Webinar, From Waste to Value: (Micro)Plastics Reduction & Turning Plastic Into Value

• January 30, 2026

The PHAROS Project with Impact Hub Athens & ICoRSA hosted its third Oceanpreneur webinar on 29 January 2026, bringing together researchers, entrepreneurs, and policymakers to discuss one of the ocean’s most pressing challenges, marine plastic pollution.

The session, held at the Clúster Marítimo de Canarias in Gran Canaria, focused on practical solutions for reducing microplastics and converting plastic waste into valuable resources through circular economy models.

The webinar demonstrated that whilst the problem is massive, the path forward requires honesty about what works and what doesn’t. The conversation revealed both promising innovations and sobering realities about the economics of waste valorisation.

The Scale of the Challenge

Adelina de la Jara, project manager at Clúster Marítimo de Canarias, opened the session by framing the discussion within the EU Mission “Restore our Ocean and Waters.”

“Our objective is to create a space where practical solutions are developed, backed by scientific evidence, and where collaborations accelerate impact,” de la Jara explained. The project targets three core mission objectives. Restoring marine ecosystems and biodiversity, preventing and eliminating pollution, and accelerating a circular, carbon-neutral blue economy.

The session’s goal was to move beyond waste management towards prevention, recovery, and valorisation. This shift in thinking can shape how we design solutions, support investment, and enable sustainable circular ecosystems.

The Brutal Economics of Plastic Recycling

Íñigo Núñez, CEO of eWaste and president of the Canarias Recicla Foundation, delivered perhaps the most direct assessment of the day. As someone who manages Canary Islands’ only specialized plant for electrical and electronic waste equipment, processing approximately 17,000 tonnes annually (including 3,500 tonnes of various plastics), Núñez understands industrial realities.

“Any business initiative related to valorisation and generating industry follows a fairly simple formula. Sell with profitability, produce with efficiency and effectiveness, and collect payment as soon as possible,” Núñez stated bluntly. “Any parameter in your research or studies that doesn’t align with this is simply not viable.”

This harsh reality defines the fundamental challenge for marine plastics. The problem are economies of scale, the flow and continuity. No industry can sustain itself without continuous flow and certain quality standards. For marine-origin plastics, this presents an enormous barrier.

Núñez distinguished between organized collection channels (like fishing nets) and the chaotic reality of ocean pollution. “With marine litter, we could say that what arrives on land in a normal way, let’s call it nets, is not a problem because you reach agreements, you have that flow, and there will be a technology that can manage it or not,” he explained. “The problem with microplastics is how you capture microplastics and how you have sufficient volume to set up any type of industry.”

The Microplastics Dilemma

Dr. Alicia Herrera, moderator and associate professor at the University of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, brought the researcher’s perspective to this challenge. Her work with the EOMAR Group focuses on microplastic pollution effects on marine ecosystems. The numbers tell a sobering story.

“We’ve been collecting microplastics on beaches since 2015, and despite the beaches being heavily contaminated, today we have two enormous boxes of microplastics in the oceanography warehouse,” Herrera revealed. “But at an industrial level, two boxes are nothing. So that’s the problem. In reality, it has no value for industry.”

Additionally, the challenge extends beyond volume. Marine plastics carry significant contamination after extended ocean exposure. One of Herrera’s studies demonstrated that microplastics contained more than 80 types of persistent organic pollutants. PCBs, DDE (residue from DDT discontinued in the 1980s), flame retardants, and various other contaminants absorb onto plastic surfaces as they float through the ocean.

“These contaminants are in low concentrations in the ocean and adhere to, or are absorbed by, the walls of microplastics and concentrate there,” Herrera explained. “So ultimately they act as transporters of these chemical contaminants.” This contamination raises serious questions about the cost of cleaning these plastics sufficiently for safe product reintegration.

Circular Ocean: Mapping the Path Forward

Maryam Rodríguez, project technician at Gesplan, presented the Circular Ocean Project, which builds on the previous OceanLit initiative. Where OceanLit focused on knowledge and characterizing marine waste, Circular Ocean examines practical management possibilities for previously identified marine waste.

The project, coordinated by the Canary Islands Government’s Vice-Ministry of Ecological Transition under the INTERREG MAC 2021-2027 programme, involves extensive fieldwork. Gesplan’s team is conducting interviews and surveys with approximately 44 entities to understand current waste management infrastructure.

“We’re creating a map of selection and treatment facilities in the Canaries at a regional level,” Rodríguez explained. “We’re identifying existing facilities, both public and private, what management processes are currently being carried out, and whether they’re interested or need to introduce modifications to incorporate marine waste management.”

The project also characterizes waste generated in port and coastal areas, something previous projects overlooked. By leveraging six years of technical assistance to the Canary Islands Emergency Directorate, Gesplan has detailed data on beach installations, safety measures, sectors, and beach attendance that helps project waste generation.

Beyond the Canaries, Circular Ocean involves third countries in monitoring activities and cleanup campaigns. The project includes distribution mapping of marine litter, cartography, specific beach cleanup campaigns, and citizen science initiatives expecting collaboration from 300 or more volunteers across Ghana, Cape Verde, and São Tomé and Príncipe.

Innovation at Small Scale: The Precious Plastics Model

The webinar highlighted challenges facing artisanal approaches like Precious Plastics. Whilst industrial scale presents one set of problems, small manufacturers face entirely different barriers.

According to feedback Gesplan received from local artisans, minimum volumes required by major recycled plastic managers in the Canaries (like Plazan or Ecoembes) are prohibitive for small manufacturers or artisanal industries. These operations must complete the entire process themselves. Collection, cleaning, classification, grinding, and drying. This dramatically increases process costs and operation time.

There’s also an absence of institutionalized markets. No structured public demand, no green purchasing that prioritizes products made from recycled marine plastic. This limits market opportunities substantially.

The ideal model these small operators propose involves waste management cooperatives and organized fishing cooperatives collecting and classifying marine plastics and post-consumer terrestrial plastics. Intermediate processing before reaching small manufacturers. The ability for small and medium manufacturers to acquire pellets in more flexible volumes. And institutional and private sector commitment to purchasing these products, which currently materialize as furniture, decorative objects, personalized products, and educational materials.

Who Pays? The Responsibility Question

The question of corporate responsibility sparked robust discussion. Núñez didn’t mince words about shared accountability.

“Corporations are responsible for producing. Yes, they’re responsible for polluting. Yes. But it depends on ethics. Citizens also pollute when they don’t dispose of things properly. The public administration also pollutes when it doesn’t fulfill its responsibilities,” he argued. “Responsibility belongs to everyone. And citizens have something called purchasing power, deciding which product to buy, to penalize or not.”

The discussion touched on the recent Toconao incident, where a container ship spilled pellets off the Galician coast. A judge determined no one was responsible, meaning no one would pay for the cleanup despite the public cost. This raises fundamental questions about insurance coverage, environmental damage liability, and the true cost of accidents.

Under European law, the polluter pays principle is clear. The producer (whoever puts the product on the market) is responsible. But as Núñez noted, “Have this very clear. We all pay for this. All of us.” This makes consumer vigilance and demand for well-designed, recyclable products essential.

The Pay-Per-Use Revolution

Núñez shared what he called “good news, sort of.” The global economic model is shifting towards pay-per-use rather than ownership. Instead of buying a washing machine or refrigerator, you rent the use of one. Your subscription determines capacity and features.

“In this pay-per-use model, the manufacturer is most interested in only replacing parts that need replacing, and if they can avoid replacing anything and upgrade capabilities via software, so much the better,” Núñez explained. This model fundamentally changes incentives. Manufacturers design for longevity and repairability rather than planned obsolescence because they retain ownership throughout the product lifecycle.

This shift could dramatically reduce waste generation whilst maintaining European competitiveness. The circular economy movement, Núñez emphasized, is ultimately capitalist. It’s about maintaining competitive position and quality of life whilst achieving material independence, energy independence, and reshoring industry.

Community Value Beyond Industrial Scale

When asked how communities can participate actively in valorisation processes, the discussion expanded beyond industrial transformation to social value creation.

Suggestions from stakeholders interviewed by Circular Ocean included cleanup campaigns and citizen science, artistic and symbolic valorisation through sculptures and artworks, professional environmental interpretation at port complexes and environmental centers, and nylon from fishing nets used for 3D printing. They also proposed integrated sports and solidarity events focusing on marine waste, and incentive programmes to minimize waste generation and emissions.

Herrera emphasized the importance of moving beyond volunteer cleanups towards paid services. “Standardize it as a service. And give value to the work, because I think volunteerism is fine, but only to a point. We need to involve the community and pay them for it too, because they’re providing a service to the community.”

This concept of payment for ecosystem services emerged as a viable business model. Entities collecting waste from the sea or coastal zones could receive payment calculated per collection, surface area, volume, or another metric equivalent to the service’s value. This creates economic opportunity without requiring transformation into new products.

The Ecodesign Imperative

Throughout the discussion, one theme emerged repeatedly. Prevention through ecodesign matters more than any recycling technology.

“What’s fundamental is mitigation,” Núñez insisted. “Research and development must be proactive, not reactive. At medium and long term, ecodesign is fundamental.” He stressed that technological gaps (no technology exists to convert waste into new resources) and economic gaps (recycling costs more than new production) must both be addressed through design thinking and compensation mechanisms.

For microplastics specifically, Núñez was unequivocal. “Ladies and gentlemen, I’m sorry. Forget about it. No small initiatives with two boxes can do anything. It’s anecdotal. Industry doesn’t care about two boxes because industries are economies of scale businesses.” The only path forward for microplastics is mitigation (preventing their creation and release) and cleanup funded separately from product valorisation.

Núñez also called for university patent funding. “I would recommend to our governments to allow universities and centers to have money to patent, not just stay with the research part.” Keeping knowledge within academia without commercialization wastes competitive advantage.

Infrastructure and Policy Changes

Practical infrastructure adaptations emerged as critical needs. Stakeholders told Gesplan they need specific containers for different marine wastes that don’t currently exist. But more fundamentally, they need changes in how waste collection is measured and charged.

“Don’t pay for air, don’t pay for volume,” Rodríguez relayed. “They’re often paying for empty volumes. Maybe instead of paying per cubic meter, they should pay per actual tonne.” This simple change in pricing structure could unlock different management possibilities.

For island territories like the Canaries with customs authority, Núñez suggested border controls on products known to generate plastics and microplastics. This wouldn’t stop currents bringing waste from elsewhere, but it would prevent problematic products from being sold locally.

He also emphasized infrastructure investment, particularly regarding land-based sources of marine pollution like outfalls. The circular economy obligation, that polluters fund proper environmental management even when waste cannot become new products, must be enforced. This creates pressure toward manufacturing easily recyclable items.

The Global Competition Context

Núñez provided crucial context about why circular economy matters beyond environmental concerns. Europe depends on others for raw materials, energy, and increasingly for manufacturing capacity (having outsourced industry). The circular economy strategy addresses all three dependencies whilst maintaining the social and environmental standards that define European values.

“We have to close the market at some point to those countries that are competitors, that produce worse, that aren’t efficient and don’t consider the environment or social aspects,” Núñez argued. But he acknowledged the complexity. Closing borders to Moroccan oranges, for example, would spike Spanish orange prices and cause inflation affecting European citizens’ economies. “It’s not that simple.”

The regulatory excess Europe imposes on itself creates disadvantages against American and Chinese competitors operating under different rules. Yet abandoning standards isn’t the answer. “I think we’re on the right path if we manage to understand where we are, but it’s not something that gets fixed in two days. That’s why you see those 2030, 2035 deadlines. We’re going in the right direction. It’s not simple.”

Looking Forward: The Faros Framework

The PHAROS Project provides a framework for addressing these challenges through its three pillars. Reducing marine ecosystem degradation, reducing marine pollution, and localizing unsustainable exploitation through increased marine protected areas, aquaculture innovation, and citizen engagement.

The project explicitly works through development phases and scaling, combining multiple EU Mission Ocean goals into integrated demonstration activities across the Atlantic and Arctic regions. Its Living Lab approach brings together the quadruple helix of actors (research, industry, government, and civil society) to co-create solutions.

As de la Jara concluded the session, she emphasized this collaborative spirit. The project distributed gifts made by Precious Plastics from bottle caps and fishing line, tangible examples of what’s possible at small scale. She invited all participants to join the PHAROS Living Lab, stressing that real progress requires everyone’s participation.

The Uncomfortable Truth

This webinar succeeded precisely because it avoided false optimism. Yes, some fishing nets can be recycled. Yes, artisanal production creates educational value. Yes, cleanup provides ecosystem services worth funding. But no, we cannot recycle our way out of this crisis.

The uncomfortable truth is that most marine microplastics have no viable valorisation pathway. Their contamination levels, collection difficulties, and volume uncertainties make industrial recycling economically impossible under current conditions. The only rational responses are prevention through ecodesign, cleanup funded as environmental service rather than profit center, and honest research into what technologies might eventually change these economics.

The circular economy isn’t primarily about being nice to the environment. It’s about European competitiveness, resource independence, and economic survival in a world where colonies no longer provide cheap materials, energy, and labor. Environmental benefits follow from economic necessities.

For entrepreneurs, the message is clear. Focus on organized waste streams with guaranteed supply and quality. Develop mitigation technologies. Provide cleanup services funded through environmental service payments. Design products from the start for circularity. Don’t chase romantic visions of turning ocean microplastics into product lines unless you have extraordinary patience and deep pockets.

For policymakers, the message is equally clear. Invest in ecodesign requirements and enforcement. Fund university patenting. Change waste pricing from volume to weight. Create procurement programmes prioritizing recycled marine plastics. Establish payment for ecosystem services. Use customs authority to penalize problematic products. And accept that some cleanup must be funded publicly as the cost of past mistakes and ongoing accidents.

For researchers, success means moving beyond characterization toward practical technology development, maintaining contact with industry to reality-check ideas, and fighting for patent resources to commercialize discoveries rather than publishing and moving on.

The Canary Islands, sitting at the crossroads of Atlantic currents collecting waste from multiple continents, face these challenges acutely. But the solutions developed here, through projects like PHAROS and Circular Ocean, have broader application. Island territories often pioneer innovations that continents later adopt. Their constraints force creativity.