This is the authors' abstract. We don't add key points for this paper.
Dissolution–precipitation is an established physical recycling route for plastic waste, but most process development remains centered on solvent–antisolvent systems. Although effective for polymer recovery, these configurations introduce additional solvent requirements, mixed-solvent separation, and potentially energy-intensive solvent purification. This Perspective examines temperature-driven dissolution as an alternative process-design framework in which polymer recovery is governed by temperature-dependent polymer–solvent phase behavior rather than antisolvent-induced precipitation. By operating within a single-solvent configuration, temperature-driven systems avoid solvent–antisolvent separation but redistribute the process burden toward heating and cooling, polymer-phase solvent retention, condensation, and devolatilization. Available process and life cycle evidence indicates that their environmental performance depends strongly on solvent recovery efficiency, thermal integration, solvent circulation, energy supply, and feedstock characteristics; lower foreground energy demand alone does not necessarily correspond to lower life cycle impact. Beyond resin recovery, temperature-driven dissolution can also enable recovery-coupled fabrication, in which waste-derived polymer solutions are processed directly into films, membranes, coatings, sorbents, and other structured materials. This Perspective integrates polymer–solvent thermodynamics, separation configuration, process-scale evidence, sustainability trade-offs, scale-up considerations, and solution-based material fabrication to identify where temperature-driven dissolution may provide practical advantages within solvent-based plastic recycling.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Saleem et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: