Measured, Not Assumed
How we will prove the environmental benefit of ReLite+ and ECOS
Better concrete and asphalt, made from the plastic nobody wants, should come with proof. This page explains how we measure the benefit and how we expect environmental credits to fit in.
Why we use life cycle assessment
Recycled content on its own does not show an environmental benefit. What matters is the full effect of a finished product, from raw materials through to the end of its life.
A life cycle assessment (LCA) is the standard way to measure that. For ReLite+ and ECOS, the question we ask is:
What is the environmental impact of a ReLite+ concrete or asphalt product, per unit of required service, compared with the conventional product it replaces?
Equal function, not equal mass
We compare products that do the same job, not products that weigh the same. A lighter product that meets the same strength, durability, and installation requirements has to be compared with its conventional equivalent on that basis.
That is also why we do not publish a single number for "ReLite+ concrete." ReLite+ and ECOS are platforms. Each mix is built around a producer's own materials, plant, and application, so each is assessed on its own terms.
Where the benefits can come from
An LCA lets us measure which changes matter most, rather than guess. The ones we are looking at:
Less Portland cement per unit of performance. Cement accounts for about 8% of global CO2 emissions (World Cement Association), so reducing it is likely the biggest lever in concrete.
Lighter products. Less material to move can mean lower freight impacts, where the savings are realized in the actual supply chain.
Plastic recovered locally. Residual plastic that closed-loop recycling cannot serve is put to a durable use.
Longer-lasting products. ReLite+ and ECOS are designed to help address porosity and water ingress. We treat service life as a design objective to test, not an assumption.
The assessment also shows the trade-offs. A mix that uses less aggregate but more cement may not be better overall. We want to find that out before our customers do.
Where ReLite+ fits
Screening. Internal, cradle-to-gate comparisons for priority concrete and asphalt applications, to find where the benefit is largest.
Validation. Real operating data from the Mitchell site and producer plants, paired with performance and durability testing against standards.
Independent review. Third-party review and, where appropriate, Environmental Product Declarations for specific, stable products.
Environmental credits: two streams
ReLite+ and ECOS work on two problems at once, plastic waste and cement emissions. That gives them the potential to qualify for two different kinds of environmental credit. Each is assessed on its own evidence.
Cement production is highly energy- and carbon-intensive. When an optimized mix meets the same performance with less Portland cement, the emissions avoided are the kind of outcome carbon registries are built to recognize. Registry methods for concrete already exist. For example, Verra's VM0043 methodology recognizes the emissions avoided when concrete made with CO2 as a feedstock needs less cement for the same performance. Methods are also being broadened: Verra's proposed revision would add supplementary cementitious materials. We are watching these closely and will pursue the pathway that fits each mix.
Our own proprietary methods may add further carbon benefits to this stream. We will report them only once they are verified.
Carbon credits
Concrete and asphalt producers do not normally buy virgin plastic, so the benefit of ReLite+ is not displaced plastic production. It is additional recycling: residual plastic put to durable use in a construction product. We are working toward a credit pathway built on that idea, for plastic that is documented as incorporated into an approved product.
Plastic credits
Credit only what is verified. Credits would follow measured, documented results, not modelled estimates.
No double counting. Each environmental benefit is counted once. Carbon credits, plastic credits, recycling claims, extended-producer-responsibility reporting and customer claims are tracked separately.
Credits add to the business case, not replace it. The product has to stand on performance and price first.
Open to the industry. A recognized method would be available to others doing the same work, which is how a new category gets established.
The same rules for both
What we will and will not say
We would rather earn trust than make a headline. We will not claim carbon negative, net zero, zero microplastic release or universal durability improvement unless it is independently verified under a clearly defined method. Where we publish a result, it will name the product, the comparison and the conditions it applies to.
Work with us
Producers: we will include your mix in the assessment.
Plastics and brand partners: help us build the evidence and the credit pathway.