Landis is the author of the book Climate Solutions Beyond Capitalism.
The fifth session of the UN Plastics Treaty negotiations ended on Aug. 15, once again in a deadlock. Over 100 countries came to the table, with the majority pushing for a binding agreement to cut plastic production, determine when plastics become waste, and limit the toxic chemicals used in plastics. Talks are set to resume at a future date, far beyond the deadline that had been set for an agreement.
As with other UN negotiations, such as the annual COP meetings on climate change, the U.S. and its allied petrostates continue to block any significant progress despite a majority of countries seeing the need to rapidly shift off fossil fuels and their byproducts, such as plastics. Frustration with the process was conveyed by Dennis Clare of Micronesia, who said, “What might have collapsed is not so much the talks but the logic of continuing or concluding them in a forum with dedicated obstructionists.” (Plastic pollution talks fail as negotiators in Geneva reject draft treaties | Plastics | The Guardian)
In 2022, the UN set the goal of establishing a global Plastics Treaty by the end of 2024, recognizing the need to address the plastics pollution crisis through a legally binding agreement. That mark was missed once again with the U.S., along with petrostates like Saudi Arabia and United Arab Emirates, refusing to make any concessions that would limit production and restrain their ability to profit off of this fossil fuel-driven industry. They instead argued that the focus should solely be on waste management rather than addressing the source of the problem—plastics production itself.
Of the approximately 2,600 participants at the fifth session of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee Plastics Treaty negotiations, 234 registrants were fossil fuel and chemical industry lobbyists —up from 221 at the previous session. This blatant interference by the very industries who have caused the environmental crisis calls into question the viability of any honest negotiations occurring through these UN bodies.
Plastics pollution is the second biggest environmental threat
According to the UN, plastic pollution is the second biggest threat to our global environment after climate change. Four hundred million tons of new plastic are produced globally each year with projections estimating a 70% growth in production by 2040. Plastics will take centuries to tens of thousands of years to completely break down, depending on the chemical makeup of the specific plastic. Instead of degrading like other materials, such as metal or glass, it instead breaks down into microscopic particles that are now prevalent everywhere—in the air we breathe, in rain and snow, in the food we eat, the water we drink, and even in human embryos. The toxic chemicals used in plastics act as neurotoxins, cause cancer and birth defects, disrupt our hormones and create infertility.
On top of the health impacts from its breakdown in our environment, the primary location of domestic plastics production is in the “Chemical Coast” of Texas and Louisiana, where a high concentration of industry poisons low-income communities and communities of color.
First created in 1907, plastics weren’t manufactured on a mass scale until after World War II, with 2.2 million tons produced in 1950. The 1970s saw an explosion of single-use plastics with overall production climbing to 407 million tons in 2015. The Coca Cola Corporation is the world’s largest producer of plastic waste, outsourcing this waste problem to every corner of the globe through their products.
Twenty-two tons of plastic waste enters the oceans every minute! Many remote areas and less developed countries don’t have the capacity for comprehensive waste management programs and with the influx of consumer goods—that generally contain plastic—waste ends up being washed into river systems during heavy rains and on to the ocean. Plastic is so prevalent in the products we use that it’s nearly impossible to avoid—from food wrappers and packaging to clothing, vehicles and technology, and nearly every household item—plastics are everywhere. It is predicted that plastics will outweigh fish in our oceans by 2050 if we continue on the current trajectory.
In the 1970s in response to the environmental movement that demanded solutions to waste and pollution, recycling programs were created. Industry pushed recycling as a tactic to diffuse peoples’ valid concerns, but never divulged the significant limitations to recycling plastics. Since the advent of recycling, only 10% of plastics have ever been recycled, partly due to the economic cost of recycling. Also, the unique properties of each plastic polymer used in various products require different processes to recycle, which are often trade secrets, so only the corporation that produced the polymer knows exactly what is in it.
Plastic waste is outsourced to to the global south
Just as the U.S. outsources its greenhouse gas emissions by outsourcing production to the Global South, it also avoids its solid waste problem by diverting it to lower-income countries. In 2018 alone, the U.S. shipped 1.07 million tons of its plastic waste to global south countries that often lack the infrastructure to manage and recycle the waste.
Even when plastics are recycled, they still end up in our environment one way or another. Through one recycling method called “downcycling,” plastics are ground into tiny fibers, which are then used to create other products like clothing, which when washed in our laundries sheds microplastics into our water systems. Thirty-five percent of microplastics in our environment are from synthetic clothing fibers. This downcycling is also limited to only two cycles before the source material is too degraded for use in new products.
Other so-called recycling processes include “advanced recycling” and “chemical recycling,” which are just greenwashing terms for incineration. As of 2020, the greenhouse gases created by plastic production and incineration of plastic waste equaled the emissions of 500 large coal-fired power plants.
So why are we still producing plastics in mass quantities every year? The answer is the profit motive.
Fossil fuel giants see profits from plastics as their ‘plan B‘
Around 6% of annual oil production goes to plastics. So not only do plastics provide low-cost, light-weight packaging and materials, which increases profits of corporations, but they also provide another market for fossil fuels beyond the energy sector. Plastics are seen as a “Plan B” for fossil fuel companies. As their profits are threatened by the transition to renewable energy, plastics production is being ramped up along with lobbying efforts that help to undermine a shift off their toxic products through a binding Plastics Treaty.
But there is another way. First, we need to greatly reduce waste in general and eliminate single-use plastics. Second, we can go back to using refillable glass and metal containers or biodegradable materials.
Sustainable solutions are available, but don’t generate profits for a few
Ninety percent of plastics used today could be made from plant-based materials, such as brown kelp, which degrades within 4 to 6 weeks. Kelp is one of the fastest growing plants on the planet, growing up to one meter per day. And kelp forests have other environmental benefits, such as filtering pollutants from waterways and alleviating nutrient run-off from agricultural fields and wastewater outflows, which reduces the occurrence of toxic algae blooms. Kelp forests also create vital habitat for a myriad of species, increasing biodiversity and reducing ocean acidification.
Through human ingenuity and sharing of research and technologies across borders, as well as an end to the consumer culture pushed onto the world by the West, we could find many truly sustainable solutions to the plastic pollution crisis.
Under capitalism, what is produced, how much is produced, what materials are used and how much waste is created is determined based on what is most profitable for the ruling elite who own these industries. This ruling elite, who benefit from the fossil fuel and plastics industries, will continue to undermine any attempts at environmental protections as they always have throughout the existence of capitalism.
Only through mass movements of the people—that threatened their continued profits—have any protections been won in the past. The U.S., along with the petrostates—which would collapse without the sale of their fossil fuels—will continue to be a barrier to the changes that are needed for a livable future. Only a socialist planned economy and global cooperation can solve the crisis that we are facing and move us to long-term environmental sustainability.