As part of its commitment to advancing circular and evidence-based practices across the EPS value chain, EUMEPS highlights the work of its members driving measurable environmental progress. Albert Visser, Operational Manager at De Vries Recycling, discusses the results of a recent life cycle assessment conducted by CE Delft, which quantifies the CO₂ savings achieved through mechanical EPS recycling.
The study confirms that the recycling process implemented by De Vries Recycling delivers substantial carbon reductions compared with the use of virgin materials and incineration. It also offers concrete data that can be used by partners and policymakers to support Europe’s transition towards a more circular and low-carbon economy.
What motivated De Vries Recycling to commission this study by CE Delft? Was there a specific policy, customer demand, or industry discussion that triggered it?
We have noticed a growing demand from both our customers and suppliers for concrete figures and results on CO₂ reduction, preferably in the form of certificates. These certificates are needed by our partners to substantiate their CSRD and SDG objectives. There is a lot of discussion in the media and among companies about CO₂ savings, recycling, and the circular economy, but our goal was to present real, verifiable, and data-based CO₂ reduction results — documented in a robust report from a renowned research institute, with figures that can also be used in certificate form.
It was quite exciting for us to see how the study would turn out, since primary data from our recycling plant was used. The results, however, are fantastic. The report clearly demonstrates that our EPS recycling process has a major positive impact on CO₂ reduction.
Could you briefly explain how CE Delft compared the recycling chain with the reference chain? What makes this life cycle assessment particularly robust or relevant to the EPS sector?
In the study conducted by CE Delft, our mechanical EPS recycling process was compared with the scenario of incinerating EPS combined with the production of new virgin GPPS. The research was carried out by CE Delft, a highly respected organization operating at the European level with deep expertise in the circular economy. CE Delft had previously published a report on the CO₂ impact of plastic recyclates in general, but this new study focuses specifically on the mechanical recycling of EPS waste into R-GPPS.
The study shows CO₂ savings of around 2.7 to 2.8 tonnes per tonne of material. How should we interpret this result in practical terms, for instance, for suppliers of EPS waste and buyers of recycled GPPS?
The report presents two perspectives: the supplier’s perspective and the buyer’s perspective.
- The EPS supplier avoids 2.7 tonnes of CO₂-equivalent per tonne of EPS waste delivered.
- The GPPS buyer avoids 2.8 tonnes of CO₂-equivalent per tonne of R-GPPS purchased.
The total impact per tonne of recycled EPS is therefore approximately 5.8 tonnes of CO₂-equivalent.
What aspects of De Vries Recycling’s process (collection, compacting, or mechanical recycling) contribute most to these savings?
The report also serves as a Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of our product. It takes into account numerous factors, including the collection process (and all transport movements), compacting — both at the supplier’s site and at De Vries Recycling — the extrusion process, and total electricity consumption.
What stands out is that the carbon footprint for collecting and recycling one tonne of EPS is about 0.3 to 0.4 tonnes of CO₂-equivalent, while the carbon footprint of the reference scenario is 5.7 tonnes of CO₂-equivalent. That is a huge difference. We already had a strong belief that our EPS recycling process was contributing positively, but now we have it proven and documented.
How do these findings fit within the broader efforts of the EPS industry to reduce carbon emissions and promote circularity?
You sometimes hear negative stories about the use of EPS, but this report once again shows that it is an excellent and sustainable material. By collaborating across the industry and increasing the mechanical recycling of EPS, we can avoid significant CO₂ emissions. Reports like this one bring the positive facts about EPS to light — and that is exactly what our industry needs.
The study mentions variations depending on where EPS waste is collected. How significant are these differences, and how does De Vries manage the logistics to keep emissions low?
The report distinguishes between four collection regions:
- The Netherlands
- Central Europe
- Northern/Southern Europe
- Outside Europe
It is true that the carbon footprint increases the farther the EPS waste originates from, but the differences are negligible — less than 0.1 tonnes of CO₂-equivalent.
We also strive to compact as much EPS material as possible at the supplier’s location, as this allows us to transport much more material per trip. In addition, we use smart return systems to ensure that trucks do not travel empty on return journeys.
Based on these results, how do you see the role of mechanical recycling evolving in the next few years, both for De Vries Recycling and for the European EPS sector more broadly?
The report makes it clear: mechanical recycling of EPS makes a real difference. We continuously refine and improve our processes to make them even more sustainable — there is always room for improvement, and we never stand still.
Of course, there are challenges as well. Like many other recyclers, we face price pressure from cheap virgin materials on the European market. This pushes us to keep our operational costs under control and to keep investing in the latest recycling technologies.
What message would you like policymakers and industry partners to take from this study regarding the environmental benefits of EPS recycling?
There is a lot of talk about CO₂ reduction and the circular economy. This report provides clear and tangible evidence that using and recycling EPS offers significant environmental advantages compared to alternative packaging materials. EPS is sometimes unfairly portrayed as environmentally harmful by opinion makers and lobby groups, but as an industry, we should not accept that.
We must proactively communicate the positive facts about EPS, and we hope this report will make a valuable contribution to that effort.
The CE Delft study provides robust, verifiable evidence that mechanical recycling of EPS delivers significant climate benefits, avoiding approximately 5.8 tonnes of CO₂-equivalent per tonne of recycled material.
For Albert Visser and his team, these findings validate years of operational improvements and strengthen the case for expanding EPS recycling across Europe.
As the industry continues to evolve, such research contributes to a clearer, data-driven understanding of EPS as a sustainable material - and reinforces the role of recyclers like De Vries Recycling in achieving Europe’s circular economy and decarbonisation goals.