• This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
  • Earth.Org Newsletters

    Get focused newsletters especially designed to be concise and easy to digest

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
SHOP Support

How effective are recycling programmes in East Asia? We crunched the numbers to compare Taiwan, Hong Kong, Singapore and Mainland China’s records on waste and recycling. The results show that Taiwan is ahead of the others, and has valuable lessons to share. 

Around the world waste is piling up. The rise of single-use packaging and our ‘throw-away culture’ is having a massive impact on our ability to deal with waste. Last year, over 2 billion tons of waste was generated globally. An estimated 5% of global greenhouse gas emissions are from waste in landfills and open dumps. 

The World Bank states that there are large disparities between high-income and low-income countries when it comes to waste. Waste generation is much greater in high-income countries as high-income means high-consumption and therefore high-waste. While waste collection and some recycling infrastructure is almost guaranteed in upper-middle-income and high-income countries, in low-income countries less than half of urban waste is collected. Likewise, recycling rates vary significantly in high-income and low-income countries. As countries develop and urbanise, this waste crisis is only going to get worse; the World Bank estimates that in the next 30 years, global waste generation will increase by 70%.

Recycling is a key component to stem the tide and eventually achieve zero waste. Further, it is a useful indicator of a country’s attitude to the overall waste issue. As such, it is telling that many high-income, high-consumption nations continue to export their waste abroad. This ‘out of sight out of mind’ approach was challenged at the end of 2017 when China banned the import of waste under the ‘National Sword’ policy. Hong Kong and to a lesser extent Singapore, both high-income states in East Asia, have struggled with this policy as a collapsed global export market has left their poor domestic recycling markets exposed. On the other hand, Taiwan is an importer of recycling waste and was affected by a flood of waste entering the country following China’s ban, with imported plastic and paper more than doubling from 2017 to 2018. 

East Asia Pacific produces 23% of the world’s waste, the most of any region. Within East Asia, Hong Kong, Singapore, Taiwan and China generate a combined 223 million tons annually. Of these four countries in East Asia, Taiwan is seen as a world leader in recycling and zero waste with high recycling rates and low waste disposal for their income level. Taiwan’s success with recycling is proof that the rest of East Asia can achieve a low-waste economy through effective policy, infrastructure and education.

You might also like: Asia’s Battle Against Plastic Waste 

asia recycling figures

From the data above on recycling in the various countries in East Asia, China has the lowest per person waste generation and disposal rates, due to a lower income per capita than the others. China doesn’t provide official statistics for recycling but it has a goal of achieving 35% waste recovery in major cities by 2020. Taiwan has similar disposal rates to China and a much more advanced recycling industry. It has the second best recycling rate, closely following Singapore. Hong Kong lags behind the other areas with high-generation, low overall recovery and very low local recycling capacity. 

Taiwan is a recent success story. As recently as 1993, it was called ‘Garbage Island’ as only 70% of waste was collected, while the rest was openly dumped or burnt in pits. Back then ‘Garbage Island’ had a paltry 5% recycling rate, but for the last 10 years, has boasted a recycling rate of above 50%. Similarly, daily disposal rates have improved from 1.14 kg per person in 1998 to 0.4 kg per person in 2013.

The remarkable turnaround was sparked by activists’ protesting to compel the government to stop using harmful incinerators to deal with waste and to instead adopt a zero-waste framework. The drive towards zero waste was achieved in the late 1990s and early 2000s with the implementation of a range of regulations. These policies were centred around a ‘4-in-1’ system of extended producer responsibility (EPR) that holds all stakeholders in the waste lifecycle responsible, from manufacturers to consumers. Additional measures, such as a municipal solid waste (MSW) charging scheme, were implemented to shift consumer behaviour and raise money for recycling infrastructure, collection services and education. In fact, education was a crucial component of the overall framework as communities have been a big part of Taiwan’s success. Recycling has become a ‘ritual’ with rubbish and recycling trucks playing classical music to alert residents and volunteers helping residents sort their waste correctly. 

Hong Kong and Singapore on the other hand have sky-high daily disposal rates. Both space-constrained cities face waste crises that are growing out of control. Hong Kong’s landfills are effectively full. Extension of an existing landfill provides capacity until 2030 and the city’s first incinerator is due to be in operation by 2024. Hong Kong only recycles 30% of waste and, due to the limited recycling infrastructure in the city, almost all of this is sent overseas to be processed. 

Singapore incinerates almost all waste that is not recovered for recycling which significantly reduces the volume sent to landfill. Despite this, the city’s only landfill will be full by 2035 if current levels of dumping continue. There is hope that the Singaporean government is taking the issue seriously as 2019 was declared a ‘year of zero waste’ to help kick start the waste reduction movement. One positive is that industrial and construction waste recycling is well established in Singapore which results in a high overall recycling rate of 59%, of which 34% is exported. Household recycling is lacking at 17% and is an obvious place for improvement.

Each city has detailed plans to respond to the crisis. Hong Kong’s 2013 Blueprint set ambitious goals to reduce waste by 40% from 2011 levels and increase recycling to 55% by 2022. Key to this blueprint was a focus on certain waste streams and an MSW charging scheme, where users pay to dispose of waste. The Environment Bureau described the MSW charging as ‘one of most forceful tools in waste reduction’. The scheme was first proposed over 15 years ago, in 2004, and after many delays, it was recently scrapped, serving a massive blow to environmental lobbyists. Measures such as education and a focus on certain waste streams, such as waste electronic and electric equipment (WEEE) have led to some improvements, however overall, ambitious goals and blueprints to reduce waste in Hong Kong have so far failed. 

Singapore’s Masterplan sets three goals, namely to reduce waste disposed of in landfills by 30% by 2030, increase the overall recycling rate to 70% and extend the lifespan of the Semakau landfill beyond 2035. Much like Hong Kong’s blueprint, the masterplan focuses on food waste, WEEE, and packaging. In fact, Hong Kong and Singapore have similar extended producer responsibility (EPR) schemes. Hong Kong’s, called a producer responsibility scheme (PRS), covers plastic bags, WEEE and glass bottles. Singapore’s is still being implemented but will likely cover WEEE by 2021 and plastic packaging and other waste streams in the following years. Both EPRs could be expanded to include more waste and be more holistic like the Taiwanese ‘4-in-1’ system. 

China is the world’s largest waste generator, and waste levels are rising fast as incomes continue to rise. By 2030 it is estimated that the country will produce double the municipal solid waste of the US, the second-largest producer. China’s waste generation per capita is low, due to its status as a lower-middle-income country. Despite this low waste generation, China is still faced with a growing waste problem. Major rivers in China are a significant source of ocean plastic, and landfills are filling up much quicker than expected

Landfills are major waste disposal methods in China with 56% of waste ending up in them. Incineration is growing and is currently responsible for 39% of disposal. Official recycling rates are not published in China so little is known about how much waste is recycled. Major cities in China are taking the lead in recycling with an initiative to increase recycling to 35% in 46 urban centres. In addition, there are 10 cities that are yet to be confirmed, to pilot China’s ‘zero waste cities’ programme. Shanghai is the first pilot city and now has strict rules on waste sorting and disposal in the hopes of improving its recycling rate which was as low as 10% in 2017. 

Taiwan is the clear leader of East Asia when it comes to zero waste and recycling, although the other three countries’ governments are starting to prioritise it. Taiwan’s turnaround from ‘Garbage Island’ shows it can be done. Policies to ensure that all stakeholders work together and are held accountable, investment in collection and recycling facilities, as well as community engagement appear to be crucial to Taiwan’s success. While conditions vary and different solutions may be required at each location, the Taiwanese model is a useful and proven starting point.

Featured image: Flickr

An investigation by Hong Kong news media outlet HK01 has found that nearly two-thirds of housing estates surveyed, both public and private, have sent plastic bottles collected in recycling bins to landfills. 


HK01 surveyed 14 housing estates and found that nine were sending plastic bottles intended to be recycled to landfills. In 2019, reporters at the news outlet attached GPS trackers onto a number of plastic bottles that were put inside the recycling bins of the housing estates in Hong Kong. 

The journalists located seven of the devices in the Nim Wan and Lin Ma Hang landfills, and two devices in waste collection stations in West Kowloon and Sha Tin. Shockingly, five of the nine housing estates sending recyclable waste to landfills and waste collection stations had been awarded under the Environment Protection Department’s (EPD) Source Separation of Domestic Waste Award Scheme in 2018/2019. One estate, Metropolis Phase 2, has received the highest “Diamond Grade” for two consecutive years.  

You might also like: Asia’s Battle Against Plastic Waste

plastic recycling hong kong
West New Territories Landfill. (Source GovHK).

Cleaners at some of the estates were interviewed and said that much of the plastic is not recycled and is ‘abandoned as garbage’. Others claimed that collectors had not picked up recyclables from the building for at least six months, and that cleaners had to therefore send them to municipal waste management. 

The Plastic Recycling Landscape in Hong Kong

Some attribute the lack of recycling to the low value of plastics in Hong Kong. According to local environmental group, Green Sense, one kilogram of collected, separated and processed plastic waste may generate HKD$0.30- $0.50 for recyclers. The price of recycled plastics has been in decline since 2018. In Mainland China (where Hong Kong was sending much of its waste before China banned foreign waste), the value per ton dropped from 8010 yuan (HKD$8700, USD$1100) in October 2018 to 7164 yuan (HKD7800, USD$1012) at the end of 2019. 

Further, in June 2019, recycling prices for paper and cardboard were slashed by nearly half, adding to the woes of waste collectors in Hong Kong and contributing to a buildup of waste in landfills, which are projected to be full by the end of the year. To meet the city’s demand for waste disposal, the government is expanding the South-east New Territories Landfill by an additional 13 hectares, which should meet the city’s landfill needs until 2030. 

The Hong Kong Environmental Protection and Recycle Industry Sustainable Development Association says that the government and property management companies should provide monetary subsidies to recyclers to incentivise the proper collection and recycling of plastics. The association also urged property management companies and housing estates to disclose the names of recyclers, something that is not currently done, meaning that residents have no channels to monitor recyclers. It also urged the Environmental Protection Department to compel estates to publish detailed monthly recycling records and receipts.

Recent statistics from the Environmental Protection Department have indicated that the average daily disposal quantity of plastic bags in 2017 rose to 793 metric tons, just short of the 867 ton level recorded in 2008, a year before the levy scheme was introduced.

In 2018, Hong Kongers sent an average of 1.53kgs per person of solid waste to landfills every day; in 2013, the Hong Kong government set a target that, by 2022, each person would throw away no more than 0.8kg of waste per day. It is unknown whether waste being sent to landfills has increased or decreased in the months since the outbreak of the coronavirus outbreak, as municipal waste data for this period has not yet been collected.

Facts About Plastic Pollution & Recycling in Hong Kong

The city sent a total of 5.87 million tonnes of solid waste to local landfills in 2018. Just 30% of solid waste was recycled in the city in 2018, which is made all the more concerning due to the fact that recycling facilities in the city are very basic, sorted by hand. In 2016, just 14% of plastic was recycled and in 2017, it was estimated that Hong Kong threw away 5.2 million bottles every day.

According to WWF Hong Kong, about 80% of the city’s marine litter is plastic, especially disposable products such as plastic bottles, plastic bags and packaging material. 

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the Hong Kong government has adopted two subsidy schemes for recycling facilities that are currently financed by its recycling fund. The first is the One-off Rental Support Scheme (ORSS), which assists recycling facilities by covering 50% of their rent or up to HKD$25 000. The second is the One-off Recycling Industry Anti-epidemic Scheme (ORIAS), which helps support recycling facilities’ operational costs with HKD$20 000 every month. So far, over 580 applications have been approved for the funds, which have provided over HKD$90 million to recyclers in the past few months. 

However, there has been a delay in the implementation of the Legislative Council’s Municipal Solid Waste Charging Scheme (WCS). The scheme was formally introduced in 2018 and taxes residents according to how much waste they send to landfills. The fee for disposing a ten-litre bag of waste is set at HKD$11, meaning that the average household would pay between HKD$33 to $51 a month. 

It is vital that we reduce our use of plastic on a personal consumption level, but it is also imperative that the Hong Kong government -and others- implement effective recycling measures and financially incentivise recyclers to collect plastic waste. Our landfills will not be able to bear the burden of the city’s waste for much longer.   

Featured image by: South TinHau markers

Singapore produces vast amounts of food waste, threatening its resources and land availability. How can this problem be solved?

Food Wastage Facts in Singapore

A study by the Singapore Environment Council (SEC) found that Singapore households throw away around 26 000 tonnes- or S$342 million- in unconsumed food annually. Food waste accounts for about 10% of the total waste generated in Singapore, but only 17% of this is recycled. The rest of it is disposed of at waste-to-energy plants for incineration.

The SEC says that this wastage is due to improper storage, purchasing patterns and food handling habits. It identifies major drivers of food loss further down the supply chain, which include poor disease and pest management, over-importation of food items and inadequate infrastructure.

You might also like: Tackling the Food Waste Crisis in China

Of those surveyed in the study, about one third said they throw away 10% or more of uncooked and unconsumed food items per week.

The study also found that 342 000 tonnes of food is lost in Singapore before it reaches retail and consumers, 49% of this from the loss of fruits and vegetables. 

Singapore Environment Council Chairman Isabella Huang-Loh, says, “More can be done in an industrialised country like Singapore to reduce food loss. Down the chain, better coordination and raising awareness among food industries, retailers and consumers can go a long way to reduce food loss and waste.”

Singapore has implemented its Zero Waste Masterplan, which outlines the Republic’s strategies to build a sustainable and climate resilient nation. The campaign says that food waste is one of the biggest waste streams in Singapore and that the amount of food waste generated has grown by 40% in the last decade. In 2018, the country generated 763 million kgs of food waste, making up half of the average 1.5kgs of waste disposed of by each household in Singapore daily. Rice, noodles and bread are the most commonly wasted food items.

Wasting food means that more food has to be sourced to meet demand, affecting food security since Singapore imports over 90% of its food supply. It also means that the Republic will need to build more waste disposal facilities, such as waste-to-energy plants and landfills for incineration ash, a difficult task for land-scarce Singapore. 

To conserve resources, food wastage must be minimised and unavoidable food waste must be treated, starting with avoiding wastage and excess food production (or re-distributing excess food) and then segregating food waste for recycling and treatment. Singapore is working on this issue through publicity and outreach programmes, where it educates consumers on how to adopt smart food purchasing, storage and preparation habits, as well as providing food manufacturers and retailers with handbooks to help them develop a food minimisation plan that suits them. Further, it is building up local research and development capabilities to discover innovative ways to recycle food waste.

What is Being Done?

In terms of legislation, the Resource Sustainability Act mandates that from 2024, large commercial and industrial food waste generators will be required to segregate food waste for treatment, including hotels and malls, as well as food storage warehouses manufacturers. Also, from 2021, developers of new developments which are expected to generate large amounts of food waste will be required to allocate space for on-site food waste treatments.

There is no shortage of potential solutions and it is vital that some of them, however novel, are tapped into. If food waste were a country, it would be the third-largest emitting country in the world, generating about 8% of total greenhouse gas emissions, although some studies have this number at 11%. This issue is not location-specific, but an issue that affects every living thing on the planet and should therefore be seen as an urgent area to take action in.

With the largest population in the world, China has the most mouths to feed on the planet. Consequently, China generates more food waste than any other nation. How can this problem be solved?

More than 6%- or 35 million kgs– of the country’s total food production is lost before reaching consumers, in the household and warehouse storage, transport and processing sectors. There are 500 cities in China producing 50 tonnes of food waste every day. Bigger cities such as Shanghai and Beijing, produce between 1 000 and 2 000 tonnes per day. With an ever-growing population and food security increasingly becoming more of a concern, it’s imperative to curb the amount of food waste that China is producing. 

The Problem with Food Waste

A report by the Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research and the China Academy Science found that in 2015, China wasted up to 18 million tonnes of food served in big cities, enough to feed 30 to 50 million people annually. This equates to roughly the population of South Korea in the same year.

Vegetables accounted for as much as 29% of the total waste occurring at the consumer level in the four cities surveyed- Beijing, Shanghai, Chengdu and Lhasa- followed by staple food, like rice and noodles, and meat, representing 24% and 18% of the total respectively.

Chinese cities produce 25% of the world’s municipal solid waste, most of it food. Most of China’s food waste is either landfilled or burned; in 2017, municipal landfills accepted more than 152 metric megatonnes of urban waste, most of which was organic waste. 

With more than 2 000 landfills nearly full, Chinese cities have turned to waste incineration, which is extremely environmentally damaging. This waste generates considerable amounts of methane and every kg of landfilled municipal solid waste can release its equivalent weight of CO2. Incineration plants in China have nearly tripled in number since 2010, but they cannot easily burn wet food waste; Chinese incinerators struggle to burn urban solid waste because it contains up to 70% moisture content. 

The problem is also putting pressure on the country’s limited water, energy and land. 

You may also like: Why We Can’t Quit Plastic

The Severity of Food Waste in China

According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), food loss in the harvesting stage is as high as 10% of total output. In the storage stage, about 8% of food stored in farmer households- over 20 billion kgs- is lost because of poor storage or drying facilities, the most common direct causes of such loss being insects, mold and birds. Over 7.5 billion kgs of the country’s grain is lost due to old and unsafe warehouses. 

In the transport sector, there is a shortage of specialised transport vehicles for grains. About a quarter of grains is transported in loose form, and because of scattering and leaking, around 5% of grains- more than 30 billion tonnes- is lost annually.

In the processing stage, more than 7.5 billion kgs is lost annually because of over-processing of foods like rice.

Reducing Food Waste in China: Moving Forward

Since 2010, the Chinese government has selected 100 different cities and given them an opportunity to explore alternative waste management systems. Restaurants will soon be charged a fee for the amount of food they produce, tracked by an online system by authorised collectors. This will boost on-site compost systems which will ease pressure on local landfills and incineration plants, but solutions must be delivered on a larger scale.

Thankfully, policies covering food waste have been rapidly emerging in recent years. In 2016, China amended its Solid Waste Law to improve oversight and transparency of waste generators, halt illegal dumping and promote recycling and reuse of wastes, including food.

Moving forward, policy makers should consider loss and waste reduction to be as important as increasing production. According to the FAO, the current policy system of agricultural subsidisation mainly includes price guarantees and subsidisation for staple crops, production materials, seeds and agricultural machinery, which leads to local governments focusing on crop production while paying little attention to the wastage in the supply chain. The region’s rate of food loss and waste in various stages of the supply chain should be assessed in addition to output, and incentives and subsidies should be based on both markers. 

The FAO also advocates for the implementation of a ‘Food Law’, whereby the management, pricing and penalisation for food loss and waste is enacted into law. There should also be increased investment in reducing food loss and waste in the form of the construction of new warehouses and special funds for storage, transport, processing technologies and equipment bundles.

An underutilised food waste disposal method used in China is anaerobic digestion, a process that transforms organic waste into biogas. This biogas, produced by bacteria as they digest the organic waste, can be used as energy on-site, or converted into biofuel. Cities across China are experimenting with making biogas from food waste to generate electricity and digestate, a substance used as fertiliser.

Finally, storage conditions should be improved, as well as measures like low temperature and high moisture storage, mechanical ventilation and promoting the use of by-products such as rice and wheat bran.

There is no shortage of potential solutions and it is vital that some of them, however novel, are tapped into. If food waste were a country, it would be the third-largest emitting country in the world, generating about 8% of total greenhouse gas emissions, although some studies have this number at 11%. This issue is not location-specific, but an issue that affects every living thing on the planet and should therefore be seen as an urgent area to take action in.

Singapore’s National Environment Agency (NEA) has released its 2019 Waste Statistics and Overall Recycling report, which reveals that last year, Singapore sent almost three million tonnes of waste to its only landfill on Semakau Island.

Singapore Waste Statistics 2019

The report, released annually, outlines the waste generated, recycled and disposed of in Singapore last year, categorised by different waste streams. About 30% of this waste was plastic waste- the top material sent to be incinerated on Pulau Semakau, while 20% was food waste and cardboard and paper waste made up 19%.

You might also like: Why We Can’t Quit Plastic

While there was a 6% reduction in the total amount of waste generated in Singapore in 2019 compared with 2018, overall recycling rates fell to 59% from 61% in 2018; domestic recycling rates decreased to 17% last year from 22% in 2018, while non-domestic recycling rates fell to 73% from 75% in the same period.

The NEA says that this drop in the overall recycling rate is largely due to the recycling rate of paper, which fell from 56% in 2018 to 44% last year. It adds that the market for recycled paper was affected by dwindling export markets. Singapore exports 34% of its recyclables.

Since 2018, China has banned waste imports, including plastics, paper products and textiles, from foreign countries, which according to local environmental group Zero Waste SG, may have resulted in an excess supply of recyclable materials across countries and a drop in the prices. 

The amount of plastic waste generated decreased by 2% to 930 000 tonnes last year from 950 000 tonnes in 2018, while recycling rates remained at 4% for both years.

Regarding food waste, Singapore saw a decrease in food waste generation of 2.5% in 2019 compared with 2018, while recycling rates saw an increase to 18% last year from 17% in 2018.

Social enterprise TreeDots says that the key reason behind the generation of most food waste in Singapore is consumers’ perception. It says that many businesses and households ‘are still caught up in their so-called knowledge of freshness, or what a product should look like’.

It says, “Given that consumers’ perspective is as such, businesses will be forced to follow through as well. This results in a huge percentage of them throwing away perfectly good food deemed undesirable in the public’s eyes.”

Zero Waste Singapore: A Solution?

In 2019, the government announced its Zero Waste Masterplan to reduce the amount of waste sent to Semakau Landfill by 30% by 2030. The plan tackles the packaging, food and electronic waste crisis in Singapore, and was implemented to extend the landfill’s lifespan beyond the projected 2035. The Republic is also aiming to hit a national recycling rate of 70%, a domestic recycling rate of 30% and a non-domestic recycling rate of 81%.

Featured image by: Alan Levine

Researchers in Israel have developed an environmentally friendly, degradable plastic – like polymer derived from marine organisms that feed on seaweed, which is completely biodegradable, as well as recyclable.

It was the successful outcome of a collaboration between Dr Alexander Golberg and Professor Michael Gozin of Tel Aviv University. Their study was published in the journal Bioresource Technology this month (January 2019).

This material may one day free the world of its worst pollutant. Plastic accounts for up to 90% of all the pollutants in our oceans, according to EcoWatch – yet there are few comparable, environmentally friendly alternatives to the material.

“Plastics take hundreds of years to decay. So bottles, packaging and bags create plastic ‘continents’ in the oceans, endangering animals and polluting the environment,” says Dr Golberg. “Plastic is also produced from petroleum products, which has an industrial process that releases chemical contaminants as a by-product.”

You might also like: How Wax Worms Can Be Used to Fight Plastic Waste

Conventional plastic is in fact largely derived from non-renewable fossil fuels like natural gas and coal that are resistant to natural degradation. Over time, they enter into the animal and human food chain. Hence, efforts are focussed on finding substitute primary materials that can decay naturally without altering the equilibrium of ecosystems when discarded.

What is bioplastic?

Researchers settled their attention on seaweed-feeding microorganisms and produced a biodegradable polymer named polyhydroxyalkanoate (PHA), which completely breaks down into organic waste.

“A partial solution to the plastic epidemic are bioplastics, which don’t use petroleum and degrade quickly. But bioplastics also have an environmental price. To grow the plants or the bacteria to make the plastic requires fertile soil and freshwater, which many countries, including Israel, don’t have.”

“Our raw material was multicellular seaweed, cultivated in the sea” Dr Golberg continues. “These algae were eaten by single-celled microorganisms, which also grow in very salty water and produce a polymer that can be used to make bioplastic.”

“There are already factories that produce this type of bioplastic in commercial quantities, but they use plants that require agricultural land and fresh water. The process we propose will enable countries with a shortage of fresh water, such as Israel, China and India, to switch from petroleum-derived plastics to biodegradable plastics.”

The new study could transform global efforts to clean the oceans without affecting arable land and without using fresh water, always according to Dr Goldberg.

“Plastic from fossil sources is one of the most polluting factors in the oceans,” he says. “We have proved it is possible to produce bioplastic completely based on marine resources in a process that is friendly both to the environment and to its residents.

We are now conducting basic research to find the best bacteria and algae that would be most suitable for producing polymers for bioplastics with different properties” he concludes.

Innovations- such as this biodegradable plastic polymer using marine organisms- should be delved into further to use the power of nature to benefit the planet.


Golberg, Alexander; Gozin, Michael; Fadeev, Ludmila; Greiserman, Semion; Gnaim, Rima; Ghosh, Supratim. “Macroalgan biomass subcritical hydrolysates for the production of polyhydroxyalkanoate (PHA) by Haloferax mediterranei”, Tel Aviv University. Bioresource Technology, Elsevier. January 2019.

Featured image by David Martin 



Subscribe to our newsletter

Hand-picked stories once a fortnight. We promise, no spam!

Instagram @earthorg Follow Us