When we look at the environmental challenges facing governments, business and individuals today, plastic use, waste and pollution is one of the most difficult issues.
The problems around disposal of plastics are well known. Millions of tonnes a year go into landfill sites, whilst more is burnt, which is not in most cases an environmentally sound method of disposal. More ends up in the oceans, where it can kill seabirds and marine creatures, from the smallest to the largest. More recently, we’ve begun to learn about the risks of microplastics; the tiny fragments of residual plastic material that are now found in the seas, the soil, even in our food and drinking water. It is far from clear what damage they might be doing to the environment and to living creatures, including humans.
And yet, plastic seems essential to modern life. It is convenient, strong, lightweight and durable. Cost of transportation and emissions would increase if plastic packaging was switched to glass or other materials. Everything from our current cars and planes to advanced medical devices just could not exist without plastic.
But recent reports have highlighted to scale of the issues that we are facing as plastic use grows inexorably year on year. Environmental charity and campaigners Greenpeace issued a report recently titled “Forever Toxic - the Science on Health Threats from Plastic Recycling” which suggests recycling plastic can actually make it more toxic. That route should not therefore be considered a solution to the pollution crisis, they say.
“Plastics are inherently incompatible with a circular economy,” says the report, which brings together various pieces of research showing recycled plastics are more toxic than their virgin constituents.
According to the Guardian newspaper, 8bn tonnes of plastic have been produced since the 1950s. The Greenpeace report “catalogues peer-reviewed research and international studies showing not only that just a tiny proportion (9%) of plastics are ever recycled, but also that those that are end up with higher concentrations of toxic chemicals, multiplying their potential harm to human, animal and environmental health”.
Compared to virgin plastic, recycled material often contain higher levels of chemicals such as toxic flame retardants, benzene and other carcinogens, environmental pollutants including brominated and chlorinated dioxins, and numerous endocrine disruptors. These can cause changes to the body’s natural hormone levels. Another issue is that waste plastics earmarked for recycling are typically exported from high-income countries to poorer parts of the world, leading to pollution, health and employment issues in those recipient countries.
Another separate piece of research by four academics in Scotland and Canada has found that breaking down plastics for recycling scatters microplastic pollution into the environment. A Washington Post article reported on the study like this:
“A recent peer-reviewed study that focused on a recycling facility in the United Kingdom suggests that anywhere between 6 to 13 percent of the plastic processed could end up being released into water or the air as microplastics — ubiquitous tiny particles smaller than five millimeters that have been found everywhere from Antarctic snow to inside human bodies”. The full paper is here.
Next week representatives from 173 countries are due to meet in Paris under the auspices of the United Nations environmental programme to (in theory) develop a legally binding treaty covering the “full lifecycle” of plastics from production to disposal, to be negotiated over the next two years. But campaigners are worried that vested corporate interests will take the negotiations in a direction that will not lead to real change.
So if we believe Greenpeace, there is no meaningful “circular economy “ route for plastics. To make a difference, there needs to be a reduction in the level of certain chemicals in plastics, and a major reduction in overall production. But at the moment, plastic production is forecast to triple again by 2060! Simple re-use can be a positive option (washing medical PPE rather than throwing it away maybe), and then more work is needed to develop less harmful methods of disposal or destruction for waste plastic – not simply burning or burying it.
Plastic waste is already high on the procurement with purpose priority list for many organisations. These emerging findings, and the UN negotiations starting next week, are likely to put it even higher on the list. If you are a major buyer, producer or user of plastics in your business, you need to be considering the options.