Today, a significant proportion of cellulose fibres is lost after only a few recycling cycles. This is primarily due to material losses resulting from inadequate collection, rough sorting and inefficient processing, rather than the properties of the fibres themselves. In the future, the entire system will need to be optimised, not least because the EU's new PPWR (Packaging and Packaging Waste) Regulation is gradually coming into force.

– This will introduce new requirements regarding the recycled content and recyclability of packaging. While this may require companies in the industry to invest, there are also commercial advantages to adapting to the new rules, says Anna Sjöstedt, Researcher and Project Manager at RISE.

One of the most important issues to address is material loss throughout the recycling chain.

– A cellulose fibre often disappears from the value chain long before it becomes unusable. In laboratory studies, where losses can be avoided, it is possible to recycle the fibres many more times. As more packaging is set to be recycled, it is crucial that we grasp how to minimise material losses, she concludes.

Sorting needs to be improved

There are losses at several points in the recycling process. One of the problems is that some materials are not collected at all.

– Compared to other materials, paper and cardboard have a high recycling rate, but there is clearly room for improvement, says Peter Hansen, Senior Researcher at RISE.

However, even if consumers were to become better at taking their packaging to recycling stations and centres, a new challenge would arise.

– At present, the sorting is too coarse for us to optimise recycling. For example, packaging with certain plastic components needs to be handled differently to packaging made of pure corrugated cardboard, he says.

When the process needs to accommodate a variety of materials, it becomes unnecessarily difficult, resulting in fibres being lost and worn away.

– Efforts have been made to make it easy for consumers, but in the future, we will probably need to think of recycled packaging as a raw material that needs to be sorted more effectively from the outset, says Peter Hansen.

Better reporting is required

Among other things, the new PPWR Regulation will impose new requirements for the increased use of recycled plastic materials in packaging. Producers must also improve their reporting of material content and the labelling of end products to facilitate consumer recycling. 

– The rules are becoming stricter in various areas and will gradually tighten over the coming years. I believe there could be major benefits to harmonising the requirements within the EU, as this would facilitate the development of technical and logistical solutions, says Anna Sjöstedt.

Consumers choose sustainability  

Many large companies also have their own sustainability goals that they expect their suppliers to adhere to, and many consumers consider sustainability when choosing products.

– Producers who adopt new directives early on can, of course, also reduce the risk of time pressure and manufacturing disruptions, says Peter Hansen.

He believes that the natural first step for many companies will be to conduct a technical analysis of their product portfolio, identifying which products can remain competitive without compromising quality or functionality.

– This is something we at RISE help many companies with. Thanks to our test and demonstration facilities and our expertise, we can clearly demonstrate how properties are affected when a certain amount of recycled fibre is added, for example, he says.

Concrete tests of the process 

Anna Sjöstedt emphasises the importance of conducting concrete trials.

– At RISE, we have both laboratories and pilot environments, so, in addition to theory, we can answer questions such as which processes handle recycled fibres best or how a change in raw material flows affects process water quality and how water management and chemical additive use need to be adapted, she says.

Another service in demand at RISE during such transitions is life cycle analyses using LCA tools to study climate impact.

– In parallel with the analyses, it can be valuable to bring in our regulatory experts, who can advise on the adjustments required based on the PPWR rules, says Anna Sjöstedt.

For decades, Sweden has built efficient, linear systems adapted to an open global world. Now that we need to reduce our dependence on fossil fuels for climate reasons, we also need to become more self-sufficient and less dependent on the global value chains we have helped to build. At the same time, we need to improve our long-term preparedness in the face of a sharply deteriorating security situation.

Smarter use of forests, fields and water

"Starting with preparedness, the short-term solution is to simply try to store the oil and gas we think we need. But this is not a long-term sustainable solution and would probably be prohibitively expensive. And it offers no solution to the other two crises," says Gustav Rogstrand, Head of the Department of Agriculture and Environmental Technology at RISE.

"So is there a way to increase long-term preparedness, while at the same time making us more independent and contributing to a positive climate footprint?

The solution is actually all around us – in our forests, in our fields and in our waters.

"For example, only about half of the carbon in the biomass we extract from forests today is converted into finished products. There is a huge potential in by-products and residual streams that we could use much better to reduce our dependency on others and get more out of the resources available here, locally. There is also great potential in residual streams from agriculture and the food industry," says Johanna Mossberg, Head of the Bioeconomy Arena at RISE.

Huge potential in various bio-based by-products and residual streams

This is about making better use of our existing resources, perhaps even several times over, working towards a circular bioeconomy.

"In fact, it encompasses all sorts of different bio-based by-products and residues. Fish waste, sawdust, bark, textile waste, grass, agricultural residues... Different raw materials that we can use different processes to turn into something useful. It can be food, feed, fuel, chemicals... the potential is huge," says Johanna Mossberg.

We are talking about significant numbers.

"In theory, we could replace up to 70% of imported fossil energy through better, smarter and more sustainable use of domestic bio-resources," says Gustav Rogstrand.

By finding ways to replace the fossil carbon atoms we currently import and, in the best case, reusing them several times in recycled or remanufactured products, we can gradually make ourselves less dependent on the outside world, more resilient in times of crisis or unrest, and contribute to a positive climate balance. So why haven't we started?

"Because it is more complex and in some cases more expensive in the short term, because it means that different actors have to work on joint solutions rather than individually", says Gustav Rogstrand.

Paper mills could produce methanol, ethanol and vanillin

But this way of thinking - looking for more efficient ways to use existing resources - is not really new.

"One example is how the former paper mill Domsjö Fabriker in Örnsköldsvik, during the Second World War, used the same chemical cooking process to produce more products, such as methanol, ethanol, vanillin. The potential exists to do the same based on biomass today, even though in peacetime we prioritised efficiency in the production of individual products," says Johanna Mossberg.

So does this mean that working according to a circular bioeconomy is always positive for the competitiveness of individual companies?

"If we find uses for residual streams from existing industries, they can generate new revenues, making them stronger and more resilient," says Johanna Mossberg.

"At the same time, a transition can mean a short-term cost increase for individual industries. That's why it's important that society as a whole is there to provide support where needed. "It can pay off even in peacetime; it can generate new export flows and knowledge," adds Gustav Rogstrand.

RISE test and demonstration facilities around the country are already being used to test various types of new processes and products, for companies in the start-up phase, those who do not want to disrupt regular operations in their own facilities or simply for those who want to develop something new quickly and with fewer resources than building up both equipment and expertise themselves.

"We have equipment as well as expertise in virtually all industries and, in addition, this opportunity to connect different industries and actors to find collaborations that benefit the whole," says Johanna Mossberg.

Different challenges for different industries

"Take the forestry and chemical industries, for example. Here there is already some co-operation between a few large players. The agricultural sector is completely different, with 40,000 small farmers, often one-man or few-man companies. Finding partnerships with the chemical industry to capitalise on residual streams requires completely different support," says Rogstrand.

This shift is not easy, but there are already good examples of what it could look like - such as Agroetanol in Norrköping, Energifabriken in Linköping and Alviksgården outside Piteå.

"Compared to other countries, Sweden has an enormous amount of biomass. But just as importantly, we have pluralism in the form of lots of different industries. It gives us a fairly diversified culture where many different tracks can develop simultaneously. This, pluralism, provides a robustness that is important to achieve strengthened preparedness," says Johanna Mossberg.