Contents
CYCLEVIA 2025 Annual Report
CYCLEVIA 4 rue Jacques Daguerre Immeuble Le Concorde 92500 Rueil Malmaison France RCS Nanterre 903 777 118 Simplif ied joint stock
company with variable capital Contributors Laurent Benchana Agathe Boileau Latifa Braïda Elsa Climeau Clémence Del Valle Nikola Dizdar Simon
Dubois Brice Fabre Guillaume Fontaine Franck Guéneau Anne Guernalec Sidonie Huberlant Guirec Poënces Brigitte Pouliquen André Zaf f iro Photo
credits Christophe Meireis Getty Images Artwork credits Boris Zaïon cover and inside pages Caroline Andrieu portraits Editorial Alexis Tain
Art direction Guillaume Burneau Copy editor Astrid Stef fan Translation Rebecca Smith
P . 03 3 questions for André Zaffiro
P . 04 2025 key figures
P . 06 5 missions to speed up
circularity
P . 07 From a financial
to a mixed
EPR model
P . 08 Mixed EPR , a change in scale
for CYCLEVIA
P . 10 The mixed EPR model in action
P . 15 2025 Review
P . 16 Products placed on the market
P . 20 Collection
P . 23 Treatment processes
P . 27 Focus
P . 28 Overseas departments
and territories
P . 31 Local authorities
P . 33 Actions &
awareness - raising
P 34 Actions
P 36 Awareness raising
P 38 6 major projects
to prepare for 2027
4 5 CYCLEVIA
2025 ANNUAL REPORT CYCLEVIA
2025 ANNUAL REPORT
57 . 3
%
86 . 6
%
collection rate
regeneration /
recycling rate
In 2025 , CYCLEVIA continued
to put in place its waste oil collection
and regeneration mechanisms ,
achieving solid results at national level .
20 , 479
8 7
collected at municipal
recycling facilities
almost of the national feedstock
gross
t
432 , 767
of declared oils placed on the market
t
229 , 000
of waste oil delivered
to treatment facilities
net
t
5 , 678
97
of waste oil collected
in the French overseas
departments and territories
of which were sent
for regeneration recycling
gross
t
240 , 455
of waste oil collected
gross
t
Understanding certain dif ferences between ADEME and CYCLEVIA data
When calculating the waste oil collection and regeneration rates the results published by ADEME and CYCLEVIA dif fer slightly
because they are not based on the same reference ADEME displays its rates based on gross tonnages collected these are the
tonnages declared by collection transfer station operators without precise weighing or deduction of water content or other pollutants
On the other hand CYCLEVIA calculates its indicators based on net quantities actually delivered to treatment operators after deduction
of their water content and weighed by a regulated system This dif ference in methodology automatically leads to a dif ference between
the f igures reported Discussions are underway between the two organisations to streamline the presentation of data