Is the Chemical Industry Ready to Be Regenerative?

Photo by National Cancer Institute on Unsplash

The chemical industry faces the dual challenge of addressing legacy pollutants while transitioning toward regenerative practices. The question is whether current efforts are sufficient to achieve this. Legacy chemicals do not just disappear. They exist in the environment and in the fatty tissues of humans and animals. Chemistry has the power to sustain life and to be renewable. Still, the road to regeneration is long and arduous, marked by technological limitations, high retrofitting facility costs, regulatory uncertainties, and the lack of new innovative business models.

Regenerative Chemistry

Regenerative chemistry is a comprehensive approach intended for the transition of the traditional linear model to a restorative and circular model equivalent with natural systems. This concept includes the design of processes that increase social and ecological well-being, therefore reducing waste and pollution and transitioning from finite fossil resources to circular and renewable feedstocks.

The industry is increasingly shifting away from the traditional “reduce, reuse, and recycle” model and adopting the 9R framework to address issues in supply chains and mitigate potential hazardous consequences on the environment.

Chemical recycling, along with technological innovation, is gaining popularity, and it involves separating molecular components that can then be used to produce high-quality raw materials.

Chemical Recycling and Renewable Feedstocks

The chemical industry must reduce its dependence on fossil resources and adopt alternatives like renewable and recycled carbon (RRC) feedstocks. Across the sector, companies are developing different approaches, from recycling to bio-based polymers and carbon capture, but face significant cost and scale barriers.

Mitsubishi Chemical, for instance, has pioneered artificial photosynthesis technology to convert sunlight and CO₂ into chemical feedstocks and collaborated with MicroWave Chemical to convert waste acrylic products into feedstocks. Mitsui Chemicals has developed chemical recycling technologies, such as pyrolysis, that recover high-quality raw materials from plastic waste while also investing in new technologies like artificial photosynthesis, to achieve carbon neutrality. SABIC and Plastic Energy are constructing a new recycling plant in the Netherlands to produce TACOIL, an alternative feedstock for virgin-quality food-grade plastics. Kaneka has further advanced its bio-based innovation by developing 100% plant-based, biodegradable polymers that are now used in everyday products, such as straws and food packaging.

Together, these initiatives demonstrate that firms are investing in renewable feedstocks and circular technologies. However, scaling them beyond pilots, along with high costs, remains a challenge to make the industry regenerative.

Beyond technological innovation, a regenerative approach also requires alignment with ecological systems.

Restored and Enhanced Ecosystems

A regenerative approach, also known as ‘nature positive’, goes beyond circular materials to ensure that its processes actively contribute to the health and vitality of natural systems. The goal of this approach is to ensure that sourcing feedstocks, particularly virgin biomass, does not lead to alterations in the natural landscape, nor does it lead to the loss of biodiversity or forests. For example, in 2022, 196 parties signed up to the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF), to reduce and reverse nature loss by 2030 and achieve full recovery by 2050.

Regenerative approaches are achieved by sourcing from agroforestry systems that increase ecological resilience or using wetlands to purify water. Regenerative practices help building stronger communities, improving access to food, restoring the health of soil, reducing environmental impacts and making a net positive impact.

Regeneration methods can also come from chemical engineering processes. For example, Adsorbents used in wastewater treatment are regenerated through various techniques in order to restore their efficiency, minimise waste, and promote a circular system.

Net-Positive Water Impact

Water is an indispensable resource in the chemical industry, used extensively in processes such as cooling, cleaning, and as a solvent. There is a growing application and adoption of Net Positive commitments by industries, which are based on creating more positive impacts than negative ones on water resources in terms of water quantity, water quality, and access to water.

Industry Collaboration

Because a chemical transition is complex, there is a growing collaboration among policymakers, businesses, and researchers. This collaboration has the objectives of creating closed-loop systems and establishing value chains that help in reducing waste and environmental impact.

Mitsui Chemicals’ partnership with Kao Corporation and CFP Co. is an example of collaborations of key actors from the chemical industry, necessary for achieving carbon neutrality.

Challenges in Becoming Fully Regenerative

· Scale and Economic Viability

While innovative technologies do exist, scaling them up to meet industry demand is an issue due to their high initial costs. Other challenges involve energy intensity and the competition with historically cheap, subsidised fossil-based feedstocks. An example is chemical recycling methods such as pyrolysis, which is an energy-intensive process that requires large volumes of feedstock to be profitable. Such challenges delay economic advantages and widespread adoption of the circular economy.

· Policy and Regulatory Gaps

Although technologies are being developed, incomplete and unclear policy frameworks slow adoption. EU policies, such as the Emissions Trading System (ETS) and the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM), offer financial incentives to reduce fossil fuel use by pricing direct greenhouse gas emissions from production. However, they do not consider the environmental impacts associated with feedstock sourcing, nor do they encourage the use of renewable or recycled feedstocks, despite these having lower lifecycle emissions.

There is a lack of clarity on certain waste recycling aspects in the EU and the US, such as in chemical recycling, and there are barriers to the development of Renewable and Recycled Carbon feedstocks. Policy strategies for renewable and recycled carbon feedstocks are either being developed in the EU or are nonexistent in the US. Without clear standards, regulations, or a shared agreement on the definition and classification of chemical recycling, scaling will remain limited.

· Public Perception and Knowledge Gaps

There is a lack of public support for and knowledge about carbon source usage as feedstock alternatives for the chemical industry, such as CO2, waste, and biomass. There is also a lack of awareness and engagement that reduces support towards transition projects.

For example, in a 2017 survey, Germans were not entirely aware that biomass, coal, waste, and CO2 are carbon carriers and can be used as feedstock materials for the chemical industry. Without this awareness that domestic carbon resources are available, they may be willing to support carbon transition processes in the German chemical industry.

· Water Mismanagement

Chemical production faces significant challenges related to water use. These are high costs and waste associated with treating lower-quality water, complex regulatory requirements for water sourcing and pollution prevention, and a lack of large volumes of high-quality water for processing. Chemical plants are facing further challenges due to climate change and population growth.

· Technological and Infrastructure Sluggishness

The chemical industry is part of socio-technical systems that rely on fossil fuels. For a transition to occur there will need to be major changes, as well as in business models, logistics, and infrastructure. However, because it is such a complex process, it will require time and commitment.

· Environmental challenges

The transition to alternative feedstocks has environmental challenges of its own such as designing natural systems that can be regenerated. Scaling up the use of biomass comes with challenging consequences on nature, food production competition, and monocultures. Most of the negative environmental concerns can be related to land-use change, which is a key determinant for the environmental sustainability of biomass feedstocks.

Verifying Regenerative Qualities

Verifying these regenerative qualities requires a combination of strong evaluation methodologies, transparent reporting, and adherence to guiding principles.

· Lifecycle Assessment (LCA)

LCA is a powerful took for advancing circular economy practices and could be useful for verifying whether chemicals can be regenerative. The chemical industry’s complex supply chains benefit from LCA in evaluating environmental impacts at every lifecycle and in identifying opportunities for improvement.

· Renewable and Recycled Carbon (RRC) Feedstocks Verification

A set of principles has been proposed to guide and verify the environmental sustainability of Renewable and Recycled Carbon (RRC) feedstocks. Factors like technology, geography and energy mix must be taken into consideration when verifying a single feedstock.

· Certification Schemes

Issued certification schemes from third parties can ensure that products, infrastructures and processes meet regulations and standards. For example, Bureau Veritas uses the ISCC Plus certification to audit products and ensure that sustainability requirements are obeyed.

Bluesign in partnership with Patagonia, in partnership with Patagonia, offers sustainable textile certifications by assessing and minimising resource use throughout the material supply chain. It also approves products, materials, chemicals and processes that are safe for workers, consumers and the environment.

There needs to be international standards that are agreed upon and pushed by the chemical industry, governments and competitors in order for circularity to thrive.

Concluding Thoughts

The industry has begun the journey toward regeneration, but progress remains limited by structural and policy barriers. Moving forward requires accountability and collaboration. Policymakers must create incentives for circular practices, companies must invest in innovation, infrastructure and sustainable water management, and legislators must push for the disclosure of environmental impacts. Above all, independently verified outcomes on carbon, water, and biodiversity are essential if chemistry is to transition from ambition to measurable regeneration.