URGENT! Tell your legislators: Fuels from plastics are NOT sustainable

Update: this bill was not voted on before session ended and therefore died for the year.

A late resolution dropped in the Virginia General Assembly which aims to include fuel made from plastics as a Sustainable Aviation Fuel (SAF). As Virginia has the opportunity to implement its ban on single use foam, it was suggested in committee that Virginia should convert that plastic waste into fuel to burn instead. This is alarming.

SAFs typically include bio based fuels. These sources including biomass can have a host of other issues. Including plastics into this mix is appalling and only confirms our opposition in this resolution. Fuels made from plastic are not and never will be sustainable.

SJ 127 will be on the Senate floor soon and if it passes, will also need to pass the House.

Call and email your legislators TODAY to tell them you oppose SJ 127. Below is a message you can use to explain your position. 

Why we shouldn’t turn foam into fuel: Oppose SJ 127

Dear legislator,

SJ 127 calls on Virginia to take all steps to increase Sustainable Aviation Fuels (SAF) use and as confirmed in committee, the intent is to include plastics such as single use foam and plastic bags. This is very problematic to our environment and our health.

1. Plastics to fuel (or what may be referred to as “advanced or chemical recycling” does not offer any of the ecological and economic benefits of true recycling, which returns materials to the production cycle. The process in and of itself is problematic and harms the environment at every stage. “Chemical recycling” is an expensive and complicated method of burning plastic.
2. More plastic pollution. It requires a steady supply of virgin plastic which means more litter and plastic pollution in the environment.
3. Energy intensive, toxic & polluting. What does get recovered is used to create a fuel. The process to create the fuel is highly energy intensive and creates a massive amount of hazardous waste.
4. Harms our climate. Due to plastics being fossil fuel based products, these fuels emit the same harmful toxins and have the same climate impacts as burning other fossil fuels.
5. Requires continued government money and support. These technologies are not new. Chemical “recycling” processes have been explored since the 1950s. They have simply been unable to work. By 2017, the technologies wasted at least $2 billion in investments with canceled or failed projects.
6. The outcomes of converting plastics into fuel include increased plastic pollution, toxic emissions, hazardous waste, and climate impacts. It is NOT a sustainable process or fuel and should absolutely not be considered as such.