How Circularity Actually Reduces Emissions
Share
Circular economies are increasingly recognised as a critical tool in tackling climate change.
But there’s a catch.
While landfill restrictions and reduced incineration have tightened the system, waste doesn’t stop being waste until it’s reused as a product.
Why This Is So Hard to Measure
Comparing circular and linear economies isn’t straightforward.
Traditional models are linear:
take → make → dispose
Circular systems are different:
reuse → remanufacture → reuse again
The challenge is that circular systems don’t just reduce emissions—they prevent emissions from being created in the first place.
That makes direct comparisons difficult.
The Key Question
So how do you actually calculate and compare emissions?
The answer is simple—but often misunderstood:
You measure emissions per unit of useful product, not per kg of material.
Because ultimately, people don’t need plastic—they need products that perform a function.
Open Loop vs Closed Loop
Before we go further, it’s important to distinguish:
-
Open-loop recycling: material is reused, but downgraded into lower-value products
-
Closed-loop recycling: material is continuously reused to deliver the same function
True circularity focuses on maintaining product value, not just material recovery.
Worked Example: Circular vs Linear Emissions
Let’s take a simple case.
You manufacture a 1kg plastic product (a “widget”) and reuse it across three generations.
Circular Model
-
Initial production (Gen 1, virgin plastic): 10.18 kgCO₂e
-
Recycling + remanufacture (Gen 2): +5.5 kgCO₂e
-
Transport: +0.23 kgCO₂e
-
Recycling + remanufacture (Gen 3): +5.5 kgCO₂e
-
Transport: +0.23 kgCO₂e
Total: 21.64 kgCO₂e per kg of useful product (across 3 uses)
Linear Model (Take–Make–Waste)
Each generation requires new material:
-
Gen 1: 11.38 kgCO₂e
-
Gen 2: 11.38 kgCO₂e
-
Gen 3: 11.38 kgCO₂e
Total: 34.14 kgCO₂e per kg of useful product (across 3 uses)
What This Actually Means
In both scenarios, you only ever have 1kg of product in use at any one time.
But:
-
In the linear system, you create 3kg of material
-
1kg in use
-
2kg wasted
-
plus all associated emissions
-
-
In the circular system, you keep using the same 1kg
-
No additional material demand
-
No duplicated embodied emissions
-
Where Most Analyses Go Wrong
Many lifecycle assessments compare emissions per kg of material.
That’s misleading.
The correct comparison is:
emissions per unit of utility (i.e. per use case)
Because demand isn’t for plastic—it’s for the function the product performs.
A Simple Way to Think About It
Take something familiar—a plastic spoon.
-
You don’t need plastic
-
You need something to eat yoghurt with
Linear system:
-
Use a spoon → throw it away → repeat
-
3 uses = 3 spoons = 3× emissions
Circular system:
-
Use → recover → remanufacture → reuse
-
3 uses = same spoon reused
The difference is not the material weight.
It’s the repetition of production emissions.
The Next Step: Remove Transport
Even circular systems still have emissions—from:
-
Recycling processes
-
Transport
-
Handling
This is where the next optimisation comes in:
Reduce or eliminate movement altogether
Why ReallyRecycle.com Focuses on Local Circularity
This is exactly why ReallyRecycle.com focuses on decentralised circular microeconomies.
By manufacturing locally from recovered materials:
-
Waste doesn’t travel long distances
-
Transport emissions are reduced or eliminated
-
Supply chains become more resilient
-
Local environmental controls remain enforceable
In effect, you don’t just reduce emissions—you remove entire categories of them.
The Bottom Line
Circularity doesn’t mean zero emissions.
But it does mean:
-
fewer materials
-
fewer repeated emissions
-
and significantly lower overall impact
When measured properly—by use, not weight—the benefits become clear.
What Comes Next?
The real opportunity isn’t just recycling better.
It’s:
-
designing systems around reuse
-
producing closer to the point of demand
-
and keeping materials in continuous circulation