SPECIAL RECYCLING FOR MULTI-LAYERED PLASTICS

SPECIAL RECYCLING FOR MULTI-LAYERED PLASTICS

It appears that many of our Local Government Units (LGUs) still do not have special programs to recycle multi-layered plastics (MLPs). Why is that? Is it because local junk shops are not buying them? Or is it because no one is buying them from the junk shops either? If that is so, perhaps it is time for the national government, through the DENR, to step in.

In the general classification of plastics, MLPs fall under number 7— “Other.” Classifications 1 to 6 generally have ready markets for recycling, but number 7 remains the odd one out. This is why I believe we should pay attention to what is happening in Pune, India. In fact, I think the Philippine Embassy in New Delhi should be tasked to find out exactly how Pune made it work.

My suspicion—although I have no hard evidence yet—is that a lot of the plastic clogging our rivers and polluting our oceans may be these very same MLPs. And we might be adding to the problem without realizing it. For example, how many of us are recycling milk cartons and juice boxes in Tetra Paks? Many might assume they’re just paper and toss them in the paper bin. While Tetra Paks are about 70% paper, the remaining 30% is a mix of plastic and aluminum.

The same question applies to plastic bottles and sachets—how many of them use MLP packaging? If there are a lot, then we should be collecting them separately, perhaps through Reverse Vending Machines (RVMs). But for that to happen, people first need to know what MLP is. That’s why we should be educating everyone—especially school children—about the types of plastics from 1 to 7.

The DENR and DTI should also be stricter about requiring plastic packaging to carry these number codes—whether it’s a shopping bag, a shampoo sachet, or a snack wrapper. Sachets may be small, but they are among the most common forms of MLP. And while we’re at it, perhaps the DOST should have a dedicated agency or division that monitors MLP use in consumer products.

Why is Pune relevant to us? Because they actually have a working system for MLP recycling. There, the waste pickers’ cooperative SWaCH Plus teamed up with ITC Ltd and the Pune Municipal Corporation. Over 1,000 waste pickers collect MLP directly from households. The waste is sorted, baled, and sent to authorized recyclers. ITC covers the “viability gap” so the system stays financially sustainable. This model has diverted over 1,000 metric tons of MLP from landfills in just a few years and increased waste pickers’ incomes by about Rs. 600 a month.

Of course, there are challenges. MLP has such low market value that without subsidies, no one would bother collecting it. Waste pickers still face tough working conditions, and scaling the model to other cities requires strong corporate and government commitment. But it’s one of the few global examples where informal waste workers are integrated into a formal Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) system—something our own RA 11898 is supposed to promote.

In the Philippine context, we could adapt Pune’s model at the barangay level. Imagine organizing informal collectors into cooperatives, using the barangay MRF as a hub for sorting and baling MLP, and then linking with companies under their Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) obligations. Fast Moving Consumer Goods (FMCG) giants like Nestlé or Unilever could cover the viability gap the way ITC does in Pune. Recyclers like Green Antz or Envirotech could take in the processed MLP for use in construction boards, plastic lumber, or even cement kiln co-processing.

We can make this modular—start with one barangay, then scale up. The LGU provides the policy and logistics; the corporate partner funds the gap; the cooperative collects and sorts. Everyone plays a role, and the plastic that’s currently ending up in our waterways gets a new life instead of choking the environment.

At the heart of it, the problem with MLPs is technical—they’re made of different materials laminated together for durability and protection. This makes them great for packaging but terrible for recycling. Still, if Pune can find a way, so can we. It’s a matter of political will, corporate accountability, and public participation.

And perhaps, the next time we buy a sachet of shampoo or a bag of chips, we should ask ourselves: Where will this packaging end up? If the answer is “probably the river or the ocean,” then we know what needs to change.

Ramon Ike V. Seneres, www.facebook.com/ike.seneres
iseneres@yahoo.com, 09088877282, senseneres.blogspot.com

10-08-2025