Residential waste producers/sources across the US provide mixed recyclable streams, where plastics are mixed with other recyclable materials (e.g., paper, metal, and glass). Our model assumes that residents are capable of sorting recyclables from other MSW without significant contamination in the disposal process, and that all MRFs are newly deployed and capable of handling the sorting of mixed plastics. MRFs separate plastics from other recyclables and the remaining recyclables are no longer considered in the scope of our infrastructure (because there are well-developed systems in place to deal with these materials). Excluding the recycling of paper, metal, and glass from our analysis does not detract from our economic results, but could in fact underestimate the total value of the infrastructure. Similarly, emission estimates of upcycling account for the sorting and processing functions of the MRF and PRF stages, but not the additional processing of excluded paper, metal, and glass streams. The model assumes that HDPE and PET bottles are separated at MRFs and are mechanically recycled; this pathway is considered within the scope of the infrastructure. The remaining plastic waste (#3 -#7) is recovered in MRFs in the form of mixed plastic bales that are reprocessed (e.g., clean up) and fed to pyrolysis processes. As analyzed by Ma et al. , it is possible to consider the scenario of feeding HDPE and PET to pyrolysis systems; in this work, however, we aim to understand how chemical upcycling can complement mechanical recycling infrastructure.