Sustainable Conduct

Environmental Protection

We meet our responsibility to protect the environment in many different ways. We are continuously working to reduce the environmental impact of our business activities and develop product solutions that benefit the environment. For us, an efficient approach to raw materials and energy makes both ecological and economic sense. Our measures help reduce environmental impact and at the same time cut the costs associated with materials, energy, emissions and disposal.

We use many means to make our production processes more resource-friendly and lower the emissions they generate. In line with our claim we are also committed to minimizing wastewater pollution. Systematic waste management and recycling activities reduce the amount of materials to be disposed of.

Responsibilities and framework conditions are stipulated at Group level, e.g. by corporate policies, targets and key performance indicators (KPIs). We use certified HSEQ stands for health, safety, environment, quality. management systems to control operational implementation. Our environmental standards apply worldwide.

Energy consumption

Total energy consumption slightly higher than last year

In 2016, the Group’s total energy consumption rose by 1.6% to 84.5 petajoules. In calculating the total energy consumption, we differentiate between primary energy consumption – mainly of fossil fuels for our own generation of electricity and steam – and secondary energy consumption, which reflects the purchase of electricity, steam and refrigeration energy and the use of process heat. Primary energy consumption rose in 2016 by 1.0% and secondary energy consumption by 2.2%. This increase in energy requirements is due to increased production activities at the Leverkusen and Krefeld-Uerdingen sites in Germany.

Energy Consumption in the Bayer Group1

 

 

2012

 

2013

 

2014

 

2015

 

2016

 

 

TJ

 

TJ

 

TJ

 

TJ

 

TJ

1

Energy consumption is netted which may result in negative values.

2

E.g. hydrogen

3

The proportion of primary energy sources used in generating the electricity consumed depends on the respective national electricity mix.

Primary energy consumption for the in-house generation of electricity & steam

 

49,047

 

47,582

 

45,572

 

42,996

 

43,424

Natural gas

 

30,411

 

29,796

 

31,580

 

28,813

 

27,552

Coal

 

15,954

 

15,094

 

12,611

 

12,755

 

13,420

Liquid fuels

 

656

 

416

 

421

 

350

 

465

Waste

 

1,005

 

1,282

 

833

 

1,523

 

1,800

Other2

 

1,021

 

994

 

127

 

(445)

 

187

Secondary energy consumption

 

34,137

 

33,266

 

39,745

 

40,186

 

41,070

Electricity3

 

25,849

 

25,560

 

27,177

 

25,977

 

28,070

Steam

 

(121)

 

(801)

 

3,579

 

4,694

 

3,576

Steam from waste heat (process heat)

 

9,144

 

9,146

 

9,639

 

9,974

 

10,010

Refrigeration energy

 

(735)

 

(639)

 

(650)

 

(459)

 

(586)

Total energy consumption

 

83,184

 

80,848

 

85,317

 

83,182

 

84,494

Total energy consumption Life Sciences

 

28,481

 

27,972

 

26,288

 

24,677

 

26,243

Energy efficiency target of Life Science areas achieved and newly formulated

We measure energy efficiency based on the relationship between energy consumption in megawatt hours (MWh) and manufactured sales volume (in metric tons). With a reduction of 0.5%, the manufactured sales volume of the Life Sciences was about the same level as the previous year, while energy consumption rose by around 6.3%, mainly at our service company Currenta, which serves among other functions as the energy provider for Bayer and third parties. As a result, our energy efficiency deteriorated by around 6.8% compared with the previous year.

Energy Efficiency

 

 

2012

 

2013

 

2014

 

2015

 

2016

 

 

in MWh / t

 

in MWh / t

 

in MWh / t

 

in MWh / t

 

in MWh / t

Energy efficiency of Life Sciences

 

8.86

 

8.54

 

7.62

 

6.34

 

6.77

Group target 2020:

improvement of 10% in energy efficiency

In line with our Group target, we are endeavoring to improve energy efficiency by 10% by 2020 compared to 2012. With an increase in energy efficiency of almost 24% compared with the base year 2012, we had achieved this target by the end of 2016.

On account of Covestro becoming legally independent, the magnitude of our manufactured sales volume and also our energy requirement has significantly fallen. For that reason, when calculating our energy efficiency in the future we want to use a more appropriate reference value for our product portfolio. With effect from reporting year 2017, we shall indicate energy efficiency for our Life Science areas Pharmaceuticals, Consumer Health, Crop Science and Animal Health as the relationship between the energy we use and our external sales, instead of the manufactured sales volume. For that reason, we have adjusted our previous target so that it is now to improve our energy efficiency by 10% by 2020 compared with the base year of 2015.

Combined heat and power processes account for high proportion of in-house energy generation

Around 90% of our own energy generation comes from highly efficient combined heat and power processes. In addition, we purchase electricity on the market – through energy exchanges, for example. The electricity and heat generated and purchased are used in our own production facilities and third-party facilities (especially of Lanxess Deutschland GmbH as the other shareholder of our service company Currenta). The proportion of renewable energies is determined by the energy mix of our energy suppliers. We comment in detail on these issues in our CDP is a nonprofit organization that works on behalf of institutional investors to compile annual rankings of detailed environmental data, especially in respect of greenhouse gas emissions (CDP-Climate) and water management (CDP-Water), from the top 500 publicly listed companies in the world. According to CDP, more than 800 investors representing fund assets of around US$100 trillion currently draw on this information for their investment decisions. Report.

Air emissions

At Bayer, air emissions are caused mainly by the generation and consumption of electricity, steam and process heat. Thanks to the various measures in our Bayer Climate Program – such as introducing energy management systems and production/process innovations – we have achieved a significant reduction in emissions over the past 10 years, which goes hand in hand with an improvement in energy efficiency. We have documented our successful reduction of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in the CDP reports and in 2016 received an excellent rating, the leadership status with the highest score of A.

As a Life Sciences This term describes Bayer’s activities in health care and agriculture and comprises the Bayer Group excluding its legally independent subsidiary Covestro. It refers to the businesses of the Pharmaceuticals, Consumer Health and Crop Science divisions and the Animal Health business unit. company too, we want to continue helping to protect the climate on several levels. This includes reducing our production-related emissions with ambitious targets relating to energy efficiency and cutting specific greenhouse gas emissions. In the future, we will be focusing more on lowering emissions in nonproduction areas. These include our vehicle fleet (Sustainable Fleet initiative), looking into increased use of electric vehicles (electric mobility programs), further developing our information and communication technologies (Green IT) in terms of environmental aspects and investigating potential ways to lower greenhouse gas emissions along the value chain.

Online Annex: A 1.4.3.3-1

limited assurance

We are also working further to reduce our CO2 emissions in connection with our global fleet of over 25,000 vehicles. At an average level of 145 g/km for the just over 5,000 vehicles newly registered in 2016, these remained at approximately the same level as in 2015 (141 g/km). Our goal is to reduce average CO2 emissions to 110 g/km for new vehicles registered in 2020. To achieve this, we shall implement further measures in 2017 such as pilot projects on e-mobility.

Transparency on greenhouse gas emissions

Bayer reports all Group greenhouse gas emissions in line with the requirements of the Greenhouse Gas Protocol ( GHG Protocol The Greenhouse Gas Protocol is an internationally recognized tool for recording, quantifying and reporting greenhouse gas emissions. Its standards cover all emissions within a company’s value chain. Bayer aligns itself to the Corporate Standard for direct (Scope 1) and indirect (Scope 2) greenhouse gas emissions and also to the Corporate Value Chain (Scope 3) Accounting and Reporting Standard, which covers further indirect emissions along the value chain. Dual reporting was introduced in 2015 with the updating of the GHG guidelines for Scope 2. Indirect emissions have now to be reported using both the location-based and the market-based methods. The location-based method uses regional or national average emissions factors, while the market-based method applies provider- or product-specific emissions factors based on contractual instruments. ). Direct emissions from our own power plants, waste incineration plants and production facilities (Scope 1) and indirect emissions from the procurement of electricity, steam and refrigeration energy (Scope 2) are determined at all production locations and relevant research and administrative sites.

Since 2015, we have reported in line with the updated GHG Protocol guideline for Scope 2, which states that indirect emissions must be reported according to both the location-based and the market-based methods.

Group Greenhouse Gas Emissions1

Million metric tons of CO2 equivalents

 

2012

 

2013

 

2014

 

2015

 

2016

1

Portfolio-adjusted in accordance with the GHG Protocol

2

In 2016, 84.21% of emissions were CO2 emissions, 15.38% N2O emissions, just under 0.37% partially fluorinated hydrocarbons and 0.04% methane.

3

Excluding Currenta

4

Typically, CO2 in incineration processes accounts for over 99% of all greenhouse gas emissions. When determining indirect emissions, our calculations are therefore limited to CO2 and indicate direct emissions in CO2 equivalents.

5

The market-based method of the new Scope 2 GHG Protocol most reliably reflects the indirect emissions and the success of emissions reduction measures, so we used emissions volumes calculated using this method when calculating the total and specific greenhouse gas emissions.

6

Specific Group emissions are calculated from the total volume of direct emissions, indirect emissions calculated using the market-based method of the new Scope 2 GHG Protocol and emissions from the vehicle fleet, divided by the manufactured sales volume of the segments in metric tons. Quantities attributable to the supply of energy to external companies are deducted from the direct and indirect emissions.

Total direct emissions2

 

4.24

 

4.09

 

4.02

 

4.41

 

4.30

of which from Life Sciences3

 

0.75

 

0.73

 

0.69

 

0.91

 

0.73

Total indirect emissions4 according to the location-based method

 

4.71

 

4.85

 

5.03

 

4.94

 

5.00

of which from Life Sciences3

 

0.88

 

0.89

 

0.90

 

0.88

 

0.88

Total indirect emissions4 according to the market-based method

 

4.72

 

4.91

 

5.53

 

5.30

 

5.57

of which from Life Sciences3

 

0.93

 

0.93

 

0.96

 

0.92

 

0.93

Total greenhouse gas emissions according to the market-based method5

 

8.96

 

9.00

 

9.55

 

9.71

 

9.87

of which from Life Sciences3

 

1.68

 

1.66

 

1.65

 

1.83

 

1.66

Specific greenhouse gas emissions from Life Sciences3 (t CO2e / t) according to the market-based method5,6

 

1.88

 

1.83

 

1.72

 

1.69

 

1.54

In line with the GHG Protocol, in our energy balance we include all greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from the conversion of primary energy sources into electricity, steam or refrigeration energy, even though a significant proportion of our direct emissions comes from the generation of energy that is delivered to other companies. Consequently, our absolute figures for greenhouse gas emissions are higher than the actual emissions resulting from Bayer’s business activities alone.

Group target 2020:

reduction of 15% in specific greenhouse gas emissions

In 2016, we recorded a slight increase of 1.7% in total GHG emissions in the Group, although those of the Life Sciences without Currenta fell by 9.5%. Direct emissions diminished across the Group by 2.4%, mainly due to the sale of the chemical park infrastructure at the site in Institute, West Virginia, United States. Indirect emissions (market-based method) rose by 5.1%. This was essentially due to enhanced energy requirements as a result of increased production activities at the Chempark Leverkusen, Dormagen and Krefeld-Uerdingen sites in Germany. We were again able to reduce the specific greenhouse gas emissions (total emissions divided by the manufactured sales volume) of our Life Sciences (here excluding Currenta). With a reduction of 18% compared with 2012 levels, we have already achieved our previous Group target of reducing specific greenhouse gas emissions by 15% by the year 2020.

As with the calculation method for our energy efficiency, we are also intending to change our reporting of specific greenhouse gas emissions from 2017 onward. We are planning to indicate these as the relationship between the greenhouse gas emissions of our Life Sciences and our external sales instead of the manufactured sales volume. We have thus adjusted our Group target accordingly and are looking to achieve a 20% reduction in specific greenhouse gas emissions by 2020 compared with 2015. This new target more adequately reflects our contribution to climate protection and takes into account our new corporate orientation as a Life Science company.

The reporting of all relevant indirect emissions from the value chain is bindingly regulated by the GHG Protocol Corporate Value Chain (Scope 3) Accounting & Reporting Standard. Following a thorough examination, Bayer has identified nine essential Scope 3 categories, which we report on in detail in the (PDF:) CDP Report.

In 2016, the Bayer Group was involved in European emissions trading with 18 plants in total. The greenhouse gas emissions of these plants amounted to approximately 2.32 million metric tons of CO2 equivalents.

Other direct emissions into the air reduced

Emissions of ozone-depleting substances (ODS) fell by 23.0% in 2016. Emissions of volatile organic compounds excluding methane (VOCs) excluding methane decreased by 30.5%.

Online Annex: A 1.4.3.3-2

limited assurance

The main source of both types of emissions is the Crop Science site in Vapi, India, which accounts for 96.0% of ODS emissions and 48.0% of VOC emissions at Bayer. The project initiated at this site four years ago to reduce these emissions continues to have an impact. Group-wide VOC emissions fell by 30.5% compared with the previous year, and ODS emissions by 23.0%. Another subproject was implemented at Vapi in 2016: a central waste air treatment facility brings together the many different sources of emissions at the site, which in the future will lead to a further significant reduction in these emissions.

Through the optimized operation of the power plants at the German sites in Leverkusen and Krefeld-Uerdingen, total emissions of sulfur dioxides fell by 15.3%. Particulate emissions also declined, in this case by 29.1%, caused by the reduction at the Covestro site in Baytown, Texas, United States. Nitrogen oxide emissions were 2.2% lower. Carbon monoxide emissions increased by 7.4%, on the other hand. This is the result of an improved analysis method at the German sites in Dormagen and Krefeld-Uerdingen.

Other Direct Air Emissions

 

 

2012

 

2013

 

2014

 

2015

 

2016

 

 

1,000 metric tons

 

1,000 metric tons

 

1,000 metric tons

 

1,000 metric tons

 

1,000 metric tons

1

Ozone-depleting substances (ODS) in CFC-11 equivalents

2

Volatile organic compounds (VOC) excluding methane

ODS1

 

0.0163

 

0.0157

 

0.0148

 

0.0117

 

0.0090

VOC2

 

2.60

 

2.27

 

2.12

 

1.61

 

1.12

CO

 

1.00

 

0.94

 

0.91

 

0.93

 

1.00

NOX

 

3.07

 

2.51

 

2.36

 

2.42

 

2.36

SOX

 

1.85

 

1.32

 

1.22

 

1.17

 

0.99

Particulates

 

0.18

 

0.16

 

0.25

 

0.23

 

0.16

Higher number of environmental incidents

The number of environmental incidents – i.e. incidents that result in the release of substances into the environment – increased from two to three in 2016. Factors that determine whether there is a reporting obligation include, in particular, the nature and quantity of the substance, the amount of damage caused and any consequences for nearby residents. In accordance with our internal voluntary commitment, we report any leakage of substances with a high hazard potential from a quantity of 100 kg upward.

Number of Environmental Incidents

Number of Environmental Incidents (bar chart)Number of Environmental Incidents (bar chart)

Online Annex: A 1.4.3.3-3

limited assurance

Environmental Incidents 2016

Personal injury

Pharmaceuticals, Wuppertal, Germany, April 18, 2016
A large volume of wastewater flowed into a nearby river on account of a leak at a sewer shaft. The leak could be repaired.

No

Pharmaceuticals, Karachi, Pakistan, June 23, 2016
During transfer from a main container to a day tank, 2,000 l of diesel accidentally leaked into a drain.

No

Covestro, Antwerp, Belgium, July 28, 2016
An unintentional leak of solvent occurred upon starting a pump. The contaminated soil was taken up and disposed of in a professional manner after consultation with the relevant authorities.

No

The following incident was registered and analyzed but does not count as an environmental incident under Bayer criteria.

Incident Not Considered an Environmental or Transport Incident under Bayer Criteria

Description
Comments

Animal Health, Kiel, Germany, April 3, 2016

Spillage of liquid waste in a storeroom
A waste container fell down causing the spillage of a flammable liquid product. This was cleaned up and disposed of in a professional manner. Due to the small quantity involved, the incident was not recorded as an environmental incident but as a plant safety incident (LoPC).

Use of water and emissions into water

Effective water management at sites in water-scarce areas

Clean water in sufficient quantities is essential for supplying our production sites and the surrounding areas. In the future too, industrial water usage must not lead to local problems such as a shortage of water for the people living in the area. Our Water Position commits us to compliance with international and local legislation to protect water resources and use them efficiently.

Group target 2017:

establishment of water management at all sites in water-scarce areas

We used the WBCSD Global Water Tool™ to identify all Bayer sites that are located in regions affected or threatened by water shortage. In line with our Group target, these sites are to establish a water management system that takes the local conditions sufficiently into account by 2017. This involves analyzing their water usage, quality and discharge data annually along with site-specific initiatives using a method developed at Bayer. During the evaluation in 2015, specific measures were agreed to initiate more effective water management at the sites where there is room for improvement. The analysis in the reporting year revealed that the proportion of sites examined that have effective water management has increased from around 58% (2015) to 95% (2016).

Online Annex: A 1.4.3.3-4

limited assurance

This has been achieved, for example, by establishing measures to control water consumption more closely and make greater use of rainwater. In addition, the efficiency of treatment cycles in production processes has been further improved and measures have been taken to recycle water. Employee training and awareness campaigns encouraging economical water usage have also proved productive.

Bayer supports the CEO Water Mandate of the U.N. Global Compact with the goal of working with key stakeholders to develop sustainable strategies for water usage. In our annual response to the CDP Water Disclosure, we report in detail on our water usage, the company-specific water footprint and the associated opportunities and risks. This represents a progress report for the CEO Water Mandate.

Water use

In 2016, total water use in the Group fell by 4.8% to around 330 million cubic meters. Some 79% of all water used by Bayer is cooling water that is only heated and does not come into contact with products. It can be returned to the water cycle without further treatment in line with the relevant official permits. At our production facilities, we endeavor to use water several times and to recycle it. Water is currently recycled at 36 sites, accounting for 42% of the total water use. The various forms of recycling include closed cooling cycles, reuse of treated wastewater and recirculation of steam condensates as process water. A total of around 11.8 million cubic meters of water was reused in 2016.

Online Annex: A 1.4.3.3-5

limited assurance

Water Use in the Bayer Group in 2016 (million m³)

Water Use in the Bayer Group in 2016 (million m³) (chart)Water Use in the Bayer Group in 2016 (million m³) (chart)

1 The differences between volumes of water consumed and water discharged can be explained, for example, by unquantified losses due to evaporation, leaks, quantities of water used as raw materials in products and volumes of condensate generated through the use of steam as a source of energy.
2 Sum from production processes, sanitary wastewater and rinsing and cleaning processes in production

The amounts of water from each source have remained at a comparable level since 2012.

Online Annex: A 1.4.3.3-6

limited assurance

Net Water Intake by Source

 

 

2012

 

2013

 

2014

 

2015

 

2016

 

 

million m3

 

million m3

 

million m3

 

million m3

 

million m3

Water consumption

 

384

 

361

 

350

 

346

 

330

of which from surface water

 

248

 

226

 

223

 

212

 

187

of which from boreholes / springs

 

123

 

120

 

112

 

118

 

124

of which from public drinking water supplies

 

7

 

9

 

9

 

10

 

13

of which from other sources, e.g. rainwater

 

6

 

6

 

6

 

6

 

6

Wastewater treatment benefits environment

Process Wastewater Volume
in million m3

Process Wastewater Volume (bar chart)Process Wastewater Volume (bar chart)

All wastewater is subject to strict controls before it is discharged into the various disposal channels. The total quantity of wastewater, including process and sanitary wastewater, was 60 million cubic meters in 2016, which is 3.1% down on 2015. 78.5% of Bayer’s wastewater worldwide was purified in wastewater treatment plants (Bayer or third-party facilities). Following careful analysis, the remaining volume was categorized as environmentally safe according to official provisions. Part of it was used to water gardens and agricultural land.

The goal is to minimize our emissions into wastewater. For this reason, in 2016, alternative means were applied, for example, for the disposal of 0.148 million cubic meters of product-containing wastewater such as incineration, distillation or chemical treatment. Discharges of phosphorus into wastewater fell by 14.2%, due among other reasons to reduced production volumes at the Kaohsiung site in Taiwan. All other emissions into water were lower than last year or at the same level.

Emissions into Water

 

 

2012

 

2013

 

2014

 

2015

 

2016

 

 

1,000 metric tons

 

1,000 metric tons

 

1,000 metric tons

 

1,000 metric tons

 

1,000 metric tons

1

Total organic carbon

2

Chemical oxygen demand; calculated value based on TOC figures (TOC x 3 = COD)

Phosphorus

 

0.15

 

0.11

 

0.10

 

0.10

 

0.09

Nitrogen

 

0.70

 

0.69

 

0.76

 

0.56

 

0.57

TOC1

 

1.42

 

1.53

 

1.20

 

1.16

 

1.14

Heavy metals

 

0.0098

 

0.0091

 

0.0063

 

0.0064

 

0.0054

Inorganic salts

 

1,048

 

946

 

845

 

927

 

931

COD2

 

4.25

 

4.58

 

3.59

 

3.48

 

3.42

Waste and recycling

Systematic waste management minimizes material consumption and disposal volumes. Safe disposal channels with separation according to the type of waste and economically expedient recycling processes serve this purpose. Production fluctuations and building refurbishment/land remediation work also influence waste volumes and recycling paths.

Higher volumes of waste

In 2016, the total volume of waste generated rose by 1.9% and the volume of nonhazardous waste by 3.1%, in particular due to demolition work at the Crop Science site in Institute, West Virginia, United States. With regard to hazardous waste generated, the volume from the power plant at the Chempark Leverkusen site rose by 1% owing to the recent categorization of fluidized bed ash as hazardous waste.

Waste Generated1

 

 

2012

 

2013

 

2014

 

2015

 

2016

 

 

1,000 metric tons

 

1,000 metric tons

 

1,000 metric tons

 

1,000 metric tons

 

1,000 metric tons

1

Waste generated by Bayer only

2

Definition of hazardous waste in accordance with the local laws in each instance

Total waste generated

 

1,014

 

899

 

896

 

940

 

958

Hazardous waste2

 

603

 

467

 

487

 

541

 

547

of which hazardous waste from production

 

397

 

417

 

442

 

488

 

507

The volume of waste disposed of rose by 2.2% in total. The volume proportions for the three main types of disposal (landfill, incineration and recycling) have remained similar over the past five years.

Online Annex: A 1.4.3.3-7

limited assurance

Recycling refers to processes that reutilize waste in some way. In 2016, the volume of recycled waste was 290,000 metric tons. Expressed as a proportion of the total waste disposed of, this represented a level of 30%. The amount of recycled waste depends on site-specific conditions such as changes to the product portfolio, other production volumes, variations in the intensity of construction measures and recycling projects.

Waste by Means of Disposal

 

 

2012

 

2013

 

2014

 

2015

 

2016

 

 

1,000 metric tons

 

1,000 metric tons

 

1,000 metric tons

 

1,000 metric tons

 

1,000 metric tons

1

Bayer serves as a certified waste disposal plant operator at various sites. At these locations, Bayer disposes not only of its own waste but also of waste from third parties (companies not belonging to the Bayer Group). For that reason, the volume of waste disposed of differs slightly from the volume of waste generated by Bayer.

2

E.g. passed on to third parties (e.g. providers / waste disposal companies)

3

Waste generated by Bayer only; definition of hazardous waste in accordance with the local laws in each instance

Total volume of waste disposed of1

 

1,021

 

915

 

898

 

949

 

969

Volume removed to landfill

 

360

 

293

 

248

 

248

 

267

Volume incinerated

 

341

 

351

 

363

 

371

 

336

Volume recycled

 

301

 

249

 

260

 

296

 

290

Others2

 

19

 

22

 

27

 

34

 

76

Total volume of hazardous waste disposed of3

 

603

 

467

 

487

 

541

 

547

Volume removed to landfill

 

175

 

53

 

65

 

75

 

67

Volume incinerated / recycled

 

428

 

414

 

422

 

466

 

480

In 2016, the waste incineration plants operated by Currenta generated approximately 675,000 metric tons of steam from the incineration of around 230,000 metric tons of hazardous waste from the Chempark sites and some external production companies. Compared to using fossil energy sources, this reduced CO2 emissions in 2016 by approximately 160,000 metric tons.

Recycling potential realized

In addition to satisfying economic and environmental criteria, the recycling and treatment of our materials also has to comply with legal requirements. This results in restrictions, in particular in the areas of pharmaceuticals and crop protection. Throughout the Group, we make use of opportunities for recycling within the framework of legal regulations.

Online Annex: A 1.4.3.3-8

limited assurance

Pharmaceuticals, Consumer Health and Animal Health

Production-related recycling takes place in line with the requirements of the relevant production site. When determining the best means of disposal, recycling options are explicitly included, and are to be considered preferable to landfilling or incineration. The disposal of pharmaceutical products is subject to strict safety criteria, so no recycling is possible for the portfolios of these segments. Packaging materials are recycled in line with national regulations as part of the country-specific infrastructure for waste disposal.

Crop Science

Material-based recycling is important in Crop Science’s active ingredient and intermediate product manufacture. Solvents, catalysts and intermediates are repeatedly processed and returned to the production process. Since these are recycling steps that are closely linked with the process, there is no global regulation. Material-based recycling is regulated separately at each production site. In the global process development of active ingredients and intermediates, material recycling is considered an important development criterion. In accordance with Crop Science’s global Environment Policy, all Crop Science sites are obliged to prevent, recycle and reduce waste and dispose of it safely and in line with good environmental practices.

Crop Science does not take back crop protection products it has sold, except in the case of production defects. Packaging materials are disposed of or recycled in line with national legislation. In many countries with no legal regulation, the industry has set up a returns system in collaboration with other providers.

Returns of obsolete stocks of crop protection products are limited to justifiable individual cases. However, the crop protection product industry has set up voluntary initiatives in various countries for the proper disposal of obsolete stocks. As part of its activities in the CropLife association, Crop Science is working with the United Nations’ Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and the World Bank to support the proper collection and disposal of obsolete stocks in Africa.

Covestro

Covestro supports the reuse and processing of its materials. For example, some waste with a high calorific value generated by production processes can undergo thermal recycling to produce steam for the company’s own production facilities.

In parallel to this, Covestro is endeavoring to reduce the amount of waste resulting from product usage. Examples include its involvement in associations such as PlasticsEurope. Covestro continues to support, for example, the “Zero Pellet Loss” initiative, with the goal of preventing the loss of plastic pellets on the way from production to the finished article delivered to the customer.