Debunking Plastic Myths
across the plastic value chain
This work recognizes the achievements we have made so far. However, there is a distance left to go to achieve our recycling goals and a circular economy.
Explore
The production of plastics is inexpensive
The determination of the true costs of producing plastics is complicated by a web of subsidies; market forces; by market externalities* related to greenhouse gas emissions; and the disposal costs at end of product life. The hidden environmental costs of plastic are at least 10 times higher than the market price. While the prices paid in the production of plastics are low, the true costs are high and hidden from view.
So What Can We Do?
Businesses can adopt improved designs, more robust business models; governments can develop and adopt public policies on subsidies and procurement; extended producer responsibility; and can use taxes and regulations to provide incentives and disincentives to reduce production. Extended producer responsibility can compensate for some of the costs of negative externalities, but eventually the plastics market must become circular.
The market for recycled plastic is robust
The complexity of plastic recycling brings high costs associated with infrastructure and processing. In addition, plastic degrades during recycling and may contain contaminants that can compromise the integrity and safety of recycled products. Therefore, rather than recycled plastic, the most reliable choice is virgin plastic, which product manufacturers prefer because it is superior in performance and reliability and, in most cases, cheaper. In the absence of interventions, the market for recycled plastic is unlikely to become robust.
So What Can We Do?
In the absence of a natural market, policymakers need to take further steps to create and sustain a viable market for recycled plastic. The solutions may include the realignment of subsidies, the adoption of Extended Producer Responsibility schemes, the adoption of policies that promote a mandatory recycled content, and innovations in recycling systems. All of these strategies may make the recycled plastics sector more attractive to investors and together may encourage more robust collection and treatment.
All plastic can be recycled
Most plastics can be recycled, but whether they actually are or not depends on the cost of doing so. Non-homogenous material, costs for recycling, additives and contaminants are the main reasons why plastic waste currently generated cannot be recycled. No more than 10 per cent of the roughly 348 million tonnes of new plastic produced annually has been recycled to date (Geyer, 2020). Even one of the most widely recycled plastics (HDPE, PET) has a recycling rate of only 30 to 50 per cent of the waste generated. There are numerous reasons behind the low percentage of plastic recycling.
So What Can We Do?
Achieving long-term solutions to the shortcomings of the current recycling systems will depend to a large extent on the development of viable markets for reprocessed plastic. Other actions include design innovations, incentives to invest in recycling capacity, and improvements in recycling technologies.
Bioplastics can solve all problems caused by plastics
Consumers may think that the “bio” prefix means that a product is greener but the tag may be misleading because it describes neither the composition of the plastic nor its biodegradability. Not all bioplastics are biodegradable and, like conventional plastics, may contain toxic additives and other contaminants. Bioplastics may degrade to microplastics, may contaminate the recycling of conventional plastics, and may divert agricultural land from food crop production. In the absence of a life cycle assessment, the environmental footprint of bioplastic remains uncertain, but the current evidence suggests that bioplastics are not a clearly better environmental alternative to conventional plastics.
So What Can We Do?
The effective management of bioplastics depends on the development and adoption of new technologies and methods from production to end-of-useful-life for the product. Such innovations may require more research and the application of life cycle assessments. The solutions available now include improving source separation and labelling, using alternatives to food crops for the production of bioplastics, and developing standards for biodegradable bioplastics.
Plastic packaging for food is unnecessary and harmful
Plastic packaging has become an essential part of food safety and quality in most parts of the world. The use of plastic protects food from the time of production and processing to the time it arrives on the table for consumption, and in some cases reduces food loss and waste. The notion that plastic packaging for food is unnecessary is false. The absence of appropriate systems to manage the packaging waste from food distribution can however, cause significant harm to the environment. The volume of this plastic waste presents serious challenges to society to deal with globally.
So What Can We Do?
The search for responses includes the consideration of alternative materials, improved design, the development of business models and cultures that support sustainability and the use of life cycle assessments.
Plastics in agriculture cause little harm
On-farm uses of plastics include: greenhouses, wind tunnels, low tunnels, shade cloth, protective mesh, irrigation tape, drainage tubing, mulch films, containers, and more. In 2021, agriculture used an estimated 12.5 million tonnes of plastic (FAO, 2021). Farmers use plastic because it is inexpensive and convenient, but most products have a short and linear life cycle of only one season (Vox et al., 2016). Only a small proportion of agricultural plastics are recycled, generally limited to developed countries. However, in most places waste plastic is typically burned, buried, or left on the ground to decompose by the sun and wind (FAO, 2021).
So What Can We Do?
The continued poor management of agricultural plastics and the lack of recognized available non-contaminating alternatives will lead to ever-increasing levels of microplastics in soil. Maintaining soil as a healthy productive living ecosystem is directly linked to the health of people and animals. While the long-term implications of microplastics in soil are scarcely understood, researchers are warning that they could pose a significant threat to sustainable food production (Lin et al., 2020). Among the possible solutions to the risks posed by plastics in agriculture are the development of policy tools, and the adoption of eco-design, alternative technologies, and nature-based alternatives.
Plastic waste is not an issue in textiles
Though largely invisible, plastic waste from textiles has become a significant part of the overall plastic waste problem. We may commonly associate textiles with natural fibres such as cotton, wool, down, and silk, but synthetic and plastic-based materials such as polyester and nylon account for 62 per cent of global fibre production (Textile Exchange, 2019). Most of the vast volume of textiles thrown away each year are not recycled but end up being incinerated or put in open dumps or landfills. Textile recycling is labour intensive and time consuming which makes it unprofitable.
So What Can We Do?
Despite the complexity of the issues, possible actions to reduce the environmental impacts of the textile industry – and the associated plastic waste – do exist. The reduction of textile waste is imperative, and both industry and consumers have roles to play. Other recommended actions focus on transforming the industry from a linear, cradle-to-grave approach into a smarter, more circular system.
E-waste is not a part of the plastic waste problem
The waste from electrical and electronic equipment at the global level ran to an estimated 53.6 million tonnes in 2019 and is projected to reach 74.7 million tonnes by 2030 (Baldé et al., 2017; Forti et al., 2020). The percentage of plastic in electrical and electronic equipment (and the resulting plastic waste) varies by the size of the equipment, but analysts generally agree that about 25 per cent of the waste from electrical and electronic equipment by weight, is plastic (Taurino et al., 2010; Ardolino et at., 2021). Thus, e-waste plays a significant part in the plastic waste challenges.
So What Can We Do?
Solutions that meet the need for increased WEEE plastic recycling may come in several forms – increase official collection systems, design changes, improvements in recycling technology, better processing, and longer product life. A life cycle approach is implicit in all these solutions.
If consumers did their part, plastics recycling would be an unequivocal success
Consumers are involved in the fate of plastic waste starting with the consumer demand that brings certain products to the marketplace, and extending through product use to the end of product life and beyond.
So What Can We Do?
Although the overall success of recycling does not depend on consumers alone, several options for improving consumer contributions to the system are available. Governments and waste management companies can provide better information, and manufacturers can adopt better labelling to help consumers make decisions that align with their environmental convictions. Along with increased consumer knowledge, waste sorting can improve through better infrastructure design and increased sorting capacity.
Chemical recycling can solve the plastic pollution crisis
Proponents say that chemical recycling is poised to be a part of the solution to plastic pollution but for now, chemical recycling is more of a promise than reality and is not likely to contribute substantially anytime soon. Chemical recycling is energy-intensive, produces greenhouse gas emissions and has not demonstrated economic viability. It may ultimately make a valuable contribution as a complement to mechanical recycling but it urgently needs to improve yields and lower its energy requirements (SYSTEMIQ et al., 2021).
So What Can We Do?
Chemical recycling might become a part of the solution to plastic pollution but cannot solve the plastic crisis alone. At this stage in the development of chemical recycling, much remains uncertain: the feasibility of chemical recycling processes at an industrial scale; the potential logistical and economic issues related to collection and sorting; and chemical recycling’s role in a circular economy. A recent study of the prospects for a circular plastic economy in Norway concludes that the reduction of avoidable consumption and the scaling up of sorting capacity are the core of the strategy for achieving circularity but also recommends the scaling-up of chemical recycling (SYSTEMIQ et al., 2021).
Downloads
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10