Asia's Chemical Recycling Awakening: Field Notes from Thailand, Singapore, and India.

(22 June 25) By Suhas Dixit, CEO, APChemi

The afternoon humidity hit me as I stepped off the plane in Bangkok, marking the beginning of an intensive journey that would reshape my understanding of chemical recycling's future in Asia. Over 45 days between May and June 2025, I found myself immersed in conversations with hundreds of industry stakeholders across three pivotal conferences in Thailand, Singapore, and India. What emerged wasn't just a collection of business cards and conference proceedings, but a profound realization that — plastic recycling success will come only by creating ecosystems where technologies, capital, and expertise flow as freely as the plastic waste we're trying to eliminate.

Bangkok: Where Reality Meets Ambition

My journey began at the 36th Asia PS Environment Meeting (APSEM) at the InterContinental Bangkok. As I presented on chemical recycling to an audience dominated by Japanese companies, I noticed something peculiar. The questions weren't about whether chemical recycling could work—that ship had sailed. Instead, executives wanted to know about feedstock quality variations, contamination tolerance, and most tellingly, how to secure consistent pyrolysis oil supply without building their own facilities.

The Styrene and Polystyrene Recycling conference that followed reinforced this trend. Large petrochemical companies, I discovered, are fundamentally rethinking their approach to chemical recycling. Rather than investing in recycling infrastructure themselves, they're seeking partnerships with smaller players who can navigate the complex world of waste collection and initial processing [1]. One executive from a major Japanese chemical company put it bluntly: "We have 3 refineries across Asia, only 3 — We can't build and operate 3,000 pyrolysis plants to feed them!"

This preference for sourcing over investing reflects a deeper challenge. Asia Pacific processes an impressive $24.80 billion worth of recycled polyolefins annually, commanding 45.74% of the global market share [2]. Yet the region receives proportionally far less investment than Europe or North America. While Europe plans EUR 8 billion in chemical recycling investments by 2030, Asia's entire chemical recycling market totals only $6-16 billion annually [3].

Singapore: The Regulatory Support

By early June, I found myself in Singapore, chairing the morning session at Smithers' Sustainability in Packaging Asia 2025 conference. The energy in the room was palpable as speakers from Nestlé, Coca-Cola, and Avantium outlined their circular economy strategies. But it was during the panel discussion, moderated by Ying Staton from Plastic Energy, that the conversation took an unexpected turn.

"Without policy support," I argued, "chemical recycling will always lose to virgin plastics on cost." The room nodded in agreement, but I sensed a deeper frustration. Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) legislation is spreading across Asia—India implemented it in 2022, Singapore launches its scheme in July 2025, and Thailand's draft act is expected to pass this year [4]. Yet these regulations focus primarily on collection and mechanical recycling targets. The crucial element missing? Mandates for recycled content in food and pharmaceutical packaging that would specifically drive demand for chemically recycled polyolefins.

The data underscores this challenge. With collection rates for plastic waste hovering between 8-20% across Asian countries, and mechanical recycling able to process only 42% of the polyolefin waste that is collected due to contamination and quality issues, the actual recycling rate becomes dismally low [5]. Chemical recycling could theoretically handle the contaminated and mixed streams that mechanical recycling rejects, dramatically expanding processing capability. Yet without regulatory pull for the output, investors remain cautious.

Delhi: The Entrepreneur's Dilemma

The Global Conclave on Plastic Recycling and Sustainability (GCPRS) 2025 in Delhi provided the most sobering statistics of my journey. India recycles only 8% of its plastic waste despite generating 55.7 million tons annually [6]. For four days at the AIPMA exhibition, I stood alongside Supreme Petrochemicals Limited as they displayed our technology, engaging in countless conversations with aspiring recycling entrepreneurs.

These discussions revealed a troubling pattern. Entrepreneurs are bombarded with pyrolysis plant options ranging from $300,000 to $5 million for the same 20 tons-per-day capacity [7]. The confusion is palpable. One visitor showed me quotes from three different suppliers—prices varied by 400%, but the technical specifications were nearly incomprehensible to someone new to the industry.

"I want to start small, understand the business, then scale up," explained a businessman from Gujarat who ran a conventional plastics manufacturing unit. His logic seemed sound, but I worried about the implications. Cheaper rotary kiln systems might offer entry-level pricing, but they often come with safety risks, lower yields, and shorter operational lifespans.

This is where I saw an opportunity for a different approach. Rather than pushing our technology, I found myself explaining how project management consultancy could help entrepreneurs navigate these decisions. "Think of it as insurance," I told him. "You might choose a different technology supplier, but having an experienced partner to evaluate options, negotiate contracts, and ensure proper commissioning can mean the difference between success and costly failure."

The Corporate Clustering Effect

Throughout these conferences, I observed what I've come to call the "like effect"—large corporations preferring to work with other large corporations. The Alliance to End Plastic Waste exemplifies this, with major companies pooling resources for large-scale initiatives [8]. While they've committed $368.8 million to Asian projects, the money flows primarily to established players and infrastructure projects rather than the innovative SMEs developing new technologies.

The disconnect became crystal clear at GCPRS when I visited the AEPW booth. When an entrepreneur asked their representatives, "Are you doing anything in chemical recycling?" they candidly admitted they weren't currently involved in chemical recycling projects—and then directed him to me. Here was one of the world's most prominent plastic waste initiatives, backed by billions in corporate commitments, referring chemical recycling inquiries to a technology provider because they lacked direct involvement in the very solution many consider critical to solving the plastic crisis.

This creates a peculiar dynamic. In Bangkok, I met several entrepreneurs with functioning pyrolysis plants producing quality oil, but struggling to connect with potential buyers. Meanwhile, in Singapore, corporate sustainability managers complained about difficulty securing reliable pyrolysis oil supplies. The disconnect isn't technological—it's relational and structural.

The irony is stark. Asia contributes 81% of global plastic pollution, with countries like the Philippines alone adding 356,371 metric tons yearly to ocean pollution [9]. The environmental crisis carries an economic cost of $5.4-16.4 billion annually across Asia [10]. Yet investment flows to Europe and North America—regions with better waste management infrastructure and lower contamination rates.

Bridging Worlds Through Partnership

The most encouraging development I witnessed was the emergence of new partnership models—though notably, not in India. Shell's agreement with Pryme for 350,000 tons of pyrolysis oil capacity, and SABIC's joint venture with Plastic Energy, demonstrate how Western majors are learning to work with specialized players [11]. These partnerships allow rapid scaling without massive capital commitments, distributing risk while accelerating market development.

The contrast with India is striking. While European petrochemical giants aggressively partner with pyrolysis technology companies, Indian petrochemical corporations remain largely on the sidelines. This hesitation is costly—Europe's chemical recycling capacity is expanding rapidly while India, despite generating 55.7 million tons of plastic waste annually, lacks similar industry-entrepreneur collaborations. Indian petrochemical companies need to engage with local pyrolysis entrepreneurs now, learning from Europe's partnership models before the technology gap becomes insurmountable.

At the Delhi exhibition, this partnership approach resonated strongly. When I explained how APChemi could serve as a project management consultant—helping entrepreneurs evaluate technologies, develop bankable proposals, and ensure successful commissioning—eyes lit up with understanding. The industry needs bridges between the corporate world demanding large-scale solutions and the entrepreneurial ecosystem capable of distributed collection and processing.

What's the cost of PE/PP v/s rPE/rPP?

One question dominated corridor conversations at every conference: "What's the real price difference between chemically recycled and virgin polyolefins?" The answer, I discovered, is far more nuanced than most realize.

Currently, the market primarily sees mechanically recycled polyolefin pricing. In Europe, virgin polyethylene trades at approximately 282% above recycled LDPE mixed-colored pellets—meaning recycled material sells at a steep discount [14]. However, this reflects mechanical recycling's quality limitations, not chemical recycling's potential. In 2023, while virgin PE commanded €1,444 per tonne, scrap PE traded at just €330 per tonne in the EU market [15].

The game changes with chemical recycling. Pyrolysis oil—the intermediate product from chemical recycling—trades between €800-2,200 per tonne in Europe, depending on quality and specifications [16]. This wide range reflects the nascent market's uncertainty. When this oil is refined into virgin-equivalent polyolefins, the economics shift dramatically. Industry sources suggest chemically recycled polyolefins could command prices approaching virgin levels, especially for food-grade applications.

The trajectory of recycled PET offers a glimpse into polyolefins' potential future. Since 2014, US recycled PET transformed from selling at a $373/ton discount to commanding a $184/ton premium over virgin by 2021. In Europe, rPET now sells for a 30%-plus premium over virgin material [17]. This reversal occurred as brands committed to recycled content targets and supply remained constrained.

For polypropylene, the market is even more dynamic. PP bale prices surged from 4.88 cents per pound in February 2024 to 13-17 cents by February 2025—a nearly 300% increase [18]. Yet this price surge benefits mechanical recyclers handling clean, sorted PP. Chemical recycling's true advantage lies elsewhere: processing the 58% of polyolefin waste that mechanical recycling cannot handle due to contamination, multilayer structures, or degradation. These "non-recyclable" streams—currently destined for landfills or incineration—represent chemical recycling's real feedstock opportunity and pricing power.

The critical factor? Scale and quality. Mechanically recycled polyolefins suffer from degradation and contamination, limiting applications and pricing power. Chemical recycling promises virgin-equivalent quality, potentially eliminating the traditional recycled-material discount. However, without commercial-scale operations, true price discovery remains elusive. Entrepreneurs must currently model scenarios ranging from recycled-material discounts to virgin-equivalent pricing—a planning nightmare that underscores the need for experienced guidance.

The Path Forward for Chemical Recycling

As my plane lifted off from Delhi, I reflected on nearly two months of intensive dialogue. The chemical recycling revolution in Asia isn't waiting for technology breakthroughs—the technology exists. It's not waiting for demand—the waste streams are overwhelming. What's needed is systemic change in how we connect capital, technology, and entrepreneurship.

The numbers tell the story. With pyrolysis plants varying from $300,000 to $5 million, entrepreneurs need guidance navigating technology choices [12]. With only 8-11% of plastic waste currently recycled across Asia and polyolefins representing 60% of waste streams, the opportunity is massive [13]. With regulatory frameworks evolving rapidly across the region, the time for action is now.

Success will require addressing three critical gaps:

• The investment gap needs $30-50 billion in additional chemical recycling infrastructure

• The technology gap must bridge Western quality with Asian affordability

• The regulatory gap requires specific recycled content mandates for polyolefins

• The collaboration gap demands breaking down silos between entrepreneurs, petrochemical giants, technology providers, and policymakers—transforming the current "like effect" into genuine cross-value chain partnerships that can unlock capital, share expertise, and accelerate market development

For established players like APChemi, this represents an evolution in how we engage the market. Beyond supplying technology, we're increasingly serving as connectors—helping entrepreneurs make informed decisions, assisting corporations in developing reliable supply chains, and ensuring projects succeed through professional project management.

The awakening I witnessed across these three conferences isn't just about chemical recycling. It's about reimagining how an entire industry collaborates across borders, company sizes, and traditional boundaries. The entrepreneurs in Delhi, the corporations in Singapore, and the technology providers in Bangkok all share the same goal. The challenge now is building the bridges to connect them.

As chemical recycling transitions from promise to practice across Asia, the lessons from these three conferences are clear: success won't come from technology alone, but from creating ecosystems where innovation, capital, and expertise flow as freely as the plastic waste we're trying to eliminate.

Interested in learning more about navigating the chemical recycling landscape in Asia? Explore APChemi's project management consultancy services or our proven pyrolysis technologies that have processed over 179 million kilograms of plastic waste since 2007.

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/suhas-dixit/

References

[1] Business Wire. (2024). "Global Chemical Plastics Recycling and Dissolution Industry Research 2024-2040." May 13, 2024.

[2] Grand View Research. (2024). "Asia Pacific Recycled Plastics Market Report 2030."

[3] Grand View Research. (2024). "Chemical Recycling of Plastics Market Size Report 2030."

[4] Source Green. (2024). "A Comprehensive Guide to EPR Laws for Packaging in Asia."

[5] Grand View Research. (2024). "Recycled Polyolefin Market Size Report 2030."

[6] GCPRS. (2025). "Global Conclave on Plastic Recycling and Sustainability 2025 Report."

[7] China-Doing Machinery. (2024). "How much does a pyrolysis plant cost?"

[8] Alliance to End Plastic Waste. (2024). "2023 Progress Report."

[9] Visual Capitalist. (2024). "Mapped: The Colossal Cost of Plastic Pollution, By Country."

[10] World Economic Forum. (2023). "How the ASEAN region's plastic pollution is being defeated."

[11] Plastics Technology. (2024). "Chemical Recycling Poised to Take Off."

[12] Beston Group. (2024). "Pyrolysis Plant Cost Analysis."

[13] Market Research Future. (2024). "Chemical Recycling Service Market Size and Growth Drivers 2034."

[14] Sustainable Plastics. (2021). "Current recycled polymer price competitiveness fuelling switch away from virgin material." October 14, 2021.

[15] European Environment Agency. (2024). "Competitiveness of secondary materials - Circularity Metrics Lab."

[16] ICIS. (2024). "Chemical recycler Ioniqa files for bankruptcy protection." August 27, 2024.

[17] Plastics Today. (2021). "The Year Ahead in Resin Pricing." December 29, 2021.

[18] Resource Recycling. (2025). "Demand, virgin pricing drive runup in PP bale values." February 20, 2025.