Melbourne, Aug 15 (The Conversation) — Efforts to establish a legally binding global treaty on plastic pollution have come to a disappointing halt. This week, negotiations held in Geneva, Switzerland, by the United Nations Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee extended beyond their schedule, concluding without reaching an agreement.
As a representative of the Scientists' Coalition for an Effective Plastics Treaty, the stagnation is particularly disheartening. Our objectives were to address the full life cycle of plastics, not just disposal, set measurable targets for reducing plastic production, and regulate harmful additives to mitigate risks to human health.
Regrettably, the talks were undermined by vested interests. Nations with significant petrochemical industries opposed limits on the production of virgin plastic. This pattern isn’t new; we have witnessed similar resistance with issues such as tobacco, PFAS, asbestos, and climate change, where scientific concerns have been overshadowed by powerful entities.
Early action on plastics, especially microplastics, could make a significant impact. Meanwhile, consumers can take steps to minimize exposure and reduce waste. Collectively, we can convey a strong message to the plastics industry.
Why is a plastics treaty necessary?
A comprehensive plastic treaty could substantially benefit the environment and public health, akin to the success seen with the 1987 Montreal Protocol which phased out ozone-depleting substances.
The original Kyoto Protocol, aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions, was insufficiently ambitious, with uneven effectiveness among signatory countries. The situation with the plastics treaty reflects this critical juncture.
The treaty represents a significant opportunity to ensure harmful additives are disclosed, ensure new materials are proven safe before widespread use, and prioritize upstream measures such as reducing production and simplifying chemistry.
Changes in Negotiations
The initial promising draft treaty, put forward two years into negotiations, saw significant alterations. Midway through the Geneva summit, it was drastically reduced, stripping away contentious elements.
Key terms like “target,” “chemicals,” “harmful,” and “phase out” were eliminated, along with Article 19, which revolved around human health. References to public awareness in waste management were also removed.
Plans for a global phase-out of products such as plastic bags and straws, sections on sustainable production and reduction targets, and transparency regarding additives were all excluded. Basic guidelines to improve recycling rates and discourage harmful practices like open burning were omitted as well.
On a positive note, the revised draft encourages innovation and research, though safeguards are needed to prevent potential exploitation of loopholes, a concern seen in the past when substituted harmful chemicals replaced banned ones.
Consumer Action
In the absence of a robust treaty, consumers hold significant influence. The response of industries to public demand is evident in the case of plastic microbeads. Once common in personal care products, these particles have been largely phased out due to consumer rejection and subsequent government bans, starting with the Netherlands.
Microplastics primarily originate from synthetic textiles and tyres, contributing over 60% of primary microplastics. These particles are released not only during decomposition in oceans but also when items are used or washed.
Small actions such as purchasing fewer clothes, choosing natural fibers, reducing washing frequency, and opting for walking or cycling over driving could collectively make a considerable impact.
It’s important to address indoor microplastic sources, like synthetic carpets, as exposure is higher indoors, including cars, highlighting the importance of walking as a beneficial choice.
Act Now Instead of Waiting
Australia's role in raw polymer production is minimal, possibly influencing its participation in the High Ambition Coalition to End Plastic Pollution by 2040. However, Australia's per capita consumption of single-use plastics exceeds 50 kilograms annually, marking one of the highest globally.
We don’t need to wait for a treaty to begin addressing plastic pollution. By taking decisive action, we can compel manufacturers to be more responsive to sustainable practices.
(Only the headline of this report may have been reworked by Editorji; the rest of the content is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)