The optimal (baseline) infrastructure design for a continental US upcycling network identified with our framework is presented in Figure . After 180 hours of computational time, the MIP was solved to an optimality gap of 4.66%, meaning that the identified system design provides an economic result within 5% of the optimal solution. The optimal design reaches all 3,108 counties and captures 100% of residential plastic waste; in other words, the model indicates that there are sufficient economic incentives to harness all the post-consumer waste to obtain virgin plastics (no policy intervention is needed). A couple of technology placement patterns are evident in the optimal design: facilities involved in the low-level (inexpensive) sorting and processing steps (MRFs and PRFs) are distributed, while facilities performing higher-level (expensive) chemical processing (pyrolysis, steam cracking, and polymerization) are more centralized (as these strongly benefit from economies of scale). We also observe the formation of seven distinct "hubs" in the US that are strategically placed to harness all waste (while minimizing transportation costs). A summary of the technologies selected are summarized in Table . Here, we can see that 336 MRFs are deployed, while only a handful of steam cracking units are deployed. The model can also be easily modified to restrict the number and location of steam cracking facilities (which would lead to a suboptimal solution), but these additional scenarios are not explored (to keep the discussion simple).