President Trump has spent the first few weeks in office writing a flurry of executive orders, and on Monday, he announced his intent to take executive action on plastic waste via his preferred medium: a Truth Social post. The issue at hand? Paper straws. On February 10, 2025, Trump signed the executive order “Ending Procurement and Forced Use of Paper Straws.” Despite the sweeping nature of many of Trump’s executive orders, this one is narrowly tailored: It simply makes the policy of the U.S. to end the use of paper straws. Of course, Trump had already repealed the 2021 Biden executive action “Catalyzing Clean Energy Industries and Jobs Through Federal Sustainability,” which included the broad directive for agencies to reduce waste. These actions and posts raise the question: What does a Trump presidency mean for waste and plastic recycling? Direct action on plastic and recycling seems unlikely, but some of his signature policies could have major implications for recycling. We’ll break down what’s likely and possible from the Trump administration, and what it could mean for the future of advanced recycling.
The Biden administration’s recent sustainability plan will be ripped up. The biggest impact here is likely to be on federal purchasing, where the executive has significant authority. The Biden administration ordered a phaseout of single-use plastics in federal agencies under the auspices of the now-revoked executive order. None of these phaseouts are actually in place yet, so there’s no material impact on the ground from any of this. Unlike other commodities, the U.S. government is not a market-moving purchaser of single-use plastics, so this isn’t a major deal. More importantly, the Biden administration’s National Strategy to Prevent Plastic Pollution is now a dead letter, and U.S. EPA efforts to curb plastic waste will cease. Approximately USD 375 million in grants for recycling infrastructure and ocean cleanup are now in serious doubt, given the Trump administration’s funding freezes and plan to cut spending to the bone. Tighter rules for chemicals manufacturers are also frozen, and any action on polyvinyl chloride, which interferes with chemical recycling, is off the table. Ultimately, the Biden administration lacked the authority to do much on plastic waste without an act of Congress, so rolling back these actions won’t be hugely disruptive. Losing funding for infrastructure is the most painful, and supply of waste will be a major concern.
Trump’s signature policies — immigration and tariffs — could really move the needle on recycling. It’s hard to find reliable data, but immigrants are a key part of the waste collection workforce, with some executives stating much as 40% of recent hires are immigrants. Mass deportation will inevitably impact both the existing workforce and the availability of new hires, making staffing a challenge. Companies will have to raise wages and work with unions to attract labor, increasing costs for recycled plastic. The relatively labor-intensive work of collection and sorting means this should disproportionately impact the price of recycled plastic compared to other materials and may further limit collection of plastic waste. Tariffs, on the other hand, should make recycled plastic more competitive: Recycling is already a largely domestic supply chain. In addition, some competitive materials will be hit hard: The U.S. is a major importer of aluminum, which Trump has just hit with a 25% tariff, including from Mexico and Canada. Aluminum cans and bottles will likely face a significant cost increase, making plastic bottles more attractive. Blanket tariffs on Canadian and Mexican goods are something of a threat to primary plastics, as they risk retaliatory duties from those governments, but the U.S. is a net exporter of primary plastics. If anything, tariffs would make domestic consumption of plastic goods more attractive. The uncertainty around the specifics of these policies makes it hard to tell exactly what the impacts will be, but immigration action seems more locked in than tariffs, so this looks like a net negative for plastic recycling.
Don’t expect Trump to save plastic pyrolysis. Plastic pyrolysis needs a few things to succeed: substantially increased supply of plastic waste, a regulatory environment that permits pyrolysis players to make claims about sustainability, and enough confidence in demand to make large investments in pyrolysis facilities. Trump has already taken concrete steps to crimp investment in waste infrastructure with the funding freeze, and his actions on immigration could further damage supply. Trump is broadly more open to industry-friendly regulation than Biden, so we could see some action on the regulatory environment, but it’s hard to see recycling being a priority amid general anti-sustainability reactions. Confidence might be the killer: Trump is a loose cannon who has already demonstrated a willingness to throw away pro-business policies like the Inflation Reduction Act and is posturing as much more aggressive with tariffs this time around. Justifying investment in capital-intensive chemical recycling seems like a tall, tall order — especially as companies are dropping or delaying their own recycling targets. Plus, state-level actions have not been favorable to pyrolysis (like California’s recent lawsuit), so expect companies that were on the fence about investing to stay on the fence for the time being.
Unfortunately, the long-term implications for the chemicals industry remain unclear. The range of possibilities from Trump — from economy-upending tariffs to empty threats — means innovation leaders will simply have to wait before committing or else accept the risk that, at any time, the entire outlook for the recycling sector could be upended.
Want to discuss this further? Reach out to start the conversation.
