Sustainable Plastics - January/February 2022 - 16

Q&A
continued from page 15
take up more space? Is more
automation needed?
The new sorting technology
will look a lot like the picture
shown on this page. It
will require more or less the
same amount of space and
level of automation as the current
state-of-the-art sorting
technology, which requires at
least 19 sorting steps to sort a
waste stream into 20 sorting
fractions, because only one
fraction can be blown out at
each sorting step. By contrast,
our new sorting technology
will measure each article only
once, but more completely,
and then, based on a single
line sorting concept, precisely
steer each item to its correct
destination and sorting fraction,
respectively. Besides TBS
and the new detector, this handling
and sorting process is the
third aspect of our innovative
waste sorting concept.
You say your system will not
lead to additional costs. Why
not, and how is this possible?
As explained, the conventional
setup requires many sorting
stages and significantly more
conveyor belts and handling
equipment than single sorting,
since waste articles have to pass
several sorting stages before being
sorted to their final fraction.
With our new sorting process,
detection and sorting are both
done at one stage only. This
saves significantly on the amount
of measurement equipment, conveyor
belts and material handling
needed, and compensates the
Structure of a TBS
complete sorting line
additional singularisation. Furthermore,
in many regions worldwide,
labour costs are at a level
that makes manual singularisation
viable. Thus, many sustainable
jobs could be created while
improving the recycling quality
substantially.
In addition, TBS complete -
where the current sorting technology
is replaced by our onestep
TBS sorting technology
- enables better specified and
purer sorting fractions, which
reduces the process costs at
the recyclers and increases
quality and price of the derived
recyclates.
The bottom line, according
to our calculations, is that a
TBS installation should at least
achieve the same financial viability
as the conventional sorting
technology available today.
Does your technology differ
- or perhaps complement -
the Holy Grail 2.0 watermarks
project?
Watermarks are small changes
in the printed artwork or surface
of packaging items. Thus,
detection requires a precise optical
picture recognition, which
is influenced by the deformation,
movement, dust and dirt
in the packaging waste stream.
Looking at tracer-based sorting,
the sorting signal is emitted
from each tracer particle in
a radially symmetric manner.
Thus, detection is much less
influenced by " waste stream "
aspects. And relevant for practical
application, TBS works for
any packaging, also for flexible
films, small packaging and
packaging with little or no print.
Importantly, circular plastic
strategies rather look for less
print than more.
Regarding the combination
of different detection technologies:
Indeed, our new sorting
process explicitly combines
multiple measurements for each
waste object. Therefore sorting
does not require having to decide
on a detection technology
yet. From a physics point of
view, TBS is probably the best
general technology for plastic
waste sorting. But it is not a
standard yet. In this phase, an
integrative detection approach
as pushed by Polysecure and
ZEISS is an ideal solution for
plastic waste sorting worldwide.
After this technology has
been commercialized, can we
look forward to further developments
arising from this
strategic partnership?
Our sorting technology approach
is quite comprehensive.
We therefore expect a
rather broad and longer-term
commercialisation strategy
addressing several waste markets
worldwide. We anticipate
further innovations which will
support and integrate our technology
and product strategy.
One interesting aspect is the
inline detection of our fluorescence-based
particle fingerprint
technology by which every
product unit could be tracked
individually. This robust and
forgery-proof marking technology
could be the ideal physical
code for a product pass or digital
twin.
Max Riedel
Your system is a timely development
in view of the increasingly
stringent recycling targets
for packaging being set
by the EU, wouldn't you say?
Yes, the link to the EU overall
situation is interesting: According
to a study by the Circular
Plastics Alliance, around
21 million tons of plastic waste
are collected in Europe each
year, of which only 9.2 million
tons are sorted and processed
in recycling plants to produce
around 5.2 million tons of recyclate.
On the other hand,
the European Plastics Strategy
sets a target for the EU to use
10 million tonnes of recycled
plastic by the year 2025. These
goals create an urgent need to
at least double the volume and
increase the quality of sorted
plastic waste if this 10 million-tonne
target is to be met.
Therefore, we definitely need
better sorting technologies.
16
January/February 2022
Sustainable Plastics - January/February 2022

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Sustainable Plastics - January/February 2022
