{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.025810721376571807, 'fraction_numerical': 0.005956320317670417, 'mean_word_length': 5.326359832635983, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
How China’s foreign waste ban will reshape the U.S. recycling supply chain: Economic and environmental considerations towards a circular economy oriented paper recycling industry

Until recently, China was the largest scrap and unsorted waste importer in the world. Chinese industries sorted the imported wastes and recovered plastic, paper, textiles, and metals, using them as raw materials for manufacturing processes. Since 2013, the Chinese government has imposed measures to ban the import of wastes, the latest one being the “National Sword” policy (fully deployed in January 2021), banning the import of unsorted and recycled wastes. As a result, collecting wastes and recyclables and sending them to China is no longer an option; this has drastically affected the recycling industry supply chain with considerable consequences. This study analyzed the development of Chinese foreign policies on the export of paper waste materials from the U.S. and their specific impact on the recovered paper recycling industry. The economic and environmental consequences of the policy on the U.S. paper recycling industry were analyzed using three scenarios: landfilling (as a baseline), incineration, and recycling. The CO2 emissions were estimated and then compared. It was found that recycling would result in the largest reduction in greenhouse gases. Although recycling was the best evaluated scenario, it has the greatest costs; therefore, possible solutions towards adding value to paper wastes were analyzed.