The noise around efforts to tackle plastic pollution has risen to a fever pitch, a week before the negotiations for a global treaty to address the issue are due to begin.

Over the last couple of weeks, reports have said the treaty should tackle issues ranging from impacts on low-income countries, to the side effects of marine clean-up technology.

Governments will meet in Nairobi for the third round of negotiations on a UN Environment Programme (UN EP)-overseen process from Monday.

The Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee on Plastic Pollution aims to conclude its negotiations by the end of the year, after talks that have happened every six months since the end of 2022.

The committee wants to tackle the plastic crisis on land and sea with a comprehensive approach to the full lifecycle of plastic.

Launched at the start of September, the zero draft text forms the basis for the Nairobi talks. The 31-page text aims to represent a range of views from the negotiations so far by showing different options for wording. One objective proposes “eliminating plastic pollution” throughout its life cycle by 2040.

The treaty may have implications for plastic credits. Verra, an environmental credits standards body, told the secretariat of the Kenyan session that plastic credits should be an integral part of the agreement to help engage the private sector.

This article explores some of the recently published plastics reports.

OFF TRACK

The need for such a treaty was highlighted by the Ellen MacArthur Foundation, in a report published in collaboration with UNEP last week. The report noted how “the world remains off-track” from a plastic reduction pathway despite having made some “meaningful progress” over the last five years.

“It is crucial that we use the learnings of the last five years, and annual reporting, to drive more ambitious policy and greater business action,” it said.

The Foundation’s paper set out progress made by 123 companies and 17 governments that have committed to the five goals of its Global Commitment, the biggest voluntary effort to tackle plastic pollution. For example, signatories reduced their usage of a form of polystyrene by 36% from 2020 to 2022, against the goal of eliminating problematic packaging.

A priority for the global plastics treaty should be moving from single-use plastics to reusable ones, Ellen MacArthur said in a separate paper.

LOW-INCOME IMPACTS

A report commissioned by green group WWF this week turned to the costs of plastic pollution. It found that low-income countries’ plastic costs can be as much as 10 times higher in financial terms than those of wealthier counties.

The report, developed by consultancy Dalberg, estimated the cost of a kilogram of plastic was around $200 on average in low-income countries, compared with $19 in high-income ones. Causes of the costs include impacts on ecosystem services, greenhouse gas emissions, and health.

Structural injustices like poorer countries being expected to manage used plastic products have created the disparity, it said.

WWF called on governments to agree on a treaty that removes inequities through measures such as “banning, phasing out or phasing down” avoidable plastic products.

SUB-SAHARAN WASTE

The charity Tearfund delved into the impact of plastic waste on countries in Africa, in another report out this week.

Every minute, enough plastic waste to cover a football pitch is either dumped or burned in Sub-Saharan Africa, Tearfund said. Plastic use in the region is “spiralling out of control”, growing faster than in any other part of the world, it said.

“If the current trend continues, the region will produce almost six times more plastic waste in 2060 than it did in 2019. Many countries do not have the capacity to manage it.”

The charity called on governments to ensure targets to reduce plastic pollution become mandatory in the global plastics treaty.

ADDITIVES

Earth Action consultancy joined the throng with a report out this week that found nearly one million tonnes of plastic additives leak into the ocean’s every year.

These additives, chemicals added during manufacturing, potentially have more environmental and health impacts than the solid body of the plastic alone, Earth Action said.

“For policy to change, we need clarity on the extent of the crisis,” said Sian Sutherland, co-founder of activist organisation A Plastic Planet, adding that the report exposes current practices and calls for safer chemistry.

“Immediate action” is required by the policymakers to address the causes of additives leakage, the report said.

CLEAN-UP TECHNOLOGY

The Environmental Investigation Agency, an NGO, added its voice to the hubbub with a report this week that found marine plastic pollution clean-up technology can have damaging environmental impacts.

While these technologies sound appealing, environmental organisations and academics are concerned they pose a threat to ecosystems, it said.

The devices can capture “significant amounts” of marine life along with plastics, while distracting from policy measures that address plastic pollution, it said.

The NGO said the global plastics treaty must couple ocean cleaning measures with provisions to reduce plastic consumption.

COURT CASE

Environmental law charity ClientEarth followed the flurry of reports this week by announcing it was supporting legal action against multinationals Coca-Cola, Nestle, and Danone for making “misleading claims” about plastic recycling.

ClientEarth said it is supporting the European Consumer Organisation in filing a legal complaint to the European Commission for claims such as bottles being 100% recycled.

“Claims such as these, commonly found on plastic water bottles all over Europe, are either vague, factually incorrect, or not substantiated, and may suggest that bottles can be recycled in an infinite circular loop, which is simply not true,” it said.

Danone responded by saying it will “continue to invest and lead the campaign for better collection and recycling”.

Coca-Cola said it was “working to reduce the amount of plastic packaging we use, and we’re investing to collect and recycle the equivalent of the packaging we use”.

By Thomas Cox – t.cox@carbon-pulse.com

*** Click here to sign up to our twice-weekly biodiversity newsletter ***