Despite overwhelming evidence of plastic’s threat to health and ecosystems, global action remains shamefully slow
Marco Magrini
A tsunami of plastic is overwhelming the planet. The sheer scale of humanity’s problem with synthetic polymers is staggering. Since the 1950s, 9.2 billion tonnes of plastic have been produced, seven billion of which have become waste.
In 2024 alone, the world manufactured around 430 million tonnes. Each year, several million tonnes (estimates vary) pour into the oceans, killing vast amounts of marine life and their predators – seabirds are now affected by a newly discovered disease called plasticosis.
Enjoying this article? Check out our related reads:
When polymers degrade into micron- or nano-sized particles, they become microplastics. These were first spotted in human stomachs, then in lungs, later in brains and, disturbingly, in placentas.
The global community is failing to respond to such a monumental calamity. International negotiations on a UN plastic pollution treaty, held in Geneva last August, failed so miserably that a large majority of nations refused to sign a draft declaration – heavy on adjectives, light on verbs.
The fundamental reason for this fiasco is simple: all the petro-states – from Saudi Arabia to the USA, from Russia to Iran – remain hostile to even a trace of common sense.
These are the same nations that resist action on climate change. This is no coincidence. Plastics are, at their core, a petrochemical product, mostly derived from oil and gas.
As demand for fossil fuels in energy production declines due to renewables and efficiency policies, oil companies increasingly view plastics as their fallback market. For some states, protecting plastics means protecting future revenue. For others, such as China – which produces 31 per cent of the world’s polymers – they represent an economic lifeline.
The international treaty that never was aimed to address the plastics lifecycle – from design to disposal. These are not insurmountable tasks. Designing products with their end-of-life in mind – plastics that are easier to collect, sort and process into new materials – would be a major step forward.
Substituting hydrocarbons with carbohydrates to produce biodegradable or compostable plastics is feasible, albeit suitable for limited applications.
But there are several other options, such as depolymerisation (breaking down certain types of polymers into their original monomers) or pyrolysis (heating waste in an oxygen-free environment to break down polymer chains into a liquid that can be used to produce new plastics).
At the talks in Geneva, the ‘High Ambition Coalition’ – a group of more than 100 countries led by the EU – pushed for a legally binding cap on plastic production, arguing that without a limit, the world’s waste management and recycling systems would be completely overwhelmed. They didn’t succeed.
As a result, global plastic manufacturing is expected to double by 2050. At the very least, future plastics should be produced while phasing put chemical additives that are toxic to humans, persistent
in the environment and contaminate recycling streams.
Bisphenols (endocrine disruptors) found in bottles, food linings and receipts; phthalates (hormone disruptors) used in soft PVC; brominated flame retardants (neurotoxic) in electronics and furniture foams; styrene (possibly carcinogenic) in polystyrene packaging and foams; and PFAS (‘forever chemicals’) used in grease-proof and non-stick coatings – all have safer, available substitutes.
The biggest barrier to replacing them isn’t a lack of alternatives, but market inertia and higher costs, especially without a global treaty imposing regulations and liabilities.
Then there’s the recycling conundrum. Thousands of plastic types exist, but they’re generally classified into seven main categories, identified by the number inside the recycling symbol.
While countries opposing a global treaty maintain that more recycling is the answer, the reality is that only plastics in categories 1 and 2 are easily recyclable – PET (used in beverage bottles) and HDPE (used in milk jugs, detergent bottles and some toys). The other five categories are either barely reusable or not at all. Only around nine per cent of global plastic waste gets a new life.
In household sorting, compliance varies – high in Germany and Belgium, lower elsewhere, and in many places, non-existent. Statistics are unreliable. Some countries count ‘collected for recycling’, others count only what’s reprocessed. Much ‘recycling’ often means shipping plastics to Asia or elsewhere.
So, yes, there’s considerable room for improvement – in plastic design, production and disposal alike.
