The energy to condense out and capture the undesirable products becomes comparable to the energy capture it.
Japan's approach isn't because they need energy but rather that they are trying to minimize landfill (as its an island and space is at a premium).
The resulting products are carcinogenic toxic waste - which comes with additional challenges for disposal. In the US, it is likely more desirable to bury the inert polystyrene rather than trying to deal with the PAHs ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polycyclic_aromatic_hydrocarbo... ) and other byproducts.
The article is describing a process where UV light and a catalyst break down/transform polystyrene into diphenylmethane ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diphenylmethane ) which is a feed stock for many other (useful) processes.
Japan's approach isn't because they need energy but rather that they are trying to minimize landfill (as its an island and space is at a premium).
The resulting products are carcinogenic toxic waste - which comes with additional challenges for disposal. In the US, it is likely more desirable to bury the inert polystyrene rather than trying to deal with the PAHs ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polycyclic_aromatic_hydrocarbo... ) and other byproducts.
The article is describing a process where UV light and a catalyst break down/transform polystyrene into diphenylmethane ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diphenylmethane ) which is a feed stock for many other (useful) processes.
The paper referenced in the article is Cascade degradation and upcycling of polystyrene waste to high-value chemicals https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2203346119