. This product price is actually too low therefore, it is called a
negative externality (Kok et al., 2013). As explained by the RLI (2013), let the producer pay for
the damage, because he is causing the negative externality. If the costs of the negative
externalities are not included in the price of the product, the consequence will be more
consumption of this product than in an optimal situation, so a higher demand. Therefore, more
consumption means more negative externalities, than it would be in an optimal situation. Other
negative externalities are climate change, health risks, a shortage of land, and social costs like
low salaries in third world countries or child labor (RLI, 2013).
Lastly, the main idea of the take-make-waste economy to use products or services only a few
times, will be seen as value destruction. Therefore, the government is discouraging this.
The solution for those problems is reforming the economy into a circular economy. This way
materials and products can be re-used, waste can be avoided or use it further in the process.
Pollution can be excluded as much as possible and maintaining as much value in the products
and the supply chain.
2.1.2 Circular economy
That a circular economy is not some trend but a longer existing theory can be proven by the fact
that the economist Kenneth Boulding described the proposed goal-set in 1966 as “a circular
economy is a long-term aim compatible with economic growth, optimal usage from resources,
sustainability and zero waste” (Greyson, 2006; Kok et al., 2013; I&M, 2013a). Although the
theory is developed many decades ago, in the last years there was an enormous increase in
popularity.
According to the EMF (2013) is in the circular economy principle, the entire system based on
renewable energy, to minimise the use of toxic chemicals and eliminates waste by design. To
establish this, the one-way consumption is history and companies act more and more as service
providers instead of sellers. A service provider maintains the ownership of a product so at the
end of the usage period they can collect and recycle the product. The type of products for which
this change is possible are especially the physical products, made of materials and resources.
Kok et al., (2013) discusses the circular model as an enormous opportunity which includes
multiple cost savings. To accomplish those cost savings, waste has to be minimized, a better
management of supply chains is necessary and less raw materials need to be involved in the
production process. This last point put a limit to the price sensitivity of companies.
The EMF circular model as seen in figure 2.1.1.1 illustrates two different loops. In the left loop
the biological nutrients based materials and products are visible (EMF, 2012). These biological
nutrients can easily be composted. This loop has the ability to reintroduce materials and
products back into the biosphere. The right loop of the EMF circular model, illustrates the on
technical nutrients based, non-renewable, produced materials, and products (EMF, 2012).
In a circular economy the ideal situation is to make materials circle longer, to keep the value in
the system, choose the best recycling option available and eliminate waste. To keep the value of
the materials as high as possible the EMF (2012) states: “Up-cycling is the process of converting
materials into new materials of higher quality and increased functionality”. It means that the
product has a higher quality than before. Down-cycling is the opposite, the product or materials
lose quality. According to EMF (2012), downgrading is “A downgrade in material quality, which
limits usability and maintains more or less the linear material flow”.
11
Figure 2.1.1.1: The Circular Economy
Source: (EMF, 2012)
If we compare the recycling options from the EMF (2012) and the Ladder of Lansink4, we get the
following order: prevention of using materials, repair, re-use, refurbishment, remanufacture,
recycling, and energy recovery and in the end, waste disposal.
2.2 Circular economy in the Netherlands
Since many decades the Netherlands is striving to produce greener, produce less waste and
recycling plays an important role. The last years the policy of the Dutch government is striving
forward. The aim of the Dutch government is to close loops, by using green growth to make the
Dutch economy more circular (I&M, 2014a; Slingerland, Veenstra, Bolscher & Rademaekers,
2014). In June 2013, a government letter regarding waste as resource is send (I&M, 2013c). This
letter is part of multiple letters which inform the government how to stimulate a circular
program, support green growth and which researches are done (I&M, 2013a; I&M, 2013c; I&M,
2014a; I&M, 2014b). These researches are done for the entire Dutch economy, and predict many
opportunities in creating a more circular economy (Bastein et al., 2013). The Dutch policy is
based on four principles: first, adjust the prices with environmental externalities without
creating an unbalanced level playing field, second, stimulate regulations and law that takes away
bottlenecks, like green deals, third, innovation and fourth, the government as a partner for
companies, institutes and initiatives by citizens (I&M, 2013c; Slingerland et al., 2014).
We have seen many ways in which the Netherlands is already putting the circular economy into
practise. In 2013, 79% of our waste is already recycled (Bastein, 2013; I&M, 2013a; I&M,
2014b). This calculation is based on the percentage of our waste that is collected separately.
Waste-to-energy is also seen as recycling, which is expected to be around 16% (I&M, 2011), and
approximately 3% is disposed (Bastein, 2013). During the last Municipal Waste Europe (MWE)
gathering in Brussels, it became clear that if the recycling definition is properly explained and
sharpened, that none of the EU countries will manage to have the recycling percentage of 70%.
The difference between the old calculation (where we score about 79%) and the new method is,
4
See section 2.4.1 for the Ladder of Lansink
12
that only the waste offered for recycling is counted (Koninklijke vereniging voor afval- en
reinigingsmanagement, 2014).
The government needs an overall policy to support this circular innovation based on waste as a
resource. First, the government needs to support initiatives based on innovation. Secondly, the
waste and environmental policy needs to support the transformation to an optimal, modernized
and altered production process (I&M, 2013a).
Examples that the government (and so the ministries) have an aim on green growth are the
many letters from the Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment. Those letters contribute
to this green growth and stimulating the circular economy (I&M, 2014a; I&M, 2014b). Besides
the letters, a couple of reports are available to support this green growth and about creating a
more circular economy (Slingerland et al., 2014). An example is the Plastic Cycle Value Chain
Agreement (I&M, 2013b). This agreement is signed by the government in 2013 together with 60
other companies, like the plastic industry, financial sector, ports and institutes (I&M, 2014c).
The aim of this agreement is to decrease the plastic waste and a better recycling of this plastic
waste. By making decisive steps within two years, a sustainable plastic market should be
created. This is done by changing and redesigning the production chain, improving the plastic
waste process and with a high-quality recycling process (I&M, 2014c).
At the same time several departments of different ministries do conducting research to
opportunities. One of the main examples of instruments the government uses is the
establishment of so called “green deals”. Green deals are clear initiatives where society and the
government work together, to deduct bottlenecks. The bottlenecks are law and regulations,
networking, knowledge and information problems. Central themes are energy, food, water,
resources, biodiversity, mobility, bio-based economy, climate and construction (Ondernemend
Groen, n.d.).
Since 2011 at least hundred sixty green deals are signed. In Figure 2.2.1 the location of the green
deals are visible. A recent green deal was signed in September. The core of this Green Deal
Scheepsafvalketen (I&M, 2014a) is that ships have to separate their waste and the separated
collection is done in ports. Therefore, the aim is to reduce the waste that ships throw in the
oceans. The advantages for the ships are that they could get discount on port fairs, value for their
plastics and other valuable waste, and they are contributing to cleaner oceans. The separated
collection of waste on board makes the different types of waste more valuable for recycling. This
is because they have a higher value compared to the situation with the separation afterwards. A
clean shipping index [CSI] is used to measure how green ships are, and to add this green deal in
the index would stimulate ships to separate their waste (I&M, 2014a). At the same time a
pyrolysis and recycling installation in ports would stimulate this separated collection, according
to I&M (2014a). Supporting new and innovative green deals creates further economic growth
without environmental damage (Slingerland et al., 2014).
Some supply chains in the Netherlands are further developed in creating the circular economy.
Examples are the paper, glass, metal and VFG (vegetable, fruit and garden waste)(I&M, 2011).
Those types of waste are being recycled and used as new resources and used in new products
(I&M, 2011). Besides those categories, the recycling of textile, and electrical finery is still
growing, and the recycled materials can be used for production (I&M, 2011). The supply chains
of the plastic recycling industry are still being established and growing every year.
13
Figure 2.2.1: Green deals
Source: Ondernemend Groen. (n.d.)
Drinks cartons are one of the next groups which will be additionally recycled in the Netherlands.
A successful collection and recycling pilot ended in 2013. The report by Stollman & Goorhuis
(2014) has recently become available. From the first of January 2015, municipalities will receive
reimbursements for collection and recycle those drink cartons (Stollman & Goorhuis, 2014).
2.3 Circular economy in Dutch seaports
In the Netherlands a development into a more circular economy is going on and the same
pattern is visible in the Dutch seaports. In this section, the change into a more circular
environment and vision of the Dutch seaports is provided.
2.3.1 Introduction
The circular economy is an important topic for Dutch seaports. According to a report from the
IMSA (Oegema & Wurpel, 2012), the Port of Rotterdam is the logistical node in the Netherlands.
Because of the opportunities there, the Port of Rotterdam can become the raw material
roundabout in the Netherlands and contribute to the larger hinterland, like Europe (Oegema &
Wurpel, 2012).
The largest seaports in the Netherlands have published their port vision until 2030. Every port
has mentioned the point of sustainability or green growth. The five biggest ports in the
Netherlands are involved in this research. In figure 2.3.1.1, the location of the different ports are
visible. From top to the bottom: Groningen Seaports, Port of Amsterdam, Port of Rotterdam,
Havenschap Moerdijk and Zeeland Seaports.
The port of Rotterdam is the biggest Dutch seaport and even the biggest port in Europe. The Port
of Rotterdam handles many containers and bulk. The Port of Amsterdam is the second largest
seaport in the Netherlands, and still in the top 10 with biggest ports of Europe. The other Dutch
seaports are much smaller.
Seaports have two functions. The main function of a port is a node in a transport chain. The
second function is a location for economic activities (De Langen, Nijdam & Van der Lugt). In this
report, the second function, the port as a location for economic activity is the investigated
function.
14
Figure 2.3.1.1: Five biggest seaports in the Netherlands
Source: (I&M, 2014c)
2.3.2 The current situation in Dutch seaports
Every seaport in the Netherlands is different, because of their location, hinterland, customers,
economic activity, and the raw materials that are shipped. In this difficult time, the seaports are
changing and sustainability is becoming an important factor. The work program for the Dutch
seaports has six different themes, which help the development of the seaports in the next two
years (I&M, 2014c).
Many Dutch seaports are earning money by transporting large quantities of raw materials.
Companies that need those resources are established in Dutch seaports or those materials are
directly exported to companies in the hinterland. Dutch seaports have specialized areas which
are important for the Dutch economy. All five of the largest seaports, have specialized chemical
clusters and large energy companies on their territory (Lanser, 2013). Other important clusters
are bio-based and logistical activities.
In the Port of Rotterdam, sustainability is important. Many years ago, they started building AVI’s
so they can burn the waste in the region. The electricity of this waste-to-energy can be re-used.
At the same time, the heat that is a by-product in this process is used for a central heating system
in the city of Rotterdam. Other by-products like CO2 are transported to the greenhouses in the
Westland area (Oegema & Wurpel, 2012).
The port of Amsterdam and Port of Rotterdam are creating a bio-based cluster which is more
circular than other clusters, because the bio-based materials can be re-used. At the same time
the Circularity Center is in 2014 established. This cooperation from the Port of Rotterdam,
Rabobank Rotterdam, Bikker & Company and Van Gansewinkel established the Circularity
Center [CC] in Rotterdam (Circularity Center, 2014). The purpose of this CC is knowledge and
business development in the circular economy. The ambition of the founders is to re-use
materials and products, to accelerate the development of a circular economy and to develop new
business models. This Circularity Center is an extra boost in creating awareness for circular
economy and further develops the possibilities (Circularity Center, 2014).
15
2.3.3 Threats and opportunities in Dutch seaports
Nowadays, Dutch seaports are still depending on fossil resources, like oil, black coal and on large
quantities of raw materials. The threat is that those products are becoming scarce and the
volumes will drop in the future. Ports need to find other ways, products, methods to gain
revenues. Changes are already visible in the funding of bio-based clusters, new technology
companies, or other companies establishing on the port areas. Another change from the ports is
their vision. The vision of the ports changes to a more sustainable view. Recycling of waste and
materials is supported, to use the materials again and for a better environment.
According to Wurpel, Akker, Betsema, & Oegema (2013), the future expectations for the ports
are not easy to forecast. This research by Wurpel et al., (2013) explains how the Port of
Rotterdam can develop in being the most sustainable port in the future and what the possible
growth scenarios can be.
The Club of Rome expects three possible scenarios in the future, which are stated in figure
2.3.3.1. The first scenario is the standard+. They expect that the present trends with business as
usual will stay and that there will not be any breaks in the trends from the last decades. Because
of the scarcity of the raw materials and resources, every new unit will become more expensive
to obtain then the ones before. Therefore, the negative impact on the environment will increase
over time just as the pollution. According to Wurpel et al. (2013), the expectation for the Port of
Rotterdam is first an initial growth, but after two decades, the throughput will decline below
current levels.
The other two scenarios have different assumptions compared to the standard+ scenario. They
incorporate the effects of possible interventions that change the current trend. The second
scenario is the technology scenario. The scenario is based on the technological changes, for
producing the same products, less materials are necessary (Wurpel et al., 2013). The last
scenario, the integral scenario elaborates on the technology scenario. Additional to this integral
scenario is that it expects a behavioral change with consumers and companies. The behavioral
change is about consuming fewer products, and less resource. A more stable, but small growth is
expected in this scenario (Wurpel et al., 2013).
Figure: 2.3.3.1 Throughput Rotterdam (million ton)
Source: (Wurpel et al., 2013)
Wurpel et al. (2013) points out that a different solution is necessary and that a growth in
volumes is not the answer. Sustainable growth however, is an excellent opportunity. In that case,
the Port of Rotterdam has to continue with further developing green opportunities, which can
contribute to new green economic activities. The development from a fossil port to a more bio16
based port is inevitable. Although, this report from Wurpel et al. (2013) has focused on the Port
of Rotterdam, the situation in other Dutch seaports is comparable.
2.3.4 Port vision on circular economy
Every seaport is making a port vision 2030. In this vision, they point out their expectations for
the coming years. Those seaports have enough ambitions about sustainable growth. To arrange
this, the port authority, government and other stakeholders need to be involved actively (Lanser,
2013). In the following areas, this sustainable growth is possible: bio-based energy, circular
economy, more sustainable logistics chains and sustainability of energy resources (Lanser,
2013).
The circular economy is an important topic in the Port of Rotterdam and the Port of Amsterdam.
It becomes clear that the policy in the ports is based on eliminating waste as much as possible
and at the same time handling the remaining waste correctly, for example to recycle as much as
possible.
The Port of Amsterdam is involved in finding alternative business to ensure the future growth.
In the new port vision, it becomes clear that the development of the port is expected to be from
new innovative technology (Port of Amsterdam, 2014a). Examples are making triplex out of
biological waste or plastic to oil (Port of Amsterdam, 2014b). The chemical industry is still
growing. They put a new business manager5 on the plastic to oil business case, so it can enroll
quickly. The heat, which is a by-product of waste-to-energy, is distributed to 161,000
households in Amsterdam (Lanser, 2013).
In the port vision 2030 for the Port of Rotterdam, important concepts reduce, re-use, and
recycling are mentioned (Port of Rotterdam, 2011). The main aspects for the Port of Rotterdam
are innovation, biomass, further development of the circular economy and container growth,
because of the second Maasvlakte (Markus, 2014). The chemical industry in the Port of
Rotterdam is still developing. The government and the Port of Rotterdam will actively attract
recycling companies (I&M, 2011).
The ambition of Havenschap Moerdijk is to be the most important hub between the Port of
Antwerp and the Port of Rotterdam (Port of Moerdijk, 2014). Other ambitions are value creation,
sustainability, and safety. The port vision 2030 (Port of Moerdijk, 2014), adds the extendibility
of a sustainable industrial complex (Lanser, 2013). Moerdijk sets in on recycling flows to export
to other countries. The exchange of energy, water, heat, and CO2 are put on the agenda (Port of
Moerdijk, 2014).
For Zeeland Seaports the port vision of 2030 is still in progress. However, in the strategic master
plan 2020 is the aim to develop the industry, which can mutual exchange waste and by-products
(Zeeland Seaports, 2009). A sustainable development from their logistical activities is an
important aim.
In the port vision 2030 of Groningen Seaports (Groningen Seaports, 2012), re-use is an
important factor. In Delfzijl, the chemical cluster is sustainable and for a large part based on
biological and renewable resources. Groningen Seaports would like to further develop and
expand this cluster (Groningen Seaports, 2012).
The combining factor of the port visions is that every one of them is based on sustainability. All
the ports have interest in new technologies, recycling waste and new opportunities to ensure
5
Interview with the project manager new business at the Port of Amsterdam, interviewed at the 16th of July
2014.
17
their future. Ports are cooperating with new companies to expand their economic activities in
the area.
2.4 Plastic to oil versus waste-to-energy
In the previous sections the importance of a circular economy is explained. The steps that are
already taken in the Netherlands and in the Dutch seaports are discussed. To continue this
research it is important to better define the role of plastic to oil. Therefore, in this section the
consequences of plastic to oil and waste-to-energy as solutions for non-recyclable plastics will
be discussed and which technique is desired.
2.4.1 Options for non-recyclable waste plastics
Three options are available for non-recyclable waste plastics after usage, namely landfill, wasteto-energy, and plastic to oil6. With the advantages of a circular economy and closing loops in the
back of our mind (Section 2.1), the disposal of plastic waste on a landfill is not the desired
outcome. A landfill location costs space, creating polluting risks and is downgrading the product
entirely (Dijkgraaf & Vollebergh, 2004). Waste-to-energy, however, is a better solution because
it creates energy that is useful as electricity or for heating houses. In the last years, multiple
waste burning installations (AVI’s) are established in the Netherlands. By-products like CO2 are
useful for companies that use it as an input factor. Other by-products like heat are redistributed
for heating parts of a city and offices. However, the rest of the by-products as emissions are still
polluting our air. The adjusted Ladder of Lansink is including waste-to-energy and visible in
figure 2.4.1.1, and determines the waste hierarchy (Bergsma et al., 2014), which is the same for
the European Union (European Environment Agency, 2013). Waste-to-energy is a better
solution, a higher step on the ladder than disposal. Combustion or incineration is not used in the
Netherlands any more, after the transition to waste-to-energy installations.
Figure 2.4.1.1: Ladder of Lansink 2.0
Source: (Bergsma et al., 2014)
The only problem is that the Ladder of Lansink is made in 1979. Newer versions are available
which include newer techniques for waste handling, like combustion and waste-to-energy
(Bergsma et al., 2014). Unfortunately, pyrolysis is not mentioned in the Ladder of Lansink and so
the exact position of this technique is not formality stated. It is difficult where to place the plastic
to oil on the Ladder of Lansink.
2.4.2 Plastic to oil versus waste to energy
From the theory, it is useful to recycle all plastics when possible, as stated in section 1.1.2. This
comes down to recycle the single-polymer plastics, like PE, PP, PS etc. (Al-Salem et al., 2009).
Most of the remaining plastics are useful for pyrolysis or waste-to-energy. If the plastics are
6
Plastic to oil is explained in section 1.1.3
18
contaminated or if the mixed plastics are consistent of mixed resins, and therefore unsuitable for
recycling, the plastics are still useful for the pyrolysis process (Panda et al., 2010).
Other problems with recycling waste plastics is if the plastics do not have a neutral color but
when pigment is added for a different color. Then, it is more difficult to recycle the plastics,
because a mixture of carbon black or titanium white plastics with neutral colored plastics is
determined as value destruction. Besides the market value of carbon black and titanium white,
the separation is important, to prevent down cycling, according to the recycling and resource
expert7. In addition, he points out that the same problems arise when we consider the additional
materials added by plastic products to raise the compatibility and performance like fillers for
saving materials. For instance, glass fibers or UV stabilizers. Nowadays the technique is available
that those plastics are adequate for pyrolysis (Panda et al., 2010).
Multiple reasons are available why plastic to oil is a more circular solution than waste-to-energy.
According to Panda et al. (2010) producing liquid fuel out of plastics is a better alternative than
reclaim waste-to-energy. This is because the calorific value of plastics and oil are comparable.
The calorific value is a measurement form the energy which is released when the fuel is reacting
with oxygen (Panda et al., 2010). According to the American Chemistry Council (ACC) (Holmes,
2011) pyrolysis is a better option than waste-to-energy. For a further quite technical
explanation, see (Holmes, 2011).
A second reason is that plastic to oil closes the plastic loop, compared to waste-to-energy. If we
use pyrolysis to produce oil, less of the polluting gasses will be set free in the air. The oil is useful
for different companies, and is used for transportation, machinery or in other sectors. If the oil
meets the European quality standards, the oil is sold for less than the market price. If this price is
high enough, burning plastics in AVI’s will decline at a certain pace.
A third reason, is keeping small loops, because that is more efficient than larger loops. Although
in the Netherlands, most AVI’s are recently built and are efficient, a more efficient way is
available to generate electricity. Therefore, retake the oil from the plastic waste and use it as fuel
has a higher efficiency.
The pyrolysis technique is still improving. It is a matter of time before the quality of the oil is so
high, that we can make new plastics out of this oil. Then we would close the loop entirely, and
creating the best solution for this type of products.
In the past, researchers ware afraid that if plastic to oil facilities are build, all types of plastics
will disappear there, even if they can be recycled. However, a recycling expert8 points out that
this will not happen, because recyclable waste plastics have a market value (Holmes, 2011). For
the plastics available for pyrolysis it is important to keep the price as low as possible for the
plastic waste. This will contribute to plastic to oil as a more attractive option than landfill
(Holmes, 2011). The height of the landfill tip is not important because it is always higher and
less attractive.
Another concern about the quantity of the feedstock is not genuine, because by choosing for
pyrolysis the per-ton waste-to-energy fee is saved by the owners (Holmes, 2011). This is another
argument in favor of plastic to oil.
While the pyrolysis technique is still improving, the costs of recycling are still expensive. In the
future newer and more developed techniques will increase the percentage of plastics which are
economical viable for recycling. If new insights occur, money can be saved in the collection
process. Combining those elements can make recycling become cheaper. For more plastics it is
economically interesting to recycle them. Pyrolysis can also contribute by develop recycling
7
8
Interview with recycling and resources professor at the TU Delft, interviewed at the 3 rd of October 2014.
Interview with recycling and resources professor at the TU Delft, interviewed at the 3 rd of October 2014.
19
techniques. The threat here is that pyrolysis will lose some market power in the next twenty
years. Nevertheless, still the estimations for pyrolysis are positive.
2.4.3 Expanding the plastic loop
In this paragraph, there will be more explained how plastic to oil can influence the basic loop of
plastics. This knowledge explains how plastic to oil is placed in the loop.
Oil is the basis for every piece of plastic. The oil can be transformed to plastics, by adding energy.
Then, by adding more energy, the desired product is fabricated. The consumer will use the
product and it ends up like waste. All the plastics, which can be recycled, need to be recycled,
because that is the best possible solution. For this process energy is required as well. We can
create an inner loop from recycling to the product, if the waste plastics can be recycled. The
plastics that cannot be recycled have two options, the best option for now is waste-to-energy,
and the other option is landfill. With plastic to oil, we could add a third option here. From those
rest plastics, by adding energy we can make oil. Figure 2.4.3.1 below, shows this plastic loop.
Figure 2.4.3.1 Plastic loop including pyrolysis
Source: Interview with recycling specialist9
In the end, it will be possible to make new plastic products from that newly produced oil. For
now, the quality is high enough to use the oil for multiple purposes, like fuel for ships or cars for
instance. Other options are diesel electrical generators, diesel pumps, boilers, burning light
heating oils, hot air and steam generators, construction mechanization air pumps and other
mechanization-using diesel. The quality of the oil has to meet many regulations, before it can be
sold on the market. By adding the possibility of plastic to oil, we can extend the loop for plastics
and make it more circular. Fewer plastics are burned in AVI’s and therefore by adding pyrolysis,
less downgrading is happening.
2.4.4 Opportunities plastic to oil
The oil converted by pyrolysis, also called waste plastic oil (WPO) looks similar as diesel. This
WPO is tested as fuel in a diesel engine. The WPO results and characteristics are comparable
9
Interview with Recycling and Resources professor at the TU Delft, interviewed at the 3rd of October 2014.
20
with diesel fuel. The conclusion is that a diesel engine can run on 100% waste plastic oil. Side
effects are that NOx is about 25% higher and the CO2 output increased with approximately 5%
compared to diesel fuel (Mani, Nagarajan, & Sampath, 2011).
In a research done for the ACC in 2011, different American techniques are compared. From this
research, the following conclusions are important. The output of the pyrolysis process contains
fuel (about 80%-90%), natural gas (about 8%-10%), and char (about 2%-13%) depending on
the used feedstock and technology (Holmes, 2011). The natural gas can be clean burned, or reused in the system, to contribute in the system energy needs. This proportion is expected to be
about one-third (Holmes, 2011). The fuel can be quite different based on the used technology
and plastic waste used in the process. Some produce a gasoline-diesel fuel, while others generate
a product similar to crude oil (Holmes, 2011). Those fuels need to be further refined in most
cases. Char is the leftover material that contains the contaminants of the former feedstock. It can
be powdery or more like a sludge, like a heavy oil. The char can burn in waste-to-energy plants
so it is almost a zero-landfill option for those non-recyclable plastics (Holmes, 2011).
Only a basic air pollution permit is needed in the US, because the emissions are lower than the
basic permit standards (Holmes, 2011). Systems cost between $1 million to $5 million for a
7,000-10,000 ton a year facility. The expected return on investments is short, between one to
four years in the US (Holmes, 2011).
2.5 Location factors for chemical industry
Location factors are important for a company. They help in deciding on which location the
company will establish their factory and for what reasons that particular location is chosen.
There are only a dozen plastic to oil companies worldwide. Therefore there are not specific
researches done for the locations factors of plastic to oil. Pyrolysis is a chemical process, so it
belongs to the chemical industry. We can use chemical industry location factors and compare
them with the actual situation in the Netherlands. This way an overview for the location factors
will be created.
Now a brief introduction in general location theory will be provided. The most basic location
model is the Weber Location-Production model, which is visible below in figure 2.5.1 (McCann,
2001, p8). In this model a two-dimensional approach is chosen, based on profit maximization.
The assumptions made by this model is that a firm is a point in space, the firm is a price taker,
production factors are available and do not change with location. The locations of the most
important raw materials in weight are provided with M1 and M2. M3 is the weighted output
produced by the firm on the market location. K will be the optimal location of the firm. In this
model every location is fixed, therefore it is a simple model based on lowering costs (McCann,
2001, p7).
21
Figure 2.5.1 Weber Location-Production model
Source: (McCann, 2001, p8)
The Weber Location-Production model can be expanded bij adding the transport costs, which
will shift the location of optimal point K in the direction of the most expensive good. This could
be one of the inputs or the output. In our case plastics have a low weight and large volumes,
which makes it more expensive to transport compared to the oil. Point K will then come closer to
the market of plastic waste, to decrease those costs. Critism of the Weber L-P model is that
assuming fixed locations for your raw materials and market output is not realistic, because of
substition options and companies who will optimize their costs (McCann, 2001, p18).
Another interesting basic model for location choice is Moses Location-Production model, figure
2.5.2 (McCann, 2001, p20). In this model it is assumed that substitution (lower product costs) is
a characteristic of firm behaviour. At the same time the distance to the market (M3) is constant,
so an optimal location on line I-J is chosen, based on production and transport costs of M1 and
M2. Point K is here the optimal location point.
Figure 2.5.2: Moses Location-Production model
Source: (McCann, 2001, p20)
22
A remark on Moses Location-Production model is that the transport costs are only a small
percentage of the production costs. Especially nowadays when the transport prices are really
low and in a different economic climate than 50 years ago, when this model was applied. Other
models based on different costs or theories could maybe better explain the location choice for an
industrial company (McCann, 2001, p19).
The next basic model to explain is the Hotelling model of spatial competition (McCann, 2001,
p28). Due to transportation costs, it is possible for a company to have some spatial monopoly
power. Because you are the closest to the consumer this can be an competitive advantage over
other companies. Companies have the incentive to compete different than in a price competition,
on quality for instance. With changing their location they will try to benefit most from their
location (McCann, 2001, p29). In figure 2.5.3 this Hotelling model of Spatial competition is
explained and what the initiatives of the companies are.
Figure 2.5.3: Hotelling model of spatial competition
Source: (McCann, 2001, p32)
In this Hotelling game companies A and B, both have a spatial monopoly. Because of the same
transport costs and expectation of the same production costs they have equal market shares. If
company A has the iniative to expand its market share, it will move close to company B,
therefore company A has more than 50% marketshare. Company B will then move to the other
side of company A and have the bigger market share. This will continue untill both companies
are settled in point X. At that point, none of the companies has the initiative to move. Therefore
the companies cluster together, even if this is not optimal for the market. The market was better
of with both the companies at location A and location B (McCann, 2001, p28).
The three basic location theories can help us explain the location factors which influence the
location decisions of companies. In the next section, there will me more explained about the
location factors for the chemical industry.
23
2.6 Comparative advantages
Nowadays, the location decision-making process is more difficult than before and not only based
on fixed locations or close to the feedstock. Many location factors influence the decision process.
The way companies compete can have influence on this location decision.
There are two ways to compete, one is a heavy price competition based on the lowest cost. The
other option is what is visible in cluster. The competitiveness from a firm depends on its
strategic ability to participate in a network, a whole supply chain or cluster (Roelandt et al.,
1999). Minimizing the production costs as done in the Weber Location-Production model
(section 2.5), is not the main reason any more of the choice of a location for the chemical
industry. According to Porter (1990), companies need to search for competitive advantages
instead of minimizing the production costs. More factors play a role in this decision making
process.
Labor, land, capital, and entrepreneurship are the common production factors required to
produce products or services, on which Porter (1990) adds infrastructure and national
resources. In the past, it was enough to have an advantage like cheap labor, low land costs, or
having cheap raw materials available. Those companies did not have the urge to innovate and
become more efficient. Other companies have experienced selective disadvantages, needed to
improve their technique by innovation and investments to create an advantage position for them
(Porter, 1990). Midelfart (2000) explains how important comparative advantages are to choose
an industrial location.
Porter (1990) explained with his ‘Diamond of National Advantage model’ the reasons that
competitive advantages happen by four classified determinants. First, the factor conditions,
which is the position of available infrastructure and skilled labor, for instance, which is the
minimum to compete. Second, the demand conditions, this is the natural demand for the product
or service from this particular industry. Third, the related and supporting industries present or
absence and other competing firms. Fourth, the firm strategy, structure, and rivalry are
important for the creation, organization and managing of the companies (Porter, 1990). This are
the minimum condition needed to create some kind of advantage for a new industrial company.
Figure 2.6.1 Porters Diamond: Determinants of Competitive Advantages
Source: (Porter, 1990)
24
Nowadays the most important factors of production are knowledge, investments and
specialization (Porter, 1990). For example, pools of labor, and a raw material source, are now
much easier to arrange because of the globalization, they are less important in the knowledge
industries (Porter, 1990). Only the highly specialized and scarce factors contribute to
competitive advantages, and they require huge investments (Porter, 1990).
Grether, Hotz & Mathys (2014) analyzed the main existing general industry location factors. His
findings are based on an extension of the Heckscher-Ohlin model. To improve the explanatory
power of the model he allowed in the model for differences between countries, imperfect
competition, and transport costs. The Heckscher-Ohlin model (Bajona & Kehoe, 2010) is based
on differences between countries, in production and labour costs. Therefore every country has a
comparative advantage, and the consequence is that trade is born (Bajona & Kehoe, 2010). The
importance of comparative advantage is endorsed by Porter (1990) and Grether et al. (2014).
Lundmark (2001) based his research on waste paper, because the supply chains are comparable
with waste plastics. The paper industry is older than plastics, so it is interesting if plastics follow
the same pattern as the paper industry. In the paper industry, the factories are first build close
to the raw materials. Later on, because of recycling a lot of pulp entered the market, and the new
factories are located on different locations, close by the markets. For the waste paper industry,
the most important location factors are labor costs, market size, population density and
agglomeration effect (Lundmark, 2001). His conclusion is that although the price of raw
materials is important, more important for a location decision are market conditions, and the
agglomeration effect.
Clusters
Market size and agglomeration effects are considered as the most important factors to choose a
specific location (Lundmark, 2001). McCann (2001, p51) explains that the first observed location
factor for the industry is clustering together in space. A couple of reasons can explain this
behavior. Because companies do not have access to all the information, they assume that other
companies know something they do not know, about the benefits of that specific location.
The other advantages of clusters are obvious when the definition of a cluster is given. “A cluster
is seen as an economic network of strongly interdependent firms linked in a value-adding
production chain” (Roelandt et al., 1999). Companies need to play an active role in clusters so
they can help develop Porters diamond further and improve their competitiveness (Porter,
1990). Clusters have common characteristics like knowledge spillovers, innovation patterns
(Roelandt et al., 1999) and more rapidly developing new technology (Porter, 2000). Clusters can
offer development of efficient environmental strategies (Røyne, Berlin, & Ringström, 2014).
In the Netherlands, there are twelve large clustered industry groups. One of those clusters is the
chemical cluster (Roelandt et al., 1999). Clusters vary widely, but at the same time the clusters
are based on the same, beneficial expects of cluster networks. A chemical cluster is located
around specific core competencies (Roelandt et al., 1999). Their research is based on improving
material technology, which is an essential way of innovation. Because of the close interaction
and cooperation, there is a lot of knowledge and information exchanged with customers,
suppliers, and competitors (Roelandt et al., 1999).
Clusters benefit from available information (Porter, 1990), the specific knowledge and
cooperation as universities, engineering companies, research institutes (Roelandt et al., 1999),
and trade associations (Porter, 2000). Knowledge spillovers are identified to influence the
location choice decision, by locating close to a university (Audretsch, Lehmann & Warning,
2005). At the same time, the competition leads to focus, flexibility and new ways of competing
and finding new opportunities (Porter, 1990). Clusters can have multiple ways of intercompany
links. Exchanging materials, energy, by-products or water make the companies work and cluster
together (Røyne et al., 2014).
25
According to Porter (2000) new business are formed in existing clusters rather than in an
isolated location. There are multiple reasons to support this. First, in clusters, information about
opportunities could encourage this development in that cluster. Second, the needed assets like
skilled workers, greater efficiency opportunities, and inputs are often present at the location of
the existing cluster. Lower entry barriers could contribute to choose a location in a cluster.
Innovation of the new techniques has a preferred location for knowledge spillovers, like
universities or clusters (Audretsch et al., 2005). Edquist (1997) adds that firms almost never
innovate when they are located in isolation.
Plastic to oil manufactures should establish their plants close to the source of the material at a
material recovery facility (Holmes, 2011). Clustering together can provide the plastic to oil
company with feedstock and customers. However, companies need to have discussions with
state and local governments about their business incentives and tax, because this can influence
the location of the factory (Holmes, 2011).
26
3.
Research methodology
In this chapter the used research methodology is explained. In the first section, the research
context explains the research topic. The second paragraph contains the research method per sub
question. In the third section, the research materials which are used are explained.
3.1 Research context
In the Netherlands, multiple companies are trying to establish a plastic to oil factory. On this
moment, all those companies are in the beginning phase in planning and try to obtain the needed
permits. In other countries, many companies exist for already. In the Netherlands, we have
constructed many waste-to-energy facilities with a high efficiency. Plastic to oil is a better
solution for non-recyclable plastics than waste-to-energy10 but the question is what the
government can do to support this. In multiple countries like Japan, the United States, and
Switzerland, commercial and state owned plastic to oil companies are established, many years
ago. From the location choice by those companies, we can learn more about the location factors
that are necessary for plastic to oil companies. We can compare those location factors with the
available location factors in the Netherlands. As explained before in section 2.6 chemical
industry is clustering because of the numerous advantages. The expectation is that plastic to oil
companies will join those chemical clusters. Therefore, it seems logical that the Dutch plastic to
oil companies follow this pattern and locate on existing chemical cluster locations. Most of those
clusters are located in Dutch seaports. Therefore, we expect the plastic to oil companies to
establish in the Dutch Seaports. In the next section the research method of the empirical
research will be further explained.
3.2 Research method
Every sub question will contribute to answer the main question of this research. In this
paragraph the research methods of the empirical research is further explained.
To obtain an answer to the first sub question to what extent is the technique of plastic to oil
developed and desired is answered by a literature analysis. In this literature review the
theoretical opinion about the relationship between plastic to oil and waste-to-energy is
explained. An interview with a recycling expert11 could contribute to further explain the future
vision for plastic to oil and identify that as a better option. Different interviews with two
employees of (I&M)12 collaborated on more waste-to-energy information and more research
opportunities. An application for an independent research is done, to investigate the
relationship between plastic to oil and waste-to-energy.
The second sub question which location factors are conducive or necessary for plastic to oil
companies and are they present in Dutch seaports is a combination of a desk research and
empirical research. First, to gather a list with as many plastic to oil companies as possible, the
search for the worldwide plastic to oil companies has led to many sources. This research, a desk
research to newspaper articles, articles from scientific journals, websites, everything found is
compared with two lists, founded on online forums (Investors Hub n.d.; Raging Bull n.d.). This
list combined with information found in a research by the American Chemistry Council (Holmes,
2011) and a report from the United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP), which provided
more plastic to oil companies (UNEP, 2009), is the starting point. To complete this list the
See section 2.4: Plastic to oil vs Waste-to-energy
Interview with Recycling and Resources professor at the TU Delft, interviewed at the 3 rd of October
2014.
12 Interviews with senior policy advisors at the directorate Maritime business, about waste, waste
management, recycling and LAP 2, interviewed 2nd of June 2014.
Senior scientific researcher at the Knowledge Institute Mobility, about prior research and circular
economy, interviewed at the 19th of May 2014.
10
11
27
snowball method is used to increase the search range by using information found online on
forums for instance and by adding companies found in journal articles searching for plastic to oil
and location decisions. Many companies from the list had to be eliminated from this research for
different reasons. They only use bio-based pyrolysis, or it is not sure if the companies still exists,
or the company is only selling the technique and therefore not contributing in this research, or
the location of the factory is not mentioned. From the company websites, more information is
gathered and only companies who look like having a real pyrolysis factory stay on the list. Their
exact location found on google maps, and the visible location factors are stated. The table of all
the worldwide plastic to oil companies is visible in section 4.1. In appendix 2, in table 2.1 are the
eliminated worldwide plastic to oil companies stated.
To gain an overview of the important location factors of plastic to oil companies is rather
difficult. There is not any previous research available for the location factors of plastic to oil
companies. Therefore, the research focuses on the location factors of chemical industry. The
location factors found for the chemical industry are used as a basis in this research to find the
location factors for worldwide plastic to oil companies. The location factors found in worldwide
companies are compared with those found in the theory. In this list, the location factors are
divided in three groups, namely necessary, conducive, and negligible. The list with possible
location factors is used in the interviews with the Dutch plastic to oil companies. For those
interviews a standard form is used which is presented in Appendix 5. The list with location
factors for worldwide companies is compared with the necessary location factors for Dutch
plastic to oil companies. The Dutch plastic to oil companies are found by articles in newspapers
and connections of I&M13. The list with the necessary location factors for Dutch plastic to oil
companies is compared with the available location factors in Dutch seaports. Both the lists of the
founded location factors for worldwide and Dutch plastic to oil companies are compared with
the available location factors in Dutch seaports. In the end a list is created that contributes to the
conducive and necessary location factors for plastic to oil companies in the Netherlands.
The third sub question what kind of governmental policies are conducive or obstructive to the
founding of plastic to oil companies in the Netherlands is more of a desk research. For the
departments Maritime business and sustainability this is an important question. From the
interviews done with the Dutch plastic to oil companies, other obstructive factors are identified.
This is combined with a research to the policy of I&M. Papers for the House of Representatives
are combined with advise from other research’s done by Dutch institutes to create an even level
playing field between plastic to oil and waste-to-energy.
3.3 Research material
Multiple types of information are needed, namely scientific literature, policy documents,
interviews, research reports, newspaper articles, books and seminar and presentations. The
combination of those different types of data makes the triangulation of data possible. In this
section below, more is explained about the interviews used in this research.
3.3.1 Interviews
During this research there were three moments where multiple interviews are used. In this
paragraph this will be further explained.
At the start of the research multiple interviews are used to quickly gather more information and
developing the research questions. Those seven interviews were all from departments of the
Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment. From those seven interviews six interviews are
from the Sustainability directorate or the Maritime Business directorate. Every interviewed
policy advisor is specialised on a different subject who is related with plastic to oil or circular
economy. The subjects are in order: oil and seaports, circular economy, green deals, Circularity
13
In many of the interviews with I&M, names of Dutch plastic to oil companies are mentioned.
28
Center and plastics, Dutch seaports and waste. The exception is the interview with a scientific
researcher from the Knowledge Institute for Mobility14, who could explain more about prior
researches done in this area by the Ministry and related research institutes. He pointed out
interesting angles for the research questions and other employees who have a lot of knowledge
about plastic to oil and the circular economy.
During the research additional interviews are used for multiple purposes. An interview with a
business developer from the Port of Rotterdam15 has contributed by receiving advice about the
interest of the Port of Rotterdam in the business case of plastic to oil. The interviews with a
biofuel policy advisor16 and the researcher from the Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis17 are
used to become further informed about oil, biofuels and recycling of plastics. The Port of
Amsterdam has a special project manager18 which supports the plastic to oil companies to start
in their port. The last interview with a recycling specialist19 discussed his view for the future and
explained more about recycling from plastics, the role for plastic to oil, techniques to improve
the quality and waste-to-energy. This interview was based on a recent presentation where a
couple of question came up.
The last interviews are with the starting plastic to oil companies in the Netherlands. All the
information gathered about eight possible plastic to oil companies are verified, by taking contact
with the companies. The four remaining companies actively working on start-ups are then
contacted to be interviewed. The interview was open, but a list with questions was used to
gather the same information with all the companies. This list is available in Appendix 5.
The first company interviewed was Pyroil International20. Pyroil International is a plastic to oil
start-up which will locate itself in the Port of Moerdijk for dashboard recycling. The second
interview is with Energy Vision21, a department form a company who is building ships in the
province of Groningen. The third interview is with BlueAlp BV/ Petrogas22 from Eindhoven.
Those companies can provide the plastic to oil technique and design a production chain in the
Netherlands. The fourth interview is with Bin2barrel23 a plastic to oil start-up in Amsterdam.
Their desired location is in the Port of Amsterdam.
In the end of the research the completed list with possible location factors are verified. Except
reviewing the list with location factors, the development of the company is discussed. Therefore,
an accurate list and company information is available.
Interview with senior scientific researcher at the Knowledge Institute Mobility, about prior research
and circular economy, interviewed 19th of May 2014
15 Interview with business developer of the Port of Rotterdam, interviewed on the 26th of May 2014.
16 Interview with senior policy advisor at the Biofuels department at the Ministry of Economic Affairs,
interviewed 2nd of June 2014.
17 Interview with researcher of the Climate change, Energy and Environment department at CPB
Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis, interviewed 6th of June 2014.
18 Project manager New Business at the Port of Amsterdam, interviewed 16 th of July 2014.
19 Recycling and Resources professor at the TU Delft, interviewed 3rd of October 2014.
14
20
Commercial director of Pyroil International, interviewed at the 5th of August 2014.
21
Commercial advisor of Energy Vision, interviewed at the 6th of August 2014.
Commercial director of BlueAlp BV and project manager at Petrogas, interviewed on the 15th
of August 2014.
23 Founder of Bin2Barrel, interviewed at the 19th of August 2014.
22
29
4.
Location factors
In this chapter the research to the location factors for plastic to oil companies is done. In the first
section, the locations from worldwide plastic to oil companies are explained. Then, the location
factors chosen in this research will be explained and collected per company. In the third section,
the outcome of this research is discussed. Followed, by the location factors from Dutch plastic to
oil companies, which will be explained in section four. In paragraph five, the available location
factors in Dutch seaports are discussed. Finally, in section six the conclusion of this chapter is
stated.
4.1 Worldwide plastic to oil locations
4.1.1 Introduction
On this moment, there are a couple of locations worldwide on which plastic to oil companies are
located. Examples are in the United States, Japan, and Switzerland.
In the United States, the American Chemistry Council (ACC) provided a research in 2011 for
plastic to oil companies (Holmes, 2011). In this research, a list with US plastic to oil companies
and foreign plastic to oil companies is provided. As mentioned before, in section 3.2, the total list
with worldwide plastic to oil companies is a combination from multiple resources. The list from
the ACC (Holmes, 2011), and multiple newspaper articles are the starting point for the total
plastic to oil company list in table 2.1 in Appendix 2. Those companies found, were traceable
because of the recent information.
The expansion from the total plastic to oil list is based on adding information from lists found on
online forums (Investors Hub n.d.; Raging Bull n.d.). All those sources together, gathered over
hundred companies. Many companies found on those two forum lists are eliminated from this
research, because they only use bio-based pyrolysis. Other possible reasons are if their exact
factory location is not found, or if it is not sure if the companies still exists. Some companies have
merged or seem not to be in operation anymore. The total list with plastic to oil companies is
listed in table 2.1 in Appendix 2.
Some companies only sell the pyrolysis technique, and therefore, they do not contribute in this
research. A list with the plastic to oil technique companies can be found in Appendix 3, Table 1.
Another reason why companies are eliminated in this research is that the location of the factory
could not be retrieved. A list with the remaining companies can be found in Appendix 3, Table 2.
Some companies of the list of the ACC (Holmes, 2011) cannot be traced anymore. If that is the
case, they are left out of this research as well. The table with those company names can be found
in Appendix 3, Table 3.
4.1.2 Worldwide plastic to oil companies
In seven countries working plastic to oil installations are found with their factory location. Most
of the factories are located in the US, but multiple countries in Europe have factories as well. In
Table 4.1.2.1, a list with the worldwide locations of plastic to oil companies is stated.
All the companies in the list, as stated in the previous paragraph, are private owned commercial
companies, except the companies from Japan. Almost two decades ago in Japan a new insight
and vision was born. To stop litter and decrease the pressure on the landfill locations, therefore
multiple recycling complexes were built. From those 12 recycling complexes, two are equipped
with a plastic to oil installation.
30
Table 4.1.2.1: Location information Plastic to oil companies
Plastic to oil companies - Worldwide
Country
Name of the company
City
Czech Republic
GB Pyrolysis
Brno
Germany
Nill-Tech GmbH
Holzgerlingen
India
Pyrocrat Systems LLP
Mumbai
Japan
Mogami Kiki Co. Ltd.
Shinjō-shi
Sapporo Plastic Recycle
Sapporo
Corporation
Sweden
Cassandra Oil AB
Västeras
Switzerland
PlastOil
Sihlbrugg
United States
Agilyx
Tigard
Nexus Fuels LLC
Atlanta
Plastic Advanced
Willowbrook
Recycling Corporation
Plastic2Oil
Niagara Falls
RES PolyFlow
Akron
Vadxx
Akron Cleveland
Prototype / factory
Factory
Factory
Factory
Factory
Factory
Factory
Factory
Factory
Factory
Factory
Factory
Factory
Factory
In the figure below, figure 4.1.2.2, the worldwide plastic to oil locations of factories are visible.
All the green colored countries are the countries where the plastic to oil companies are located.
The exact location of the plant is marked. In the US and in Europe, many locations are close.
Therefore, there are two separated figures available. From the US, the figure is available in
Appendix 4, figure 4.1 and the Europe figure is available in Appendix 4, figure 4.2.
Figure 4.1.2.2: Worldwide Plastic to Oil Locations
31
4.2 Location factors per country
4.2.1 Chosen location factors
In this research, many location factors are investigated. In this section, the chosen location
factors are explained. The location factors are divided into five different groups.
Geographical characteristics
For the geographical characteristics, all the possible modes of transport are taken into
considerations. Therefore, the distance in km to a highway, train terminal, port, and airport are
stated. Additional to those geographical characteristics is the distance to a university. According
to Audretsch et al. (2005), new techniques and innovative companies are locating close to
knowledge spillovers, so close to universities. Porter (1990) and Roelandt et al. (1999) agree
and argues that knowledge is an import factor, which is explained in section 2.6.
Input and output location factors
From the theory in section 2.5, it is clear that companies are searching for an optimal location
between input, production, and output factors. The Weber L-P model creates an optimal point
between input and output product locations, based on the distance to available feedstock and
the distance to the market to sell the output. The model takes transportation costs in account. In
section 2.5, this is further explained.
The Input location factor is the availability and quality of the feedstock and the transportation
costs to gather it in the factory. According to Porter (1990) and Lundmark (2001), the
comparative advantage of plastic to oil companies is that they transform plastic waste in a
valuable raw material. The location factor of the availability of feedstock is therefore added in
section 4.2.2. Clustering together can provide the plastic to oil company with feedstock and
customers (Holmes, 2011). Plastic to oil manufactures should establish their plants close to the
source of the material at a material recovery facility (Holmes, 2011). A further explanation can
be found in section 2.6.
The output location factor is called demand, and it explains if the product is certified. It is
important if the polluting permits are satisfied for that particularly chosen country. If so, the
output has more market value.
Agglomeration factor
The location factor for the surrounding of the chosen location is called the agglomeration factor.
This factor explains if the company is located at a business park or if it is located at a chemical
cluster. According to Lundmark (2001), companies tend to cluster together. Clusters have the
advantages that they intend to innovate (Roelandt et al., 1999), and develop more and newer
techniques (Porter, 2000). Røyne et al. (2014) adds that clusters can develop efficient
environmental strategies. A further explanation is discussed in section 2.6.
Process location factors
Additional needed location factors for the production are the required employees, pollution, and
energy needs. Skilled workers are an important factor to create greater efficiency opportunities
(Porter, 1990). Pollution is important for the chemical industry to receive permits for the factory
and production of plastic to oil. To choose a location, companies need to have discussions with
state and local governments about their business incentives and tax prices, because this can
influence the location of the factory (Holmes, 2011). Because plastic to oil companies are
industry it is expected that they need to receive energy for the production process. Therefore,
the location factor power supply is added.
32
Financial location factor
A financial location factor is added for the private companies. They need to make enough returns
on their investment. According to Porter (1990), investments are important factors of
production. Therefore, this financial location factor called capital costs is added.
Additional location factor
The size of the city where the plastic to oil company is located is also taken into account in this
research. Lundmark (2001) finds this an important factor. The location factor is called
population. The size of a city might be helpful to draw conclusions in the combination with other
location factors.
The following location factors are chosen: geographical characteristics near by the location,
clustering together, influence, and availability of feedstock, the location for the demand for oil,
pollution regulations, employees needed, required power supply, and the capital costs. In section
4.2.2 all the chosen location factors are put in a table to compare the different location factors
between the different plastic to oil companies. All the chosen location factors are visible in table
4.2.1.1. Some additional information is added in the table as well. For instance, the year of the
establishment of the company, the number of plants available, types of plastics applicable for the
company, types of output of the production process, and how polluting the factory is. This
information is not directly needed to transform into a location factor, but it could give a better
insight in the different companies.
Table 4.2.1.1: Chosen Location Factors
Location Factors
Factors
Year
Population
Number of plants
Geographic
Highway (distance in km)
characteristics
Train (distance in km)
Port (distance in km)
University (distance in km)
Airport (distance in km)
Agglomeration
Business park
Chemical cluster
Feedstock
Availability
Types of plastics
Demand
Certified
Product
Pollution
Country emission criteria
Pollution
Employee
X
Power supply
Needed
Capital cost
IRR; Quick return on investments
Information
Date of first operation
Size of the city
Number of plants
Distance to the closest highway
Distance to the closest train terminal
Distance to the closest (sea)port
Distance to the closest university
Distance to the closest airport
Located at a business park
Located at a chemical cluster
Availability of plenty waste plastics
Types of plastics applicable
Is the output certified oil
Percentage of different output
Available permits
Explanation about polluting risks
Skilled employees necessary
Necessary energy needs
Return time of the investments in
years
4.2.2 Plastic to oil companies per country
In this section, the location factors for every plastic to oil company are identified. Per company a
table is filled with important information on the location factors found. Special details of
information about the company are written down in an introduction per company.
33
Czech Republic
In the Czech Republic is the factory of GB Pyrolysis established a little north of Brno. The
company is located close to the highways in the two main directions in the Czech Republic. Brno
is located in the eastern south of the Czech Republic, the distance to Prague is about 200 km. GP
Pyrolysis is located at a business park. GB Pyrolysis is positioned close to almost all the location
factors, except a port. GB Pyrolysis can handle many different types of plastic waste like PP, PE,
LDPE, HDPE, PS, ABS, PUR, PES, Tires, Rubbers and a few more. The waste can be converted in
multiple types of output, namely traditional diesel, poly-fuel (characteristics similar to diesel,
poly-gas, and carbon black. GB Pyrolysis is also setting up a plastic to oil plant in Slovenia. All the
location factors of GB Pyrolysis are stated in Appendix 4, in table 4.1.
Germany
Nill-Tech GmbH is located in the southwest of Germany and 28 km south of Stuttgart. For ten
years, this company is making oil out of waste plastics. All the location factors of Nill-Tech are
stated in table 4.2, in Appendix 4. From 1-ton waste plastic, they can produce 950 liters oil. The
feedstock from Nill-Tech is coming mainly from the automobile industry and the cosmetic
industry.
India
The company Accpre Engineering is located in Hyderabad. The company is located in the city,
however not so close to the highway. The problem with India is that their transportation system
and legislation is entirely different. Only a few roads are from asphalt, the rest is not. Therefore
their transportation possibilities are completely different than in developed countries. Together
with the dated information online available about the location factors, Accpre Engineering is left
out of this research.
Japan
The first plastic to oil company from Japan is Mogami Kiko. The company is located in a recycling
complex in Shinjō-shi. It is located in the middle of Japan on the main island. The company is
located in an area with mountains. Mogami Kiko is located only 3 km away from a bigger road,
but unfortunately further away from a real highway. The location factors of Mogami Kiko are
stated in table 4.3 in Appendix 4.
The second plastic to oil company in Japan is Sapporo Plastic Recycle Corporation. This company is
part of a recycling complex in Sapporo (Legislative Council Secretariat, 2006). A website is not
found, but because a location is available and the companies in Japan are stated owned and
cooperative with other recycling companies in the same recycling complex, this location can
contribute to this research. In table 4.4 in Appendix 4, the location factors of Sapporo Plastic
Recycle Corporation are stated.
Sweden
Cassandra Oil AB is located 60 km west from Stockholm. It is located near inland water, but not
directly on the sea. Their oil is sold on the open market. Cassandra oil has long-term contracts
with partners in the waste management business to ensure enough feedstock. The location
factors are stated in table 4.5 in Appendix 4.
Switzerland
PlastOil AG is located 15 km south of Zurich. One kilogram of plastic is transformed into one liter
of fuel. A PlastOil factory is only build if there is enough feedstock available, therefore, a location
is chosen based on a plastic source point of view. The standard PlastOil factory will have three
lines of plastic to oil machinery available. This results in a high standard of production at all
times. If there are only non-recyclable waste plastics from households available, then around
400,000 households are needed for enough plastic waste. All the location factors are mentioned
in table 4.6 in Appendix 4.
34
United States
In the United States (US), there are multiple locations. Almost all the locations are in the
northern part of the US. The earlier mentioned research done by the ACC, is about the economic
impact of plastic to oil in the US (Rose-Glowacki, Moore, Swift & Sanchez, 2014). In the US, a
maximum of 600 PTO facilities can be build, which accounts for almost 39,000 jobs. The direct
and indirect economic value is expected up to 30 billion dollars, with an additional annually
economic value of two billion dollar (Rose-Glowacki et al., 2014). In the US, a couple of
supporting measures are available, like job creating taxes or agriculture grants when we talk
about locating in a rural area (Holmes, 2011). Other factors that help create an interesting
investing climate are supporting investments in green technologies, investments in alternative
fuel production opportunities, rising fuel costs and the vision to support the increase in recovery
and recycling goals of plastics (Holmes, 2011). The US companies are stated in alphabetical
order.
The first company in the US, Agilyx in Portland is established in a business park with many
technical companies. Most of the surrounding companies are based on electronics. Agilyx is
located southwest of Portland and it is located close to a highway. The other geographical factors
located close to Agilyx are a river, a port, and a train terminal. A priority of Agilyx is to ship
waste only for short distances. The project development starts with a feedstock analysis,
followed by a permitting strategy, then a site assessment, and lastly secures feedstock
agreements. An average of 8.5 until 10 pounds of plastic waste generates approximately one
gallon of synthetic crude oil. The location factors are stated in table 4.7 in Appendix 4.
The second US company, Nexus Fuels LLC is a company located in the city Atlanta. Nexus Fuels is
located at a business park surrounded by many depots and less than one km away from a huge
transportation center, which has enormous rail capacity. At the same time, the company is
located close to highways in all the desired directions. The output of Nexus Fuels is a mixture of
naptha (light hydrocarbon oil), gasoline, kerosene, diesel, and a heavy oil/wax. The location
factors are stated in table 4.8 in Appendix 4.
The third plastic to oil company in the US is the Plastic Advanced Recycling Corporation, which is
located in Atlanta. All the geographical location factors are close by. The company produces
4605 gallons of oil and 4.5-ton carbon black out of 30-ton plastic. The location factors are stated
in table 4.9 in Appendix 4.
The fourth US company is Plastic2Oil and is located in the New York part of Niagara Falls, close
to Canada. It is located next to a river, but the river is not directly connected to a sea, only some
lakes. There is no port in the neighbour. The interstate is close and the same accounts for a train
terminal. Plastic2Oil makes green jobs possible, from one kg of unwashed, unsorted waste
plastics can Plastic2Oil produce one liter of oil. In table 4.10 in Appendix 4 are the location
factors of Plastic2Oil stated.
RES PolyFlow is the fifth plastic to oil company in the US and is located in the city of Akron. It is
located on a business park with many research centers and buildings of the government.
PolyFlow is located next to the University of Akron. An airport is located close by with
connections to many routes to eastern US locations. At the same time, many railways are close,
with many connections in all the possible directions. In table 4.11 in Appendix 4, are the location
factors of RES PolyFlow stated.
The sixth plastic to oil company in the US is Vadxx, also established in Akron. Vadxx is
established on the border of a business park, but also not so far away from houses. The company
is also located next to the University of Akron and the same counts for a node for the Interstate
in all possible directions. An airport is located close to Vadxx with many routes to eastern US
locations. At the same time, many railways are close, with many connections in all the possible
directions. On average, about 10 pounds of plastic waste can create 1 gallon of oil, 2 pounds of
35
fuel gas and 1 pound of inert char. The oil is delivered to liquid terminals, fuel blenders, and
wholesale marketers. Everyday 6 till 12 trucks deliver the plastics. The location factors of Vadxx
are mentioned in table 4.12 in Appendix 4.
4.3 Location factors plastic to oil companies worldwide
From the research in the previous section, a list with location factors is formed for the existing
plastic to oil companies worldwide. In this list of plastic to oil companies, only the companies
that provided information from the location of their factory are contributing in this research. For
every location factor three possible options are available to determine the importance of the
location factor. The categories are necessary, conducive, or negligible location factors.
Population
First, the sizes of the cities where the plastic to oil companies are located are considered in
figure 4.3.1. The cities vary from 12,000 inhabitants to 1.9 million inhabitants. The cities are
entirely different, in size, location and in their surroundings. Plastic to oil companies can get the
feedstock from two different waste producers: municipal waste or industrial waste (Panda et al.,
2010). A city with only 12,000 inhabitants seems too small to have their own plastic to oil
company. Nevertheless, if there are enough surrounding cities or companies, which produce
plastic waste, it seems possible.
Figure 4.3.1: Population
Population
5
Number
4
3
2
1
0
< 20
20 - 50
50 - 200
> 200
People (x1000)
Geographic characteristics
The geographic characteristics explain the distance between the plastic to oil facility and a mode
of transport, as a highway, train terminal, port, or airport. The availability of a university is also a
geographical characteristic. The first geographical factor is the distance to a highway. In figure
4.3.2, the distance to a highway is stated for all the plastic to oil companies. From this figure, we
can conclude that almost all the companies are very close positioned to a highway. The only
exception is Mogami Kiko from Japan, which is located in the mountains in a part of Japan where
there are no highways. The only thing to consider is that highways are close to economic
activities. A plastic to oil factory could have the same reason for locating close to economic
activity. Therefore, the conclusion is that it is likely that a highway is close by, and therefore it
seems to be a necessary location factor, but further research is necessary to see if there is an
underlying relationship.
36
Figure 4.3.2: Highway Distance
Highway distance
6
5
Number
4
3
2
1
0
<3
3-6
7 - 10
> 11
Distance in km
After the geographical location factor highway, the next factor is distance to a rail terminal. For
all the plastic to oil companies, the distance to the nearest train terminal is investigated. Most of
the plastic to oil companies are located on a business park, and outside of the cities. In many
cases, there was a rail terminal close by. The distance measured is the distance to a rail terminal
or company owning a transport facility for the departure from trains. In figure 4.3.3, the train
distance between the plastic to oil companies and terminals is visible. From the figure, we can
conclude that most plastic to oil companies are located nearby a train terminal. Nevertheless, the
same question arises as before, is this location chosen because of the distance to a train terminal
or is another factor influencing the location decision. The train terminal and a plastic to oil
company need much space and cargo transportation is often located outside of big cities on
business parks. Therefore, although at almost every location a train terminal is nearby, it is
unlikely that they use it for the transport of plastic waste or the oil. Railway transport is more
expensive than transport by truck for smaller distances. For high volumes over larger distances
(over 200 km), railway transport is competing with transport by truck. For smaller distances,
this is not the case. Therefore, it is likely that the location factor for train distance is negligible.
Figure 4.3.3: Train Terminal Distance
Train Terminal distance
6
Number
5
4
3
2
1
0
<3
3-6
7-9
> 10
Distance in km
37
The third geographical location factor is the distance to a port. The distance is taken from the
plastic to oil company to the nearest port. The two port functions for a plastic to oil company are
a transport node, and an economic activity center to produce plastic waste. Another benefit of a
port is that it can be used to sell the fuel after the pyrolysis process. In figure 4.3.4, this port
distance is showed. There are huge differences between the different plastic to oil companies. If
the plastic to oil locations are inland, they can easily have distances from over 400 km.
Transporting plastic waste is costly, therefore it is unlikely to move the waste plastics over
larger distances. If these huge distances appear, it eliminates the option that plastic waste is
shipped by a port. The two remaining port functions are only a considerable option if the plastic
to oil company is close enough to the port. Therefore, the location factor port distance is likely to
be a conducive factor. For some companies it can be import, but for others it is not.
Figure 4.3.4 Port Distance
Port distance
5
Number
4
3
2
1
0
< 10
10 - 50
50 - 100
> 100
Distance in km
The fourth geographical factor is the distance to a university. This location factor is chosen
because there are multiple reasons why locating near a university could be interesting. First, a
university could influence and support the quick development of new technology. Second, in the
neighbor or city of a university the level of high skilled workers is higher. All the positive
influences of a university can be helpful in further developing the plastic to oil technique.
In this case, there are many differences between the location distances for universities. Some
plastic to oil companies are located almost on the university property while others seem to have
no connection with a university or are at least located far away from an university. The
universities from the Czech Republic and two of the US universities are located very close, while
the universities in Japan are far away. In figure 4.3.5, the university distance is showing the
distances between universities and plastic to oil companies.
38
Figure 4.3.5 University Distance
University distance
6
Number
5
4
3
2
1
0
<3
3 - 10
10 - 20
> 20
Distance in km
Most of the time, universities are located in bigger cities, but comparing the size of a city and the
university distance is not showing a convincing pattern. Assumed is that small cities are till
50.000 inhabitants, middle cities between 50,000 and 200,000 inhabitants and big cities are
over 200,000 inhabitants. In figure 4.3.6, the university distance and population of cities are
compared. However, the figure is not showing a convenience pattern. Although it seems that a
plastic to oil company is located further away from a university in smaller cities, it is not entirely
different in middle and large cities. On average, the distances to a university are smaller in
middle or large cities, nevertheless, this is not for every city. An explanation could be that
universities contribute in the development of the plastic to oil technique. Nevertheless, when the
technique is developed, other plastic to oil companies can easily locate further away from
universities.
If small cities have enough industrial waste or surrounding cities there could be enough plastic
waste available for a plastic to oil company. Although, most universities are not located in small
cities, the plastic to oil companies are found in small and in big cities. However, the distance to a
university can be quite far. Therefore having a university close by located is likely a conducive
factor.
Figure 4.3.6: University Distance and Population
University distance and population
70
Distance in km
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Population in PtO city
39
The fifth geographical factor is airport distance. It is unlikely that plastic waste will use an
airport as transportation method to a plastic to oil company. However, an airport could buy the
fuel after the pyrolysis process. There seems no pattern in the distances between the different
countries or plastic to oil companies compared with the distance to an airport. In figure 4.3.7,
the distance from a plastic to oil company to an airport is stated. In the future, it could be
possible that the oil of the pyrolysis companies has the quality, needed to blend kerosene. It is
unlikely that airline companies are waiting in line for the oil of plastic to oil companies. It is a big
step, there is more expected, and risks in flying than in the shipping business due to fuel.
Therefore, airport distance is likely to be a negligible location factor.
Figure 4.3.7 Airport Distance
Airport distance
5
Number
4
3
2
1
0
< 10
10 - 25
25 - 40
> 40
Distance in km
Agglomeration
For the agglomeration location factor we expect from the theory that the location of a plastic to
oil company is close to the collection of the plastic waste. Because waste plastics are light and
voluminous the transport costs are an import source of costs. The Weber Location-Production
model and Moses Location-Production model (section 2.5) support this, that an optimal location
close by is necessary. The Hotelling Model of Spatial Competition (section 2.5) and comperative
advantage theory from Porter (section 2.6) explains that similar companies tend to cluster,
because of the numerous advantages. Therefore we expact that pattern in the agglomeration
location factor of plastic to oil companies. Pyrolysis is a chemical process, so it can be expected
to cluster with chemical companies or cluster with waste recycling companies. Both options
provide feedstock for the company, and are likely to occure. Plastic to oil is a chemical process
and it is unlikely that a plastic to oil company will receive a permit to locate in a residential area,
because of the allocation plan. Therefore the agglomeration factor of a business park seems
necessary.
In the previous paragraph, the expectation of the agglomeration factor for business parks and
chemical industry are explained and now compared with the noticed agglomeration factor with
worldwide existing plastic to oil companies. The agglomeration factor business park and
chemical industry explais more about the surrounding companies from the plastic to oil
company. All the plastic to oil companies are located in business parks. The surrounding
companies differ a little, from technological parks, to warehousing parks, or even chemical
industry. However, the plastic to oil companies in Japan are located at recycling clusters. The
companies in Sweden and Plastic2Oil in the US are located at chemical industry clusters.
Therefore, there remain two additional possibilities, a cluster on a chemical industry location, or
cluster on a recycling location. Both those possibilities are visible in different countries,
therefore both are likely to be conducive.
40
Feedstock
The feedstock for plastic to oil companies has two categories. The first category is municipal
waste and the second category is industrial waste (Panda et al., 2010). Companies can use one
category or mix them up. For the municipal waste, estimates from the Swedish company
Cassandra Oil are available about the amount of waste necessary for a plastic to oil factory. The
company needs around 400,000 inhabitants to make sure enough plastic waste is available.
Therefore, it seems unlikely that a city of only 12,000 inhabitants is big enough to use municipal
plastics only from their own city. Using industrial plastics or importing plastic waste are options
to ensure the availability of enough plastic waste.
The plastic to oil concept is completely based on the availabilty and affordability of waste
plastics nearby. According to the Weber Locantion-Production model (section 2.5) the optimal
location of a plastic to oil company is expected to be closer to the source of waste plastics, then
the location of the output market. This is because plastic waste contains large amount of air, is
light weighted and volumious. A kg of plastics takes more volume than a liter of oil, therefore the
optimal location is closer to the available location of the plastic waste.
From the worldwide plastic to oil companies six companies have mentioned that their feedstock
is the most important deteminant of the location decision. The plastic to oil companies from
Japan are positioned as a recylcing cluster as a whole. The location decision of the recycling
cluster is also based on the availability of feedstock. The other companies haven’t mentioned it,
but because waste plastics are their core business, we can assume that waste plastics are
necessary and important. Therefore the availability of the feedstock is a necessary location
factor.
End Product
The end product of the different plastic to oil companies are comparable. Although the output
can differ a little, because of different pyrolysis systems and different input plastics, the quality
is still comparable. However an official quality control is important. A certified product has a
larger market value and is easier to sell. Only a couple of plastic to oil companies have
mentioned the certification of the product. Although only a couple of companies mention this
criterium, it is still a conducive factor.
Besides the quality of the output, the oil, it is important to locate close enough to the sales
market of the oil. If the oil is applicable as fuel for ships, than a location nearby a bunker port is
needed. If the target group is kerosene, than the location needs to be close enough to an airport.
For private companies, it is urgent to have customers for the output, to be a healthy, longlasting
private company. Therefore the location decision is influenced by the sales market of the output,
which makes this a necessary location factor.
Pollution
The pollution location factor is devided into two different groups, the country emission criteria,
and how polluting the used pyrolysis technique is. The country emission criteria are the criteria
that a company has to obey with their production emissions. The emissions should meet the
handed permits the country has sold or given the company. So every company in the country has
to obay the same regulations and emission critera.
The other factor is how polluting the used pyrolysis technique is. For example, the US companies
only need a regular CO2 permit, because the used pyrolysis technique is clean. This pyrolysis
technique could be less polluting than other chemical companies. The pyrolysis technique used
is clean and less polluting than burning waste. Therefeore, only a standard permit is needed in
most of the countries in this research. However, for a different technique, or starting the first
plastic to oil company in a country could determine the need of an extra license to operate.
Therefore, the emission criteria is a conducive location factor.
41
Staff
The pyrolysis machinery is not labour-intensive, so only a few employees are needed for the
factory to run 24/7. Most of the plastic to oil companies bought or hired the pyrolysis machinery
so specialized developers are not necessary. The staff location factor is therefore conducive and
is less important.
Energy
Most of the energy needed for the pyrolysis process can be retrieved from the oil (end product)
of the pyrolysis process it self. Besides from the energy needed for the start-up, only a few
pomps are electricity driven. For the rest of the energy comsumption, the produced oil or gas
can be used. Therefor, there is not a huge energy need, so the assumption made here is that this
energy need will easily be furfilled on any location. The energy location factor is negligilble and
less important.
Capital costs
For privately owned plastic to oil companies the return on investments is more important than
for a government owned company. In Japan all the plastic to oil companies are built on recycling
parks and government owned, so the return on investments is less important. Although they will
benefit from a quick return on investments. Except for Japan and Sweden where the return on
investments are not mentioned, for the rest of the companies we see differences between 1 year
and up till 4 years. In the graph below, figure 4.3.8, the quick return on investments of the
worldwide plastic to oil companies are stated. Besides the economic motive, the other motives
are green (less polluting) energy, and a solution for plastic waste.
Many earlier mentioned location factors have influence on the returns of the investment. The
distance between the location of the plastic to oil company, the source of the plastics and the
sales market, together with the affordability of the plastic waste are the cost intensive factors.
Keeping them low, will make the returns on investment higher. As an additional note, the fiscal
climate has an influence on the company results, and on the returns of investments as well. For
private companies the returns on investments are imported, so it is a conducive factor.
Figure 4.3.8 Quick Return on Investments
Quick Return on Investments (IRR)
4
Number
3
2
1
0
1
2
3
3<
IRR in years
Concluding remarks
In this research, the following location factors seemed to be important to the existing plastic to
oil companies for the location decision of new plastic to oil companies. In table 4.3.9, the entire
list of location factors is mentioned, including the importance of the factor.
42
Table 4.3.9: Location factors of worldwide companies
Location Factors
Factors
Geographical
Highway (distance in km)
characteristics
Train terminal (distance in km)
Port (distance in km)
University (distance in km)
Airport (distance in km)
Agglomeration
Business park
Chemical cluster
Recycling cluster
Feedstock
Availability
Demand
Certified
Sales market
Pollution
Country emission criteria
Power supply
Needed
Capital cost
IRR; Quick return on investments
Importance of the factor
Necessary
Negligible
Conducive
Conducive
Negligible
Necessary
Conducive
Conducive
Necessary
Conducive
Necessary
Conducive
Negligible
Conducive
In this section, the location factors, which are found by a research of the existing worldwide
companies, are integrated. Although there are some differences between the different countries,
they are not taken out of this research because it helps explaining the different decision methods
for a location decision for a plastic to oil company. In the next section, the previously founded
location factors will be compared with the requested location factors for Dutch plastic to oil
companies.
4.4 Location factors Dutch plastic to oil companies
After examining the location factors for worldwide plastic to oil companies, it is time to focus on
the Dutch market. In the Netherlands, multiple companies are establishing plastic to oil
companies. Some have the plastic to oil technique available themselves, while others buy the
needed technique from companies who are specialized in the technique. On this moment, none
of the companies has a working factory, but a few are working on their pilot facility or have one
in a foreign country.
4.4.1 Dutch Plastic to oil companies
The following companies in the Netherlands are working with a plastic to oil case, Bin2Barrel,
BlueAlp, Energy Vision, and Pyroil International. All those companies cooperated with an
interview about their business and location choice. In the beginning there seemed to be more
plastic to oil companies, but at this moment they are not active anymore.
The results from the interviews with the four companies are discussed below. The interviews
were open, but a list with questions was used, an example from that list is stated in Appendix 5.
The main point for their location choice is close to the feedstock. All four of the companies based
their decision of the region on the availability of the feedstock. Because plastics have large
volumes but are light weighted it is important to transport it for distances as small as possible.
Otherwise the transportation costs are becoming too high and that is not efficient for this
recycling process. To find the final location, other location factors are also imported. Although,
this factor seems like the most important condition, Bin2Barrel proves differently. Power supply
is a negligible location factor, because only limited power is needed and that is available all over
the Netherlands.
43
Bin2Barrel
Bin2Barrel is a plastic to oil company located in Amsterdam and planning to build their factory
in the Port of Amsterdam. In an interview24 with one of the owners of Bin2Barrel more
information about the company and their necessary location factors are given. The company has
a company site in the Port of Amsterdam. Feedstock is an important factor, but other factors
influenced Bin2Barrel so positively, that the location decision was primarily based on other
location factors. The cooperation from the Port of Amsterdam and the province North-Holland
influenced the company by supporting the company. Therefore, a location in the Port of
Amsterdam was chosen. The chosen location is not based on the feedstock, but on the
preferences of the Port of Amsterdam and the province. For Bin2Barrel the location of a Dutch
Seaport provides benefits. An example is the import of large volumes of plastic from Ireland.
Bin2barrel will sell the oil in and around the port area, as blended oil for ships or cars. In table
5.1 in Appendix 5, the location factors that are necessary for Bin2Barrel for the location choice
decision are stated.
BlueAlp BV/ Petrogas
BlueAlp, previously PlastOil, is a company marketed by Petrogas. The plastic to oil technology
will be rolled out by BlueAlp BV. In an interview25 more information about the company, future
plans, projects and their insight in the needed location factors are discussed. BlueAlp
Innovations BV is owner of the pyrolysis technique. For every plastic to oil project BlueAlp
supplies the systems and equipment for the client. BlueAlp BV and Petrogas provide the project
development and technique. They can deliver and build the pyrolysis factory, and set up cleaning
machines if this is necessary. BlueAlp BV is working on different projects in the Netherlands and
Belgium. Although the systems are standardized as much as possible, every project is different.
The common location factors observed by BlueAlp BV are stated in table 5.2 in Appendix 5.
Energy Vision
Energy Vision is a company a little different than the rest of the Dutch plastic to oil companies.
Energy Vision made Biodiesel already with the pyrolysis technique from Siemens. At the same
time they have a ship dockyard and build ships in the province of Groningen. The next challenge
for Energy Vision is creating a new division, which is explained in an interview26. The challenge
is to have a small pyrolysis device on their dock yard, which investors can visit. The final goal is
to find enough investors to build a bigger pyrolysis machine on a ship, so they can fish for litter
in the oceans. In table 5.3 the location factors from Energy Vision are stated in Appendix 5.
Pyroil International
Pyroil International is a start-up which would like to locate in the port of Moerdijk (Havenschap
Moerdijk). An interview27 with the owner of Pyroil International provided this information.
Pyroil International would like to establish in Havenschap Moerdijk, because of the presence of a
car recycling company. Pyroil International can collect plastic dashboards for free. For both the
companies this is useful, because the car recycling business will get a higher recycling
percentage and the plastic to oil company has free clean feedstock on large scale available.
Therefore Pyroil International wants to establish their factory close by this recycling company to
limit the transport costs. However, on this moment Pyroil International is still struggling closing
their business case. In table 5.4 the necessary location factors are stated in Appendix 5.
The location factors are also divided in the three categories, namely necessary, conducive and
negligible. The category is chosen based on the interview with the company to eliminate
24Interview
with the founder of Bin2Barrel, interviewed at the 19th of August 2014.
with the commercial director of BlueAlp BV and a project manager at Petrogas, interviewed on
the 15th of August 2014.
26Interview with the commercial advisor of Energy Vision, interviewed at the 6 th of August 2014.
27Interview with the commercial director of Pyroil International, interviewed at the 5 th of August 2014.
25Interview
44
different opinions and to make it easy to compare. In the next paragraph the conclusion of the
Dutch plastic to oil companies is discussed.
4.4.2 Conclusion from the four Dutch plastic to oil companies
The four Dutch plastic to oil companies have a couple of similarities. From the interviews with
the four Dutch starting plastic to oil companies, the following location factors are important. In
table 4.4.2.1 the important location factors are stated.
Table 4.4.2.1: Location factors Dutch Plastic to oil companies
Location Factors
Factors
Information
Geographical
Highway
Necessary
characteristics
Train terminal
Negligible
Port
Necessary
University
Negligible
Airport
Negligible
Agglomeration
Business park
Necessary
Chemical cluster
Conducive
Recycling cluster
Negligible
Feedstock
Availability
Necessary
Demand
Certified
Necessary
Sales market
Necessary
Pollution
Country emission criteria
Conducive
Power supply
Needed
Negligible
Capital cost
IRR; Quick return on
Not clear yet
investments
Geographical characteristics
From the geographical location factors only highway and ports are important location factors for
the Dutch plastic to oil companies. For Bin2Barrel a port is more than a production location. The
main function of a port, as a node in the transport chain (section 2.3.1), is for Bin2barrel the
reason to locate in a seaport, while the other companies use it as a place for economic activity.
The third reason to choose a port as a location is because the biggest seaports in the Netherlands
are located in large urban areas. However, every company has a different reason for choosing a
location in a port. Examples are desired location of the port and the province, port as a node,
close to the feedstock or close to the demand customers. Highway and port are therefore
necessary location factors for the Dutch plastic to oil companies. Train terminal, university and
airport are negligible location factors for Dutch plastic to oil companies.
Agglomeration
The next location factor is the agglomeration factor, which has three different categories:
business park, chemical cluster, or a recycling park. From the Dutch companies only the business
park agglomeration factor is important. All the companies are establishing on a business park in
or near a seaport. In the Netherlands a chemical plant will not receive a permit and license if
they are planning to build it in a residential area. Therefore a business park is a necessary
location factor. The chemical cluster location factor is conducive, because half of the Dutch
plastic to oil companies argue that this influence their location choice a little.
Feedstock
The feedstock location factor is important for the starting plastic to oil companies. The
availability of enough affordable feedstock is important. Although every Dutch plastic to oil
company is different, for every company is enough affordable feedstock important. Half of the
companies locate close to their feedstock, while the other companies choose a location close to
their demand customers. The companies that did mention the feedstock location factor as
45
conducive instead of necessary are still in advance planning the availability of feedstock. The
difference is that those plastic to oil companies are not locating close to their feedstock, but they
do locate in the area. In the end it is likely that the feedstock location factor is necessary.
Demand
The demand of the plastic to oil companies is important. Most of the companies are trying to get
the product certified. To have a stable and high quality is important for every Dutch company to
be able to sell the oil. For most companies the oil is capable for the fuel for ships or cars. If the
companies can prove a type of certificate it makes it easier to sell the oil. For half of the
companies their location choice is based on distance to their customers, with the argument that
the plastic waste is coming from different locations. Therefore a location nearby your own
customers would limit the transportation costs. Many customers can be found in a port. The
location factor demand is a necessary location factor.
Pollution
According to the Dutch companies there is no pollution, except CO2 emissions. But official
reports are not yet available. The pollution should be comparable with the country emission
criteria in the Netherlands. Everywhere in the Netherlands the same permits apply, therefore
this is not influencing the location decision. This polluting location factor is conducive because it
is necessary to satisfy this pollution criterion, but at the same time it is not influencing the
location choice within the Netherlands. If a plastic to oil company want to establish a factory in
the Netherlands they have to satisfy this emission criteria, whatever location they choose.
From the four companies, only two have the same technique, which means that three different
pyrolysis techniques will be available in the Netherlands in the future. For all those companies
the pollution should be investigated to draw better conclusions.
Employee
The Dutch companies believe that they will have no problems in finding enough qualified
employees. Therefore, the location factor employee is unlikely to play a role in the location
choice for Dutch plastic to oil companies and it is negligible.
Power supply
Although plastic to oil is a chemical process, only a limited amount of electricity is necessary. In
every plastic to oil company some energy is necessary for the start of the pyrolysis process and
for some smaller pumps. It is assumed that everywhere in the Netherlands this is available.
Therefore power supply is unlikely to be a location factor for Dutch plastic to oil companies and
is negligible.
Capital costs
It is difficult to make an accurate estimate when the business case is not clear. It is difficult for
the companies to clarify the capital costs, like return on investments, because they have not
started building the facilities. They are still in the design phase and waiting for the desired
permits before being able to start building the facilities. However, for the companies it will
benefit more if there is an adjustment made on the ladder of Lansink, by adding an extra step
between recycling and waste-to-energy. Pyrolysis deserves a better status than it has now as
some kind of combustion. In the US, under ISO 15270 pyrolysis is recognized as a form of
feedstock recycling (Holmes, 2011). To create an even level playing field this should introduced
in the Netherlands as well. Bergsma et al. (2014) explains the same advice to differentiate
between feedstock recycling and waste-to-energy. In figure 4.4.2.2, this adjusted Ladder of
Lansink 3.0 is stated. To adjust the status of plastic to oil, this will improve the business cases of
the plastic to oil companies and less plastic will be burned.
46
Figure 4.4.2.2: Adjusted Ladder of Lansink 3.0
Besides the location factors the Dutch plastic to oil companies explained more in the interviews
about some hurdles they experience. This will further be explained in chapter five.
4.5 Available location factors Dutch seaports
From the interviews in the previous section, it becomes clear that all of the Dutch plastic to oil
companies wants to establish their factories in Dutch seaports. In this section, all the location
factors for plastic to oil companies are compared with the available location factors in Dutch
seaports.
Chemical clusters
In the Netherlands, there are six chemical industry clusters at five different locations. In an
alphabetic order: Botlek, Chemelot, Delfzijl, Emmtec, Pernis and Terneuzen (Vereniging van de
Nederlandse Chemische Industrie, n.d.). Chemelot is located in Limburg, the southeast of the
Netherlands and is not closely located to a seaport. The same accounts for Emmtec, which is
located in the northeast and is not close by a seaport as well, but they are both located close to
Germany.
The four remaining chemical industry locations are located in seaports. In the Port of Rotterdam
to chemical clusters are located, Botlek and Pernis. They are located in the south-west region in
the Netherlands. Delfzijl is part of Groningen Seaports, located in the northeast region of the
Netherlands, and Terneuzen, part of Zeeland Seaports is located in the south-west of the
Netherlands.
The chemical clusters in the Netherlands have much strength according to the Vereniging van de
Nederlandse Chemische Industrie (2012). The main strengths that are important for plastic to
oil companies are an advanced integration with refineries and pipeline systems, the
transportation infrastructure, the mix with different companies and different products, a skilled
workforce, strong universities and the culture of cooperation. The weaknesses of the Dutch
chemical clusters are the costs of labour, limited number of start-ups and limited number of
available engineers (Vereniging van de Nederlandse Chemische Industrie, 2012). As soon as the
pyrolysis plant is built and working, only a few employees are necessary. Therefore, high labour
costs can be limited.
47
Dutch Seaports
From the four plastic to oil companies three have a desired location in a port, the Port of
Rotterdam, Port of Amsterdam, and Havenschap Moerdijk. The Port of Amsterdam and the Port
of Rotterdam are negotiating with the plastic to oil companies because they would like to have
them on their grounds. The port of Amsterdam has a new business project manager to support
new innovative companies, like a plastic to oil company. The fourth Dutch plastic to oil company
is a little different and locating on their existing shipyard. From that location, they would like to
build the plastic to oil machinery on a ship.
According to Ivan, Burgering, Van den Broek, Groen & Van der Meulen (2009) the Dutch
seaports have many strengths. The most importance strengths for plastic to oil companies in a
Dutch seaport are good geographical location with an expended waterway network, sustainable
development, many supporting port facilities, developed logistical sector, high educated
personnel, establishment opportunities, and the law and regulation. The many ships and
companies make it possible that plenty plastic waste should be available if this is collected
separated. From the Green deal Scheepsafval (section 2.2) it is stated that ships have to separate
their plastic waste. This opens opportunities for a plastic to oil company in or near a seaport.
Besides of the overall strengths of the Dutch chemical clusters and the Dutch seaports, they have
to be compared with the necessary and conducive location factors needed for plastic to oil
companies. The negligible location factors are left out, because they have not proved their
contribution to a location decision. In table 4.5.1 below, the necessary or conducive location
factors are compared with the availability of them in the particular Dutch seaports.
Table 4.5.1: Location Factors of three Dutch Seaports
Location
Factors
Port of
Factors
Rotterdam
Geographic
Highway
Yes
characteristics Port
Yes
University
Yes
Agglomeration Business park
Yes
Chemical
Yes
cluster
Recycling
cluster
Feedstock
Availability
Yes, close from
surrounding
companies, city of
Rotterdam and
ships
Demand
Sales market
Yes
Power supply
Needed
Available
Willingness
PtO in the port
Yes, important
Port of
Amsterdam
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Havenschap
Moerdijk
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
-
-
Yes, close from
surrounding
companies, city of
Amsterdam, ships
and import
Yes
Available
Yes, important
Yes, car
recycling
company
Yes
Available
-
In the table above, pollution and the capital costs are not taken into account. The polluting
location factor is out, because the regulations for permits and licenses are the same in the
Netherlands. The capital costs are left out, because they are different per company, per location
and which types of waste and technology is used. Therefore, an easy comparison is not possible.
All three of the Dutch seaports have a convenient score on the available location factors. From
table 4.5.1 it is visible that on every basis element (necessary or conducive) in the list is satisfied
by the Dutch seaports. From the geographical characteristics only highway and seaport are
necessary location factors. Because university is a conducive location factor for worldwide
plastic to oil companies, the availability of it in Dutch seaports is identified.
48
In this table one additional location factor is included, the willingness of the port regarding to
plastic to oil. As visible in the table, both the Port of Rotterdam and the Port of Amsterdam are
supporting plastic to oil companies to establish in their port.
4.6 Conclusion
In this chapter, the location factors from many worldwide plastic to oil companies are discussed.
Although, their a couple of different types of plastic to oil companies, more or less the same
location factors are important to take the location decision.
The location factors are classified in three categories: necessary, conducive and negligible. The
complete table 4.3.9 with location factors of the worldwide companies is stated in section 4.3.
The most important, necessary location factors for the worldwide plastic to oil companies are
highway distance, location on a business park, the availability of feedstock, and the availability of
a nearby sales market. The necessary location factors are found with almost all the companies.
The conducive location factors are not found with all the companies, but are important for a few
companies, and therefore they are called conducive. The conducive location factors are distance
to a port, distance to a university, locate on a chemical cluster, locate on a recycling cluster, have
a certified oil product, satisfy the country emission criteria, and have a high return on
investments.
The remaining location factors seem negligible. Those factors are distance to train terminal,
distance to an airport, and availability of power supply. Nevertheless, those remaining factors
are not important for a location decision, however they could still be important for a company
but be available on any location. For example, the power supply is a factor, which seems
available on every location, because only limited energy is needed.
From the theory and the necessary location factors for the worldwide plastic to oil companies,
multiple locations in the Netherlands are still capable locations. However, there are differences
between the necessary Dutch location factors and the worldwide ones. In table 4.6.1, all the
location factors are compared between the worldwide companies and the Dutch companies. In
the fifth column the availability of the location factors from the Dutch seaports are stated.
Table 4.6.1: Comparing location factors
Location factor
Geographic
characteristics
Agglomeration
Feedstock
Demand
Pollution
Power supply
Highway
Train terminal
Port
University
Airport
Business park
Chemical cluster
Recycling cluster
Availability
Certified
Sales market
Country emission
criteria
Worldwide
Netherlands
Necessary
Negligible
Conducive
Conducive
Negligible
Necessary
Conducive
Conducive
Necessary
Conducive
Necessary
Conducive
Necessary
Negligible
Necessary
Negligible
Negligible
Necessary
Conducive
Negligible
Necessary
Necessary
Necessary
Conducive
Negligible
Negligible
Dutch
Seaport
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
49
IRR; Quick return
Conducive
Not clear yet
on investments
Yes
Willingness
Location
Necessary
The location factors that are important for the Dutch and the worldwide companies are marked
in green. The difference between Dutch companies and the worldwide companies are visible in
red. The port location factor, the certified demand factor, and the willingness of a location are all
marked in red. All the Dutch companies seem to locate in a seaport, while from the worldwide
companies none of the companies is located in a port. The Dutch are known for their water and a
lot of ports and port areas are available, compared to the international companies. A large part
of the Dutch economic activities are involved in import, export and industry located on and by
using the Dutch seaports. None of the other worldwide companies have the same economic
structure as the Netherlands. The other factor is the certified demand. The European legislation
and Dutch legislation have strict rules on chemical industry and the sales of uncertified fuels.
Therefore receiving the certification is more important for the Dutch plastic to oil companies.
The willingness of the Dutch seaports to establish a plastic to oil company in their port is
growing. The two biggest seaports are putting efforts and support companies to establish on
their grounds. This could contribute in the location choice in favour of a seaport.
The result from this research is to understand the location choice which plastic to oil companies
make, to see if those are available in the Netherlands. Although, there is much to learn from the
worldwide companies, there seem to be some differences between Dutch location choice and
international location choice. Dutch seaports are the desired location for plastic to oil
companies. All the necessary and conducive location factors come together in seaports. The
other, most important location factor is the availability of feedstock which is available in or
nearby the Dutch seaports. The other factors that influence the location decision of Dutch plastic
to oil companies are highway distance, to locate on a business park, the availability of a sales
market, and a certified product.
50
5.
Other factors influencing plastic to oil companies
Besides the location factors, other factors could influence the plastic to oil companies as well. If
these are obstructive government policies, those policies should be adapted. Policies are
necessary to adapt for obstacles and barriers. If they become those barriers, the policies could be
outdated. In this chapter, other factors that are influencing the Dutch plastic to oil companies
will be discussed.
5.1 Other factors influencing plastic to oil companies
From the different interviews with the Dutch starting plastic to oil companies, it becomes clear
that other factors are influencing the Dutch plastic to oil companies as well. All four Dutch plastic
to oil companies made a location choice decision already. At the same time, all the companies are
still in the pre-building stage of the pyrolysis machinery. It seems a difficult step to close the
business case.
In the interviews with the plastic to oil companies, it was clear that there are two different roles,
which are expected from the government. On one hand, plastic to oil deserves the same attention
as recycling and obstructive policies should be eliminated. The second role for the government is
adding a recycling label like feedstock recycling for plastic to oil, as stated before in paragraph
4.4.
On this moment, there is not a policy about plastic to oil, pyrolysis or if there should become one.
For recycling and waste-to-energy there are policies made to support this positive development.
Many policies are about stimulating green growth or the circular economy. It is clear that those
policies are based on green growth, eliminating waste and creating a more circular economy
(section 2.2). The discussion in section 2.4 results in a clear answer why pyrolysis is better for
the environment and maintaining the energy level from the plastic waste. Enough waste is
available for the AVI’s, but waste plastics will be recycled on a higher level. However, Dutch
policy is not cooperating with that. It seems that the level playing field is uneven between
recycling, waste-to-energy, and plastic to oil. Because plastic to oil will contribute to a more
circular economy and less waste, this should get a follow up.
Although many companies are trying to establish a business case around plastic to oil, or see it
as a new opportunity from their current business, there is not a single factory built in the
Netherlands. Some companies see this opportunity for plastic to oil for years, but none of those
companies has actually started building.
Another point, which is already mentioned in section 4.5, is the willingness of the ports. While
the willingness of a port is not a real location factor, it influences the location choice. Therefore,
it is mentioned before. Nevertheless, the willingness of the Dutch seaports (Rotterdam and
Amsterdam) is contributing to Dutch plastic to oil companies.
From the interviews, it is clear that the license process takes a very long time. More than half a
year is long waiting time. This makes it difficult to establish a factory quickly, but on the other
hand, it is a standard procedure in the Netherlands.
5.2 Government policies
From 2011 on, many government letters contain topics with recycling, the circular economy,
green growth, or waste. Every policy has to consider the Dutch waste management plan (I&M,
2011). An example to reduce plastic waste is to prohibit free plastic bags in supermarkets (I&M,
2011). In section 2.2, many government letters are discussed. Examples like the plastic cycle
value chain agreement (I&M, 2013b) and the green deal scheepsafvalketen (I&M, 2014a) have
proven that this kind of agreements contributes to less waste and a better separated collection
of waste (I&M, 2014b). Government policies are necessary when it is not economical profitable
to recycle, but when it contributes to the social benefits (Netherlands Bureau for Economic
51
Policy Analysis, 2014). Additional to the previous examples, other influencing policies
influencing Dutch plastic to oil companies are discussed below.
A change in the Dutch policy is visible with the transition to a circular economy that waste is
more than just a by-product, it needs to be handled like a resource (I&M, 2014d). To stimulate
this in the Netherlands, a special program is established, namely “Van afval naar grondstof”,
translated as ‘from waste to a resource’, which started in 2011 (I&M, 2013a). This Dutch policy
is a reaction on the European policy from resource efficiency (European Commission, 2011). The
main points from this Dutch policy are to treat waste like a resource, to tackle supply chains and
waste flows for environmental improvement and improve the waste separation and collection
(I&M, 2013a).
A plastic packaging tax is introduced in the Netherlands in 2008 to reduce the amount of used
plastics. A different rate is made between primarily used plastics and secondary used plastics in
the packaging industry (Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis, 2014). Together with
higher taxation on disposal (I&M, 2014b), waste-to-energy, pyrolysis and recycling are favorable
over disposal.
Although there are many policies about a green, circular economy, plastic to oil is not mentioned
in them. General policies are made about supporting new initiatives for social economic and
technical developments and innovation to optimize the entire system (I&M, 2013a). Explained
more specific, to optimize uniform and modernize the waste and environment policy (I&M,
2013a).
On this moment, there is not a fair level playing field between pyrolysis, recycling, waste-toenergy, and disposal. In the past, many AVI’s are built and plenty capacity is available in the
Netherlands. The AVI’s have a protected status as a useful purpose, but plastic to oil installations
do not have this same status. As written before in paragraph 2.4.1, pyrolysis is seen as
incineration, while waste-to-energy is seen as some kind of recycling. This is not a fair level
playing field (I&M, 2013c). In paragraph 4.4, an additional step on the ladder of Lansink can
change this vision. Because plastic to oil contributes to a more circular economy this change of
the green label of feedstock recycling seems necessary. The prices of waste-to-energy are
extremely low, because the market is not at an efficient point. Although there are taxes on wasteto-energy and disposal, much waste is burned in installations.
However, a change is starting to get visible. An ambition of the government is to reduce the
waste burned in AVI’s (I&M, 2011). The quantity of materials offered to the AVI’s or for disposal
was in 2010 almost 10 million ton. Multiple changes like recycling, sustainable products, and
different consumption patterns can contribute to lower the materials that leave the economy if
other upcycling options are available (I&M, 2014b), like pyrolysis. A tax on disposal is a working
example that less waste is offered for disposal (I&M, 2011).
Another ambition mentioned in (I&M, 2014b) is what the government could do to support
plastic to oil is to start a green deal. This way, many companies are getting in touch and doors
will be opened (I&M, 2014b). The ambition from I&M is to eliminate barriers from companies if
they are developing circular processes (I&M, 2014b).
A new experiment with a different waste collection method, is handing in plastic waste and
receive a deposit for a supermarket nearby (Dekkers, 2014). This experiment confirms new
research to different collection methods and provides the availability of more plastic waste for
plastic to oil.
Other influencing government policies are the two fiscal encouragements by VAMIL and MIA
(I&M, 2014a). These are two Dutch fiscal arrangements. The first, MIA is an Environmental
Investment Deduction which the company can use to deduct investments till a maximum of 36%.
52
The second, VAMIL is Random depreciation Environment investment, where the company can
choose the date of depreciation. The ministry of I&M supports those two fiscal measures for
green environmental-friendly investments (RVO, n.d.). On the Environmental list from 2014, a
pyrolysis installation is mentioned (Agentschap NL, 2013).
In the past, it was simply collect large quantities, while nowadays multiple smaller flows are
collected from the same location, but therefore it loses the economies of scale. The many
different collection methods of waste in municipalities are inconvenient. Every municipality is
optimizing their own waste collection method, so that economies of scale are not present. Every
municipality is obligated to support a separated collection of plastic waste. Instead of optimizing
the entire waste system every municipality is optimizing every separated waste chain (I&M,
2013a). To reduce the different collection methods, the entire waste collection system can be
optimized (I&M, 2013a). Many different methods are available in the Netherlands and in other
countries (Bergsma et al, 2014). Not every collection method has the same returns and the
quality can differ. This could influence the available plastics for pyrolysis but it is not clear what
kind of influence. Therefore, additional research is necessary.
Another disadvantage of different collection methods could be the willingness of the consumers.
If every municipality has its own way it could be difficult to accept and contribute. A more
uniform waste collection policy will tackle this hurdle (I&M, 2013a).
53
6.
Conclusion and discussion
In this chapter, the main question from this research will be answered. A conclusion regarding to
which factors are stimulating the founding of plastic to oil companies in Dutch seaports. In the
second part of this chapter a discussion about this research is explained.
6.1 Conclusion
To determine the location factors that are important for Dutch plastic to oil companies a review
of worldwide plastic to oil companies is made. From the theory a list with location factors is
developed. For every worldwide plastic to oil company with a factory location, the list with
location factors is tested. Every location factors is classified in three categories: necessary,
conducive and negligible. The most important, necessary location factors for the worldwide
plastic to oil companies are highway distance, locate on a business park, the availability of
feedstock, and the availability of a nearby sales market. The necessary location factors are found
with almost all the companies.
From the theory and the necessary location factors for the worldwide plastic to oil companies,
many locations in the Netherlands are still capable locations. However, there are surprisingly
differences between the location factors of worldwide companies and the location factors of
starting Dutch plastic to oil companies. In table 6.1 the differences between the location factors
of worldwide plastic to oil companies, the founded location factors for Dutch plastic to oil
companies and the availability of the location factors in the Dutch seaports. The similar
important location factors are marked in green and the difference between the location factors
are marked in red.
The outstanding difference between Dutch companies and the worldwide companies is the port
location factor. All the Dutch companies seem to locate in a port, while from the worldwide
companies none of the companies is located in a port. In the Dutch economy ports are more
important than they are in other countries found in this research. This could help explain why in
the Netherlands ports are important. Further research to the available location factors in Dutch
seaports explains that all the necessary location factors are there. At the same time the largest
two Dutch seaports support the plastic to oil companies. By their search to a more circular and
renewing production they support the plastic to oil companies in their ports. The willingness of
the two seaports and the available location factors making the difference between other location
and the Dutch seaports.
54
Table 6.1: Comparing location factors
Location factor
Geographic
characteristics
Agglomeration
Feedstock
Demand
Pollution
Power supply
IRR; Quick return
on investments
Willingness
Highway
Train terminal
Port
University
Airport
Business park
Chemical cluster
Recycling cluster
Availability
Certified
Sales market
Country emission
criteria
Location
Worldwide
Netherlands
Necessary
Negligible
Conducive
Conducive
Negligible
Necessary
Conducive
Conducive
Necessary
Conducive
Necessary
Conducive
Necessary
Negligible
Necessary
Negligible
Negligible
Necessary
Conducive
Negligible
Necessary
Necessary
Necessary
Conducive
Negligible
Conducive
Negligible
Not clear yet
Yes
-
Necessary
Yes
-
Dutch
Seaport
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
-
The other factor that differs between Dutch and worldwide plastic to oil companies is the
certified demand. The European legislation and Dutch legislation have strict rules on chemical
industry and the sales of uncertified fuels. Therefore receiving the certification is more
important for the Dutch plastic to oil companies.
Together with the location factors port , certified demand and the willingness of a seaport, the
other necessary location factors that influence the location decision for Dutch plastic to oil
companies are distance to a highway, to locate on a business park, the availability of feedstock,
and the availability of the sales market. The conducive location factors are the presence of a
chemical cluster, and the country emission criteria. The remainder location factors are unlikely
to contribute to the location decision process.
From the interviews with the Dutch plastic to oil companies it is clear that other factors are
influencing the founding of plastic to oil companies as well. There seems to be an uneven level
playing field between plastic to oil and waste-to-energy. Plastic to oil can be seen as a method of
feedstock recycling. Although many policies are in favour of green, circular and recycling
policies, the importance from plastic to oil is not visible. From different waste policies the main
priority is to reduce waste and that waste is seen as a resource. Governmental policies can
change these shortcomings. By optimizing the entire waste system instead of trying to optimize
every new separated collected type of waste higher recycling targets can be satisfied.
The result from this research is to understand the location choice for founding plastic to oil
companies in the Netherlands. Although, there is much to learn from the worldwide companies,
there seem to be some differences between Dutch location choice and international location
choice. Dutch ports are the desired location for plastic to oil companies. All the necessary and
conducive location factors come together. The other, most important location factor is the
availability of feedstock which is available on a nearby the Dutch seaports. The other factors that
influence the location decision of Dutch plastic to oil companies are highway distance, to locate
on a business park, the availability of a sales market, and a certified product.
55
6.2 Discussion
It is not surprising that the Dutch location factors are different then the location factors found in
worldwide plastic to oil companies. The Netherlands is a unique country which differs in size,
location, density of the population and the role as a transit country, compared to the other
countries that have plastic to oil factories. Because of this difference, seaports are more
important than they are in other countries. The port of Rotterdam is the largest port of Europe
and therefore a lot of economic activity is stated in the port areas. With a high population
density nearby the ports and many companies established in the ports, this explains the
availability of large quantities of plastic waste. This factor is an important location factors and
contributes to the location decision for Dutch plastic to oil companies.
In this research some limitations are available. Unfortunately, from many plastic to oil
companies there is not a location of their pyrolysis factory available. The consequence is that
they are eliminated from this research and the table 3.2 from the companies without a factory
location is long. Although, every company found is approached to gather their factory location,
this could influence the research a little. The number of plastic to oil companies is larger then
used in this research.
Another difficult item is the lack of Dutch plastic to oil companies. The few Dutch plastic to oil
companies are not in production yet, so it is more difficult to see if their expectations about the
location factors are suitable for future companies. At the same time some of the Dutch plastic to
oil companies were cooperating more than others, which makes it more difficult to draw
conclusions. Fortunately the Dutch plastics to oil companies have made a location choice already
and could explain this location choice. The companies have not mentioned other factors, except
the influence of the government so the list with location factors seems complete.
The founded location factors for worldwide plastic to oil companies are supported by the
founded theory. The difference between the Dutch and the worldwide plastic to oil companies
seems truthful because of the different country elements.
Plastic to oil is a more recently introduced technique to convert plastic. More and more research
is done about this topic. However, previous research about a location choice or location factors
about plastic to oil companies is not done before. General location theories and location theory
for chemical industry are used to examine the possible location factors for plastic to oil
companies. This research contributes to the knowledge of the Dutch plastic to oil companies and
some departments of the Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment. More knowledge is
gathered about plastic to oil, and it location factors.
56
7.
Recommendations
Plastic to oil is an important circular step and therefore a factory should be established in the
Netherlands. However, companies experience some difficulties in closing their business case.
The Dutch government could eliminate some policies that form obstacles and barriers. At the
same time supporting measures for plastic to oil within the waste hierarchy can developed. The
first adjustment is to add an extra level in the Ladder of Lansink. By adding feedstock recycling,
plastic to oil is a form of feedstock recycling and this eliminates the uneven level playing field
within the Netherlands. In other countries is plastic to oil seen as feedstock recycling, so
changing it in the Netherlands will contribute to an even level playing field.
Another way in which the Dutch government can support the plastic to oil companies is to set
the first steps to create a green deal plastic to oil. In a green deal, many companies, institutes,
investors, and municipalities cooperate on a general volunteering agreement. In this agreement,
measures to support plastic to oil companies can be assembled. If obstructing policies exist, they
can be adjusted. These appointments can contribute to quickly enroll a network, so the plastic to
oil companies can be build.
Many policies contain the advice that the government should support new innovative techniques
and initiatives. The establishment of the Circularity Center is a great circular initiative that the
government can support. Especially because this center is established by the initiative from a
cooperation of companies and support circular research, the government should support them
by doing so.
On this moment, many different collection methods for municipal plastic waste are used, and
this is not always leading to the best possible results. Every supply chain of additional separated
collected waste type is optimized. The consequence is that many different collection methods
can be used for all the different types of waste. Instead of optimizing the entire waste supply
chain, this is a better solution. It is also better understandable for people to have the same
collection methods instead of five differences. Another argument to support this vision of
applying more similar collection methods is that this will enlarge the transparency in the waste
collection market. Other countries have other collection methods that could optimize the entire
supply chain for separated collection of waste. Those other collection methods of waste are
interesting enough to reconsider. A better and more transparent collection policy could
contribute in more support from inhabitants, which makes the higher recycling targets possible.
More separated collection of plastic waste will improve the recycling value and the plastics
available for plastic to oil.
Many company initiatives show that many people, companies, and foundations find a more
circular economy important and want to eliminate plastic waste to conserve our environment.
An example is that the first stores are opened in Europe, even in the Netherlands without any
packaging materials. Those grocery stores sell the groceries in your own cans, bottles and cups.
Therefore a lot of plastic and other packing materials are saved. The government should support
green alternatives which changes behaviour in a positive way.
This research focusses on the location factors for plastic to oil companies in the Netherlands, and
in Dutch seaports more particularly. Other factors that influence the founding of plastic to oil
companies in the Netherlands are also mentioned. Future research can show a connection
between the location factors found for Dutch plastic to oil companies and the eventually chosen
location.
57
8.
References
Agentschap NL. (2013). MIA en Vamil Jaarverslag 2012. Milieu-investeringsaftrek/Willekeurige
afschrijving milieu-investeringen. Zwolle.
Al-Salem, S. M., Lettieri, P., & Baeyens, J. (2009). Recycling and recovery routes of plastic solid
waste (PSW): A review. Waste management, 29(10), 2625-2643.
Audretsch, D. B., Lehmann, E. E., & Warning, S. (2005). University spillovers and new firm
location. Research policy, 34(7), 1113-1122.
Bajona, C., & Kehoe, T. J. (2010). Trade, growth, and convergence in a dynamic Heckscher–Ohlin
model. Review of Economic Dynamics, 13(3), 487-513.
Bakker, M., Dimaio, F. & Rem, P. (2013). Advances in solid waste recycling and the bridging
scenario of land-storage. Retrieved on 12-10-2014 from:
http://www.elfm.eu/Uploads/ELFM/FILE_7E9C5215-EFDF-4AE5-9966CCA066790271.PDF
Bastein, T., Roelofs, E., Rietveld, E. & Hoogendoorn, A. (2013). Kansen voor de circulaire
economie in Nederland. Delft: TNO.
Bergsma, G.C., Vroonhof, J., Blom, M.J. & Odegard, I.Y.R. (2014). Evaluatie Landelijk Afvalbeheer
Plan (LAP) 1 en 2. Delft: TNO.
Center for Life Cycle. (n.d.). Center for Life Cycle Analysis. Retrieved on 03-12-2014 from
http://www.clca.columbia.edu/.
China sets up. (2013-12-01). China sets up association to promote circular economy. Global
Times. Xinhua. Retrieved on 20-06-2014 from
http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/828920.shtml.
Circularity Center. (2014-04-04). Rotterdamse Krachtenbundeling in Circularity Center.
Retrieved on 07-05-2014 from http://www.portofrotterdam.com/nl/actueel/pers-ennieuwsberichten/Pages/rotterdamse-krachtenbundeling-in-circularity-center.aspx
Dekkers, H. (2014) Proef met huishoudelijk afval verpakkingsafval loopt goed. GRAM. 105 nr 6.
Augustus 2014.
De Langen, P.W., Nijdam, M.H. & Van der Lugt, L.M. (2012). Port Economics, Policy and
Management. Erasmus University Rotterdam. Rotterdam.
Dijkgraaf, E., & Vollebergh, H. R. (2004). Burn or bury? A social cost comparison of final waste
disposal methods. Ecological Economics, 50(3), 233-247.
Ellen MacArthur Foundation. (2012). Towards the Circular Economy. Economic and business
Rationale for an Accelerated Transition. McKinsey & Company.
Ellen MacArthur Foundation. (2013). The Circular model – an overview. Retrieved on
13-06-2014 from http://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/circulareconomy/circular-economy/the-circular-model-an-overview
European Commission. (2011). Roadmap to a Resource Efficient Europe. Brussels.
COM(2011)571.
58
European Commission. (2014). Environment: Higher recycling targets to drive transition to a
circular economy with new jobs and sustainable growth. Brussels.
European Environment Agency. (2013). Managing Municipal Solid Waste – A review of
achievements in 32 European Countries. Copenhagen.
Grether, J. M., Hotz, I., & Mathys, N. A. (2014). Industry location in Chinese provinces: Does
energy abundance matter?. Energy Economics, 44, 383-391.
Greyson, J. (2006). An economic instrument for zero waste, economic growth and sustainability.
Journal of Cleaner Production. 15. (2007). 1382-1390.
Groningen Seaports. (2012). Economische Groei = Groen. Havenvisie 2030. Delfzijl.
Holmes, K. (2011). Conversion technology: A complement to plastic recycling. Portland:
4R Sustainability Inc.
Hanemaaijer, A., Rood, T. & Kruitwagen, S. (2014). Opties voor een afvalstoffenbelasting. Den
Haag: PBL.
International Environmental Technology Centre. (2013). Policy Brief on Waste Plastics.
What, Why and How. Osaka: UNEP. Retrieved 22-10-2014 on From:
http://www.unep.org/ietc/Portals/136/Other%20documents/PolicyBriefs/10052013_
Waste%20Plastic%20Policy%20brief.pdf
Investors Hub (n.d.) Pyrolysis Companies. Retrieved on 10-10-2014 from:
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=90323366
Ivan, V., Burgering, C., Van den Broek, F., Groen, R. & Van der Meulen, S. (2009). Nederlandse
Zeehavens; Onderscheid door Netwerkfocus. Toekomstige kracht door innovatieve
samenwerking en duurzame achterlandlogistiek. NEA.
Kok, L., Wurpel, G. & Ten Wolde, A. (2013). Unleashing the Power of the Circular Economy.
Amsterdam: IMSA Amsterdam for Circle Economy.
Koninklijke vereniging voor afval- en reinigingsmanagement (2014) Retrieved from
14-10-2014 from http://www.nvrd.nl/nieuwsberichten/website/70-recycling-haalbaar.
Lanser, N. (2013). Inventarisatie Duurzaamheidsamibities Zeehavens. Advies voor verdere
ondersteuning door Rijksoverheid. Rotterdam: Royal Haskoning DHV Nederland.
Legislative Council Secretariat (2006) Sapporo Recycling Complex. Retrieved on 22-10-2014
http://www.legco.gov.hk/yr05-06/english/sec/library/0506fs13e.pdf
Lundmark, R. (2001). Choice of location for investments in the European paper industry: the
impact of wastepaper. Resources, conservation and recycling, 33(3), 167-180.
Mani, M., Nagarajan, G., & Sampath, S. (2011). Characterisation and effect of using waste plastic
oil and diesel fuel blends in compression ignition engine. Energy, 36(1), 212-219.
Markus, N. (2014-06-10). Dankzij Tweede Maasvlakte winnen we vanaf 2016 weer
marktaandeel. Trouw. Economie, p15.
59
McCann, P. (2001). Urban and Regional Economics. Oxford University Press. New York.
Midelfart, K. H., Overman, H. G., & Venables, A. J. (2000). Comparative advantage and economic
geography: estimating the location of production in the EU.
Ministerie van Infrastructuur en Milieu. (2011-08-25). Meer waarde uit afval. Den Haag. (30 872,
nr. 79).
Ministerie van Infrastructuur en Milieu. (2013c-03-28). Groene Groei: Voor een sterke,
duurzame economie. Den Haag. (33 043, nr 14).
Ministerie van Infrastructuur en Milieu. (2013b-11-12). Plastic Cycle Value Chain Agreement.
Ministerie van Infrastructuur en Milieu. (2013a-06-20). Van afval naar grondstof. Den Haag. (33
043, nr 15).
Ministerie van Infrastructuur en Milieu. (2014a-09-10). Green Deal Scheepsafvalketen. Den
Haag.
Ministerie van Infrastructuur en Milieu. (2014b-01-28). Invulling programma van Afval
Naar Grondstof. Den Haag.
Ministerie van Infrastructuur en Milieu. (2014d-01-28). Van Afval naar Grondstof. Uitwerking
van acht operationele doelstellingen. Den Haag. Bijlage 1.
Ministerie van Infrastructuur en Milieu. (2014c). Werkprogramma Zeehavens 2014-2016. Alle
hens aan dek!. Den Haag.
Ministerie van Infrastructuur en Milieu, Rijkswaterstaat (2014e-03-13). Monitoring
kunststoffen. Den Haag.
Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis. (2014). Circulaire economie
binnen handbereik? Den Haag.
Oegema, T. & Wurpel, G. (2012). Alleen verbeeldingskracht is schaars. Op weg naar een
circulaire economie in Nederland. Amsterdam: IMSA Amsterdam.
Ondernemend Groen. (n.d.). Green Deals op de kaart. Retrieved, 02-10-2014 via:
http://www.ondernemendgroen.nl/greendeals/Pages/opdekaart.aspx
Panda, A.K., Singh, R.K. & Mishra, D.K. (2010). Thermolysis of waste plastics to liquid fuel: A
suitable method for plastic waste management and manufacture of value added products
– A world prospective. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 14(1), 233-248.
Planbureau voor de Leefomgeving. (2011). Scarcity in a sea of plenty? Global resource
scarcities and policies in the European Union and the Netherlands. The Hague: PBL
/Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency.
Plastic Waste Management Institute. (2009). An Introduction to Plastic recycling. Japan.
Retrieved on 12-11-2014 from https://www.pwmi.or.jp/ei/plastic_recycling_2009.pdf
Porter, M. E. (1990). The Competitive Advantage of Nations. Harvard business review. Retrieved
on 01-11-2014 from http://kkozak.wz.cz/Porter.pdf.
60
Porter, M. E. (2000). Location, Competition, and Economic Development: Local Clusters in a
Global Economy. Retrieved from 29-10-2014 from
http://edq.sagepub.com/content/14/1/15.
Port of Amsterdam. (2014a). Visie 2030: Port of Amsterdam, Port of partnerships. Amsterdam.
Port of Amsterdam. (2014b-06-03). Amsterdam mikt voor de toekomst op meer shortsea.
Nieuwsblad Transport.
Port of Moerdijk. (2014). Port of Moerdijk 2030. Havenstrategie Moerdijk 2030. Moerdijk.
Port of Rotterdam. (2011). Port compass. Havenvisie 2030. Rotterdam.
Raad voor de leefomgeving en infrastructuur. (2013). Nederlandse Logistiek 2040:
Designed to last. Den Haag.
Raging Bull (n.d.) Waste Disposal Plant. Retrieved on 10-10-2014 from:
http://ragingbull.com/forum/topic/341157
Research Centre for Fuel Generation. (n.d.). Research Centre for Fuel Generation. Retrieved on
04-12-2014 from http://www.rcfg.co.in/.
Roelandt, T., Hertog, P. den, Sinderen, J. van & Hove, N. van den (1999). Boosting innovation:
The cluster approach. Paris: OECD. Chapter 13. Cluster Analysis and cluster policy in the
Netherlands.
Rose-Glowacki, H.R., Moore, M.G., Swift, T.K. & Sanchez, E. (2014). Economic Impact of Plastic-toOil Facilities in the U.S. Washington: American Chemistry Council.
RVO (n.d.) MIA en Vamil. Retrieved on 18-12-2014 from http://www.rvo.nl/subsidiesregelingen/mia-en-vamil.
Røyne, F., Berlin, J., & Ringström, E. (2014). Life cycle perspective in environmental strategy
development on the industry cluster level. A case study of five chemical companies.
Journal of Cleaner Production. 1-7.
Slingerland, S., Veenstra, E., Bolscher, H. & Rademaekers, K. (2014). Het echte groene boekje:
definities, debat en acties voor een groene economie. Triple E Consulting – Energy,
Environment & Economics B.V.
Stollman, S. & Goorhuis, M. (2014). Statiegeld (nog) niet vrijgegeven en aan de slag met
drankenkartons. GRAM. 105 nr 6. Augustus 2014.
United Nations Environmental Programme. (2009). Converting Waste Plastics into a
Resource: Compendium of Technologies. Osaka.
United Nations Environment Programme. (2011). Decoupling natural resource use and
environmental impacts from economic growth. Paris.
Vereniging van de Nederlandse Chemische Industrie. (2012). The Chemical Industry in the
Netherlands: World leading today and in 2030-2050. Deloitte.
Vereniging van de Nederlandse Chemische Industrie. (n.d.). Chemieregio’s. Retrieved on 9-122014 from https://www.vnci.nl/chemie/beschrijving-sector/chemieregios/.
61
World Map. (2014). Retrieved on 01-10-2014 from
http://www.presentationmagazine.com/world-maps-vector-editable-507.htm.
Wurpel, G., Akker, van den, J., Betsema, M. & Oegema, T. (2013). Updating the Future. The next
steps in becoming the sustainable global port, using scenarios from Limits to Growth.
Amsterdam: Club of Rome.
Zeeland Seaports. (2009). Strategisch Masterplan Zeeland Seaports 2009-2020.
62
Appendix 1 - Interviews
Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment
Senior policy advisor at the directorate Maritime business, about the connection between oil and
seaports, interviewed at the 13th of May 2014.
Policy advisor at the directorate Sustainability, about the circular economy, interviewed at the
16th of May 2014.
Senior policy advisor at the directorate Maritime business, about the connection between green
deals and the circular economy, interviewed at the 16th of May 2014.
Senior scientific researcher at the Knowledge Institute Mobility, about prior research and
circular economy, interviewed at the 19th of May 2014.
Policy advisor at the directorate Sustainability, about plastics, Circularity Center and the
‘Ketenakkoord’, interviewed at the 21st of May 2014.
Coordinating policy advisor at the directorate Sustainability, about Dutch Seaports, interviewed
at the 26th of May 2014.
Senior policy advisor at the directorate Maritime business, about waste, waste management,
recycling and LAP 2, interviewed at the 2nd of June 2014.
Other interviews
Business developer of the Port of Rotterdam, interviewed at the 26th of May 2014.
Senior policy advisor at the Biofuels department at the Ministry of Economic Affairs, interviewed
at the 2nd of June 2014.
Researcher of the Climate change, Energy and Environment department at CPB Netherlands
Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis, interviewed at the 6th of June 2014.
Project manager new business at the Port of Amsterdam, interviewed at the 16th of July 2014.
Recycling and resources professor at the TU Delft, interviewed at the 3rd of October 2014.
Plastic to oil companies
Commercial director of Pyroil International, interviewed at the 5th of August 2014.
Commercial advisor of Energy Vision, interviewed at the 6th of August 2014.
Commercial director of BlueAlp BV and project manager at Petrogas, interviewed at the 15th of
August 2014.
Founder of Bin2Barrel, interviewed at the 19th of August 2014.
63
Appendix 2 – Total list plastic to oil companies
Table 2.1: Total list with plastic to oil companies
Country
Australia
Canada
China
Czech Republic
Germany
India
Ireland
Japan
Poland
South-Africa
Sweden
Switzerland
Thailand
United Kingdom
Name of the company
Pacific Pyrolysis Pty Ltd
Klean Industries, Inc
New Fuel Systems Inc
JBI Global Inc
Anhui Oursun Environmental
Dinter Heavy Industry
Machinery Co. Ltd.
Pyrolysis Oil
Xinxiang Xinda Energy
Equipment Co.
GB Pyrolysis
Plast Oil
Alphakat PL
Nill-Tech GmbH
Syntrol
TPL GmbH
Accpre Engineering Pvt. Ltd.
Bhagirath Equipments
Pyrocrat Systems
Vipar Engineering
Zorba Industries
Cynar
Blest co Ltd
Mogami Kiko Co. Ltd
Ostrand Corporation
Sapporo Plastic Recycling Co.
Shonan Trading Co. Ltd
Yukaki
T Technology
Graham Fuel Technology Pt Ltd
Cassandra Oil AB
Granit Systems S.A.
PlastOil
Polymer Energy
Cynar Plc
Harmonic Energy
Plastic Energy
VC Cooke
City
Somersby
Vancouver
Niagara Falls
Hefei
Henan
Information
Prototype
Technique only
No Location
Technique
No factory location
Technique
Shangqiu
Technique
Technique
Brno
Prague
Covanta
Holzgerlingen
Factory
No location
Technique
Factory
Technique
No factory location
No location factors
No factory Location
Technique
No factory location
No factory location
No factory location
Prototype
Factory
Technique
Factory
Technique
Technique
No factory location
No factory location
Factory
No factory location
Factory
No factory Location
Technique
No factory location
No factory location
No factory location
Hyderabad
Mumbai
New Delhi
Portlaoise
Hiratsuka-shi
Shinjō-shi
Tokyo
Sapporo
Yokohama
Nagano-Shi
Kleszczów
Västeras
Sihlbrugg
Circle Pines
Londen
64
Country
United States
Name of the company
Agilyx
Climax Global Energy
Envion
GEEP
GreenMantra Recycling
Technology
Kool Manufacturing Company
Natural State Research
Nexus Fuels LLC
Northeastern University
PK Clean
Plastic2Oil
Recarbon corperation
Reklaim
RES PolyFlow
Standard Oil International Ltd.
Vadxx
Plastic Advanced Recycling
Corporation
City
Tigard
Allendale
Washington
Barrie
Stamford
Atlanta
Niagara Falls
Wilkes Barre
Akron
Akron
Willowbrook
Information
Factory
Factory
Factory
Factory
Factory
No factory location
Factory
Factory
Factory
No factory location
Factory
Factory
No factory location
Factory
No factory location
Factory
Factory
65
Appendix 3 – List with plastic to oil companies left out of the research
Table 3.1: Plastic to oil companies technique only
Plastic to oil companies Technique only - Worldwide
Country
Name of the company
Canada
Klean Industries, Inc
JBI Global Inc
China
Dinter Heavy Industry Machinery
Co. Ltd.
Pyrolysis oil
Xinxiang Xinda Energy Equipment
Co.
Germany
Alphakat PL
Syntrol
India
Bhagirath Equipments
Pyrocrat Systems
Japan
Blest co Ltd
Ostrand Corporation
Shonan Trading Co. Ltd.
United Kingdom
Yukaki
Cynar Plc
City
Vancouver
Calgery
Henan
City Shangqiu
Covanta
Holzerglingen
Hyderabad
Mumbai
Hiratsuka-Shi
Tokyo
Yokohama
Nagano-Shi
London
Table 3.2: Plastic to oil companies without location of the factory
Plastic to oil companies - No factory location
Country
Name of the company
Canada
New Fuel Systems Inc
China
Anhui Oursun Environmental
Czech Republic
Plast Oil
Germany
TPL GmbH
India
Pyrocrat Systems
Vipar Engineering
Zorba Industries
Ireland
Cynar Plc
Poland
T Technology
South-Africa
Graham Fuel technology Pty Ltd
Switzerland
Granit Systems
Thailand
Polymer Energy
United Kingdom Harmonic Energy
Plastic Energy
VC Cooke
United States
Kool Manufacturing Company
Natural State Research
PK Clean
Reklaim
Approach
Website Form
Website Form
Website Form
Email
Website Form
Website Form
Website Form
Website Form
Website Form
Email
Website Form
Website Form
Website Form
Email
Email
Email
Email
Website Form
Website Form
66
Table 3.3: Plastic to oil companies left out although in ACC list (Holmes, 2011)
Plastic to oil companies Left out although in ACC list - Worldwide
Country
Name of the company
City
China
Anhui Oursun
Hefei, Anhui
Environment &
Technology Corporation
Ireland
Cynar Plc
Central Ireland
Canada
Klean Industries, Inc
Korea
KOREA ECO-System
Buchon City
United States Polymer Energy
67
Appendix 4 – Location Factors worldwide pto companies
Table 4.1: GB Pyrolysis – Czech Republic
GB Pyrolyis
Hudcova 533/78c, 612 00 Brno
Location Factors
Factors
Year
Population
Brno
Number of plants
Geographic
Highway (distance in km)
characteristics
Train terminal (distance in km)
Port (distance in km)
University (distance in km)
Airport (distance in km)
Agglomeration
Business park
Chemical cluster
Feedstock
Availability
Types of plastics
Demand
Certified
Product
Pollution
Country emission criteria
Pollution
Employee
Power supply
Needed
Capital cost
IRR; Quick return on investments
Table 4.2: Nill-Tech – Germany
Nill-Tech GmbH
Max-Eyth Straße 23 D-71088 Holzgerlingen
Location Factors
Factors
Year
Population
Number of plants
Geographic
Highway (distance in km)
characteristics
Train terminal (distance in km)
Port (distance in km)
University (distance in km)
Airport (distance in km)
Agglomeration
Business park
Chemical cluster
Feedstock
Availability
Types of plastics
Demand
Certified
Product
Pollution
Country emission criteria
Pollution
Employee
Power supply
Needed
Capital cost
IRR; Quick return on investments
http://www.gbpyrolysis.com/
Information
2004
385,913
45 worldwide
10
1
>500
2
23
yes
Plenty available
Plastics, rubbers, tires
Yes
Diesel
yes
No
Few
Self-sufficient
3 years
http://www.nill-tech.de/
Information
1992
12,268
1
10
>1
>500
31
30
Yes
Technological
Available
Oil, gas
German emission law
No CO2 pollution
68
Table 4.3: Mogami Kiko – Japan
Mogami Kiko
Fukudayama Fukuda Shinjō-shi, Yamagata-ken
Location Factors
Factors
Year
Population
Number of plants
Geographic
Highway (distance in km)
characteristics
Train terminal (distance in km)
Port (distance in km)
University (distance in km)
Airport (distance in km)
Agglomeration
Business park
Chemical cluster
Feedstock
Availability
Types of plastics
Demand
Certified
Product
Pollution
Employee
Power supply
Capital cost
Japan emission criteria
Pollution
http://www.mogami-kiko.co.jp
Information
2007
38,894
1
60
6
59
64
46
Yes
Recycling cluster
Thermoplastics
Hydrocarbon Oil (79%), Solid
Residue (14%), Off-gas (12%)
Approved by National federation
CO2 decrease
Needed
IRR; Quick return on
investments
Table 4.4: Sapporo Plastic Recycle Corporation - Japan
Sapporo Plastic Recycle Corporation
〒003-0849 Hokkaido Prefecture, Sapporo, Shiroishi Ward,
Kitago, 2357−10
Location Factors
Factors
Year
Population
Number of plants
Geographic
Highway (distance in km)
characteristics
Train terminal (distance in km)
Port (distance in km)
University (distance in km)
Airport (distance in km)
Agglomeration
Business park
Chemical cluster
Feedstock
Availability
Types of plastics
Demand
Certified
Product
Pollution
Country emission criteria
Pollution
Employee
Power supply
Needed
Capital cost
IRR; Quick return on
investments
Information
1998
1,918,096
1
2
4
27
10
42
Yes
Recycling cluster
Waste plastics
Oil
69
Table 4.5: Cassandra Oil AB - Sweden
Cassandra Oil AB
Sjöhagsvägen 14 SE-721 32 Västerås, Sweden
Location Factors
Factors
Year
Population
Number of plants
Geographic
Highway (distance in km)
characteristics
Train terminal (distance in km)
Port (distance in km)
University (distance in km)
Airport (distance in km)
Agglomeration
Business park
Chemical cluster
Feedstock
Availability
Types of plastics
Demand
Certified
Product
Pollution
Country emission criteria
Pollution
Employee
Power supply
Needed
Capital cost
IRR; Quick return on
investments
Table 4.6: PlastOil AG -Switzerland
PlastOil AG
Chrüzegg CH-6340 Baar / Sihlbrugg
Location Factors
Factors
Year
Population
Number of plants
Geographic
Highway (distance in km)
characteristics
Train terminal (distance in
km)
Port (distance in km)
University (distance in km)
Airport (distance in km)
Agglomeration
Business park
Chemical cluster
Feedstock
Availability
Types of plastics
Demand
Certified
Product
Pollution
Country emission criteria
Pollution
Employee
Power supply
Needed
Capital cost
IRR; Quick return on
investments
http://www.cassandraoil.com/en/
Information
2011
110,877
1
3
2
3
4
9
Yes
Yes
Almost inexhaustible
Tires, Plastic waste, sand oil
Oil, gas, carbon black, and metals.
No polluting emissions
Self-sufficient with the oil
http://www.plastoil.com/default.htm
Information
2013
20,000
1
2
6
400
35
50
Yes
?
Yes
Mixed plastic waste
EN-590
Diesel
Yes
No
25-50 FTE
ROI: 10-16.5% depends on the sale
price
70
Table 4.7: Agilyx – United States
Agilyx
9600 SW Nimbus Ave, Suite 260 Beaverton, OR 97008
Location Factors
Factors
Year
Population
Number of plants
Geographic
Highway (distance in km)
characteristics
Train terminal (distance in km)
Port (distance in km)
University (distance in km)
Airport (distance in km)
Agglomeration
Business park
Chemical cluster
Feedstock
Availability
Types of plastics
Demand
Certified
Product
Pollution
Country emission criteria
Pollution
Employee
Power supply
Needed
Capital cost
IRR; Quick return on investments
Table 4.8: Nexus Fuels – United States
Nexus Fuels LLC
Atlanta, Georgia 1445 Marietta Blvd
Location Factors
Factors
Year
Population
Number of plants
Geographic
Highway (distance in km)
characteristics
Train terminal (distance in km)
Port (distance in km)
University (distance in km)
Airport (distance in km)
Agglomeration
Business park
Chemical cluster
Feedstock
Availability
Types of plastics
Demand
Certified
Product
Pollution
Employee
Power supply
http://www.agilyx.com/
Information
2007
93.542
1
1
18
31
30
36
Yes
No
Important and available
Resins 1 to 7
Crude oil (80%), natural gas (12%)
4 years or less
http://www.nexusfuels.com
Information
447,841
1
5
1
400
4
53
Yes
No
Diesel (70-80%), Natural gas (812%)
Country emission criteria
Pollution
Needed
71
Capital cost
IRR; Quick return on
investments
X
Table 4.9: Plastic Advanced Recycling Corporation – United States
Plastic Advanced Recycling Corporation
7884 S.Quincy Street, Willowbrook IL 60527
www.plastic2x.com
Location Factors
Factors
Information
Year
1996
Population
35,983
Number of plants
2
Geographic
Highway (distance in km)
4
characteristics
Train (distance in km)
7
Port (distance in km)
33
University (distance in km)
32
Airport (distance in km)
34
Agglomeration
Business park
Yes
Chemical cluster
Feedstock
Availability
Types of plastics
Demand
Certified
Product
Crude oil (50-70%), Natural gas
(15-25%)
Pollution
Country emission criteria
Pollution
Employee
Power supply
Needed
Capital cost
IRR; Quick return on
2.5 years
investments
Table 4.10: Plastic2Oil – United States
Plastic2Oil
20 Iroquois Street Niagara Falls, NY 14303 USA
Location Factors
Factors
Year
Population
Number of plants
Geographic
Highway (distance in km)
characteristics
Train terminal (distance in
km)
Port (distance in km)
University (distance in km)
Airport (distance in km)
Agglomeration
Business park
Chemical cluster
Feedstock
Availability
Types of plastics
Demand
Certified
www.plastic2oil.com
Information
2009
49,468
1, multiple machines
3
1
42
7
11
Yes
Yes
PE, PP, HDPE, LDPE, others
72
Product
Pollution
Country emission criteria
Pollution
No. 6 Fuel, No 2 Fuel (Diesel,
petroleum distillate), Naphtha, 2-4%
carbon black, off-gases (10-12%)
Yes
No
Employee
Power supply
Needed
Minimal energy required.
Capital cost
IRR
One year
Table 4.11: RES PolyFlow – United States
RES PolyFlow
39 S. Main Street Suite 606 Akron, OH 44308
http://www.respolyflow.com
Location Factors
Factors
Information
Year
2008
Population
198,110
Number of plants
1
Geographic
Highway (distance in km)
5
characteristics
Train terminal (distance in km) 3
Port (distance in km)
64
University (distance in km)
<1
Airport (distance in km)
8
Agglomeration
Business park
Chemical cluster
No
Feedstock
Availability
Types of plastics
Resins code 1-7
Demand
Certified
Product
Diesel (33%), Monomers (33%)
Pollution
Country emission criteria
Pollution
Employee
Power supply
Needed
Capital cost
IRR; Quick return on
3-4 years
investments
Table 4.12: Vadxx – United States
Vadxx
655 South Broadway Street Akron, OH 44311-1003
Location Factors
Factors
Year
Population
Number of plants
Geographic
Highway (distance in km)
characteristics
Train terminal (distance in km)
Port (distance in km)
University (distance in km)
Airport (distance in km)
Agglomeration
Business park
Chemical cluster
Feedstock
Availability
Types of plastics
Demand
Certified
Product
www.vadxx.com
Information
2009
198,110
1
2
6
65
1
7
Yes
No
Crude oil (75%), natural gas (15%)
73
Pollution
Employee
Power supply
Capital cost
Country emission criteria
Pollution
Needed
IRR; Quick return on
investments
Lowest emission rating
18
1 year
74
Appendix 5 – Location Factors Dutch plastic to oil companies
Table 5.1: Necessary Location Factors Bin2Barrel
Bin2Barrel
Location Factors
Factors
Possible location
Geographical
Highway
characteristics
Train
Port
University
Airport
Agglomeration
Business park
Chemical cluster
Recycling cluster
Feedstock
Availability
Demand
Certified
Sales market
Pollution
Country emission criteria
Power supply
Needed
Capital cost
IRR; Quick return on
investments
Table 5.2: Necessary Location Factors BlueAlp BV
BlueAlp BV/ Petrogas
Location Factors
Factors
Possible location
Geographical
Highway
characteristics
Train
Port
University
Airport
Agglomeration
Business park
Chemical cluster
Recycling cluster
Feedstock
Availability
Demand
Certified
Sales market
Pollution
Country emission criteria
Power supply
Needed
Capital cost
IRR; Quick return on
investments
Information
Port of Amsterdam
Necessary
Negligible
Necessary
Negligible
Negligible
Conducive
Conducive
Negligible
Conducive
Necessary
Necessary
Conducive
Negligible
Not clear yet
Information
Multiple locations in ports
Necessary
Negligible
Conducive
Negligible
Negligible
Conducive
Conducive
Negligible
Necessary
Necessary
Conducive
Conducive
Negligible
Different every project
75
Table 5.3: Necessary Location Factors Energy Vision
Energy Vision
Location Factors
Factors
Possible location
Geographical
characteristics
Agglomeration
Feedstock
Demand
Pollution
Power supply
Capital cost
Highway
Train
Port
University
Airport
Business park
Chemical cluster
Recycling cluster
Availability
Certified
Sales market
Country emission criteria
Needed
IRR; Quick return on
investments
Information
Province of Groningen/ close by
Groningen Seaports
Necessary
Negligible
Conducive
Negligible
Negligible
Necessary
Negligible
Negligible
Necessary
Conducive
Conducive
Conducive
Negligible
Not clear yet
Table 5.4: Necessary Location Factors Pyroil International
Pyroil International
Location Factors
Factors
Information
Possible location
Havenschap Moerdijk
Geographical
Highway
Necessary
characteristics
Train
Negligible
Port
Necessary
University
Negligible
Airport
Negligible
Agglomeration
Business park
Necessary
Chemical cluster
Negligible
Recycling cluster
Negligible
Feedstock
Availability
Necessary
Demand
Certified
Conducive
Sales market
Necessary
Pollution
Country emission criteria
Necessary
Power supply
Needed
Negligible
Capital cost
IRR; Quick return on
Not clear yet
investments
76
Appendix 6 - Plastic to oil figures United States and Europe
Figure 6.1: Plastic to oil location United States
Figure 6.2: Plastic to oil location Europe
77
Appendix 7 - Standard question form Dutch Plastic to oil companies
Gesprek met:
Datum:
Bedrijf:
Locatie:
Wat is de huidige stand van zaken?
Hoe zit met de CO2 uitstoot bij de pyrolyse? Andere uitstoot?
Waar wilt u de installatie gaan bouwen? Wat voor omgeving?
Welke factoren neemt u mee in dit besluit proces?
Hoe zit het met de inzameling van de plastics?
Kunnen alle soorten plastics gebruikt worden?
Wat is de kwaliteit van de olie?
Heeft u al een werkende installatie buiten Nederland?
Wat zijn de knelpunten voor het opstarten van pto bedrijf?
Hoe zit het tijdspad eruit?
Wat zou de rol van de overheid moeten zijn:







Financieel?
Wetgeving?
Subsidie?
Partijen in contact brengen?
Vergunningen?
Wegnemen van knelpunten
Evt andere rol?
Wat is de belangrijkste?
Vertrouwelijk?
Overige aantekeningen
78