A global plastic treaty will only work if it caps production, modeling shows

https://phys.org/news/2024-05-global-plastic-treaty-caps-production.html

by PaulHoule • 2 years ago

82 141 2 years ago

martinbaun5• 2 years ago

I dislike getting poisoned by microplastics as much as the next guy, but a treaty like this decided by some global elite might have some unintended consequences. Like they always do..

This probably wont affect the average HN, but all of our food and medicine is using plastics for a reason. It is cheap, sterile and safe. If you're poor and the price of shippings/storing your food becomes significant more expensive then you'll even more screwed. Again, probably wont affect you or me, but these things always have bad unintended consequences.

mihaic• 2 years ago

I think at this point the unintended consequences argument has been overused.

There are significant intended consequences that implementing something like this would have. I order for this to be negative, the unintended consequences would need to be larger, and I think it's hard to see that happening.

Reading the article between the lines though, it seems like global coordination is required, and the biggest challenge is getting the top 5 producers in line (China not being mentioned by name/exact number feels evasive by the authors).

tialaramex2• 2 years ago

Plastic appears in a lot of "convenience" products which I wouldn't expect to be popular with the poorest people in the world. Plastic bottle of water? Convenient but not an efficient or reliable option.

And while you can probably find a "bad unintended consequence" for everything if you try hard enough, it's usually the case that these bad effects are far smaller than the thing we set out to achieve.

idontwantthis2• 2 years ago

Are you saying you assume plastic bottled water and convenience items are not popular in the poorest places in the world?

That’s most definitely not the reality. South east asian cities are littered with takeout containers and bottles.

_mlbt3• 2 years ago

Plastic bottles of water are one of the most important supplies you can provide during and after a major disaster. There are so many situations that disrupt access to clean, safe, potable drinking water and pallets of bottled water are the simplest and fastest way to help people in need.

martinbaun5• 2 years ago

Perfect example. Bottled water might be a luxury good for you, but in most places in the world you have polluted tap water you can die from or bottled water.

So if you were in charge of this, you might have just killed a few million people from cholera.

https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/cholera

I can't stress this enough, but there are so many unintended consequences.

keybored• 2 years ago

Having access to drinkable tap water[1] is an amazing privilege. Some places either don’t have access to enough water or don’t have the infrastructure.

[1] Bonus if it also tastes good!

reaperman• 2 years ago

I'd imagine a lot of these could be replaced with certain varieties of PLA that are sourced from bio-feedstocks and also relatively biologically degradable. Some PLA isn't very biodegradable, and certainly many would contain problematic plasticizers and other harmful chemicals. Additionally, PLA doesn't have the mechanical stiffness and toughness needed for many applications - but I think if the market for that expanded greatly, research investment would create new varieties of biodegradable PLA which could function as a drop-in replacement for a larger portion of other plastics.

constantcrying2• 2 years ago

Plastic is how extremely poor people get things. If you want basic necessities for living plastic is a great option.

If you are extremely poor, what do you eat from? What do you store things in? What do you wear? The answer is obviously plastic.

TazeTSchnitzel• 2 years ago

As I see it, plastic is too cheap to produce (no incentive to recycle it) and overproduced (lots of very low quality plastic goods that have to be frequently replaced; lots of things with unnecessary plastic packaging). A cap on production ought to go some way towards solving both problems.

michael94239• 2 years ago

Plastics can't be recycled. Even the best quality HDPE resins can only be down-cycled once, and are turned into pens, toys and other low quality plastics stuff you don't want to have close to food.

1970-01-013• 2 years ago

I'm afraid the plastic recycling factories haven't gotten this memo.

https://youtu.be/g1WTgGyirDw&t=247

PaulHoule4• 2 years ago

There are processes for “chemical recycling of plastics” that either convert polymers back to the monomer (pretty easy for styrene) or to mixed petrochemicals (such as pyrolysis). There are other problems, but the economics are always going to be tough for them because bulk plastic monomers and other petrochemicals (even fuels) usually cost about 50 cents a pound which is a hard price to beat even when you don’t consider the cost of gathering and transporting all that plastic.

michael94239• 2 years ago

In an ideal world, people would use natural and durable materials, mostly wood, glass, steel. Stuff that does not hurt living beings.

The acute problem is not plastic production, although that's an issue. But the industry invented the myth of plastic recycling, and due to wrong incentives, the plastic is shipped to poor countries where it comes into the environment.

The easiest way to deal with plastics is to collect it and burn it.

warcher4• 2 years ago

But those more durable goods have a cost in hydrocarbons as well, don’t they? Lot of energy input in a hunk of steel. Are we really saving any fossil fuel conversion by swapping over? Has anyone measured?

yareal6• 2 years ago

Yes. This analysis has been done. And yes, it depends on your source of energy. But in general energy is getting cleaner, and eventually could be 100% oil free. Most plastics rely on oil, so there's a crossover threshold for most at some point.

michael94239• 2 years ago

Actually plastics is the most ecological and economic way to package things. Nothing comes close. Because people throw things away all the time, and producing things out of cotton, wood, glass etc. takes way more energy.

The price of something usually reflects the energy needed to produce it. But it does not take account the externalized cost on the society and environment.

On the other hand, there are areas where other materials like cotton are only a bit more expensive but do not have such a negative effect on the environment. In those areas, like textiles, a ban on synthetic material is probably a good thing.

The problem with the environmental impact of plastics is not the production, it's where it ends up. So the question is how to incentivize keeping a closed system where plastics ends up being burned.

Minimizing the use of plastics requires a complete change of how the economy works. It would require a society of citizens, not consumers who throw away things that are still fine and there are certain areas where plastics can not be replaced by other stuff.

Forcing a cap on plastic production means hurting the emerging markets most but also the wealth in western countries.

lm28469• 2 years ago

Carbon is only a tiny part of the problem... plastics are nasty in all kind of ways, both to you and the environment.

Steel and glass won't give you cancer, wool won't destroy your hormonal system, &c.

kjkjadksj10• 2 years ago

The math really depends on if you insist on buying new everytime, or realize a stainless steel skillet you can find in the thrift store in your neighborhood can last another 3000 years.

jwells89• 2 years ago

Would it be correct to say that the lowest hanging fruit for reducing production of plastic without outsize negative impact would probably be in stymying the vast quantities of synthetic textiles being sold, particularly to richer countries? Those materials dominate fast fashion and are one of the most common types of fabric across a broad range of products ranging from clothing to automobile seat covers to pet beds.

juujian2• 2 years ago

The easiest way would be to curtail the supply of oil, which is the raw input of all plastics and there is more of it being extracted than ever before. As long as there is a glut of cheap oil on the market, companies will find a way to make a profit while outcompeting companies that use natural products like cotton. The major ways we use oil all harm the planet in some ways.

ars• 2 years ago

Cotton uses an order of magnitude more oil than "plastic" clothing.

stoperaticless5• 2 years ago

Planet and nature will be just fine. Number of species bounce back after extinction events. As long as there is at least one ameba, life will find a way.

Humans on the other hand might have tougher time during each next century.

yareal6• 2 years ago

Packaging produces about 140 million tons annually. Textiles produce about 40 million tons. Construction produces about 75 million tons, and transportation about 60 million tons.

Textiles are non negligible, but packaging is almost certainly a better target for inexpensive impact. Tons of stuff doesn't need plastic wrapping.

PaulHoule4• 2 years ago

Yeah, "frustration free packaging" could save the Earth. Often it is such a terrible experience cutting into plastic clamshells.

bryanlarsen• 2 years ago

Only a very small percentage of packaging ends up as micro or nano plastic in the water supply. A much larger percentage of textiles end up as micro or nano plastic in the water supply since they're generated by washing clothes.

If that's what you're concerned about, a focus on textiles is warranted.

travisb2• 2 years ago

There is no low hanging fruit when it comes to reducing plastic production or consumption. Plastic is just too awesome -- which is why we use it instead of whatever we used before plastics.

I'm not aware of any major use of plastic where going backwards in time is on-net more environmentally friendly. Most reports discussing plastic replacements make unreasonable reuse and durability assumptions. Often they ignore or downplay consequences of switching like increased transportation pollution or pollution from assumed recycling.

digging4• 2 years ago

I'm not aware of any major use of plastic where going backwards in time is on-net more environmentally friendly.

Literally all of them. They reduce plastic pollution to 0. CO2 pollution is not the driving factor behind plastic reduction.

White_Wolf2• 2 years ago

Maybe you're too young to remember the days of paper bags, hemp shopping bags, shoes and shirts. "more environmentally friendly"? Most alternatives are more environmentally friendly in a long run than plastic.

mitthrowaway2• 2 years ago

I'm not aware of any major use of plastic where going backwards in time is on-net more environmentally friendly.

My guess would be fishing nets. These are the main source of plastic pollution in the ocean.

dzink2• 2 years ago

A HUGE % of plastic production worldwide is from bottlers of Coca Cola company drinks and their competitors. Why not address and deal with the elephant in the room.

_mlbt3• 2 years ago

What solution are you advocating for? Glass bottles? Aluminum cans? Banning soda entirely?

klysm2• 2 years ago

Aluminum cans

giantg210• 2 years ago

Aluminum cans are plastic lined.

GeoAtreides• 2 years ago

Banning soda entirely

I mean... is it a climate emergency or not? Do we really need to haul tons of sugary water up and down the highway? Not to mention the plastic.

There is alternative btw: soda stream and syrups. Apparently a 440ml bottle of syrup makes up to 9 litres of pepsi.

lupusreal• 2 years ago

Banning soda entirely?

You'd be doing literally everybody (except soda company shareholders) a favor.

dzink2• 2 years ago

The solution has been figured out by the company decades ago. The drinks are concentrated a massively and only mixed and the bottler, which is also the biggest plastic polluter on the planet. Have reusable containers people can buy from the company if they want to and set up dispensing machines at any location. Even better - rent those containers to the customer when they buy the drink and charge if they don’t return the container. But the logistics of all of that worldwide are more expensive than making ferrying and polluting with plastic. Move the bottling to the edge - to the consumer.

constantcrying2• 2 years ago

Plastics are one of the greatest, most versatile materials available. If you want to cap plastic production, every single industry and your daily life will be drastically affected.

There are exactly zero incentives for any nation to drastically limit plastic production. As with CO2 these policies will be implemented by many Western nations, while the many, densely populated countries, relying on cheap goods will take no serious actions. Plastic is just too useful.

stoperaticless5• 2 years ago

Plastic bags seem unbelievably strong for what they weigh, for their thickness.

(Kind of reminds me of my fascination of shows on Discovery channel praising spider silk or carbon nanotubes for their super strength)

nobodyandproud3• 2 years ago

While I agree-it’s a class of materials “of the future” that we take for granted—it’s also played a part in a heavily-disposable consumer economy.

Encouraging a competitive and parallel economy of repair and reuse would be awesome.

And for those use-cases, I personally have zero problems with plastics. But beverage bottles? Packaging? Shopping bags? Not so thrilled.

thriftwy2• 2 years ago

I've heard that 80% of plastic pollutions in the oceans are from African big rivers being used as dumpsters and then flushing their yield to the sea.

Why TF are we supposed to limit plastic use in developed countries, often located deep inland, where our plastic has many orders of magnitude smaller chance of polluting the oceans, etc?

robocat2• 2 years ago

African

You have heard wrong. Then again:

"More than 1000 rivers account for 80% of global riverine plastic emissions into the ocean" https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.aaz5803 Has some nice maps of waste versus country: https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.aaz5803#F4

"Around 90% of all river-borne plastic that ends up in the ocean comes from just 10 rivers" https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/06/90-of-plastic-polluti...

Not necessarily contradictory, but an indication of disagreement.

stoperaticless5• 2 years ago

The map shows asia and south america as top offenders.

thriftwy2• 2 years ago

Thanks - I'm surprised that Amur is also on the list. I'd expect everybody on its banks has figured out how to deal with waste by now.

pinkmuffinere• 2 years ago

The modeling uses a certain set of assumptions, and has a certain goal. As far as I can tell, neither were discussed in the article, making it difficult for me to _really_ conclude whether I feel the cap on production is justified. I realize my option doesnt matter, and the research papers probably do discuss the assumptions of the model. I don’t see why anyone should read this article though, unless you want another opinion piece

chris_va• 2 years ago

It might be simpler to mandate accounting and (progressively) tax production to pay for remediation to force the market away from polluting.

And maybe it would encourage more out of the box solutions, like this one: https://arstechnica.com/science/2024/04/researchers-make-a-p...

boring-alterego• 2 years ago

Sometimes you come to the comments for good ideas, sometimes you come for the show.

datahack2• 2 years ago

The way to fix it is to find a material to replace it that’s cheaper and doesn’t have the downsides. We might be able to limit one time use plastic with government intervention, but not the global plastic industry. Call me a pessimist. But once you really dig in to all the places it’s used you realize a lot of the modern world wouldn’t exist without it unfortunately.

Nothing short of that will unseat plastics.

tacocataco2• 2 years ago

Force these corporations to deal with the plastic waste they make while generating their profits. They dont get to half do their job and walk away with the extra saved cash. No more externalization of costs.

We will even let them keep their profits from all the years of getting away with it. How generous!

A global plastic treaty will only work if it caps production, modeling shows

Related Stories