Earth has a garbage problem. Specifically, it has a plastics problem, with single-use plastics being the biggest contributor to a growing environmental calamity.
Consider the Great Pacific Garbage Patch, a collection of trash caused by circular currents in the world’s largest ocean. The patch is believed to cover an area twice the size of Texas, serving as a monument to a consumer society that is not doing enough to clean up after itself.
According to a 2015 study published in Science magazine, about 4.8 million metric tons of plastic waste finds its way into the world’s oceans each year. Researchers predict that by 2050, ocean plastics will cumulatively outweigh marine life.
While the Great Pacific Garbage Patch is the most visible part of the problem, nearly all plastic waste breaks down into microplastics that are not biodegradable and sink to the bottom. From there, they are ingested by marine animals and enter the food chain. Researchers in Europe have found that most of the humans they studied have plastics in their stool samples; we’re guessing that is not healthy for the digestive system.
All of this is relevant in the wake of a recycling action plan released last month by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The plan focuses on four main areas: Increasing education about the benefits of recycling; encouraging cities to improve the collecting and sorting of recyclables; improving measurements for recycling efforts; and developing new markets for recycled products.
Among those, education might be the most important. Customer confusion over what can be recycled, particularly among plastics, has contributed to the problem. Consumers frequently throw out plastics that could be recycled or recycle contaminated containers. High contamination rates led China to stop accepting most plastic and paper waste in 2018; that nation previously was the largest buyer of recycled material from the U.S.
The city of Vancouver website answers questions about whether specific items can be recycled, and the city offers classes on the basics of recycling. That is a good start, and it reflects the need for municipalities and states to take the lead in the wake of inaction by the federal government. While the recommendations from the EPA are worthy suggestions, they do not go far enough to effectively deal with the issue.
Notably, the working group for the federal recycling plan included representatives from groups such as the American Chemistry Council, Dow Chemical Co. and Exxon Mobil. It was predictable that the recommendations would place the emphasis on changing consumer habits rather than holding industries accountable by expecting them to reduce plastics production or pay for cleanup.
Canada, on the other hand, is planning to ban all disposable plastic packaging in the next two years, and the European Union has adopted a comprehensive plastic reduction strategy.
With the U.S. government falling short in this regard, it is up to the states to take action. Last year, a ban on single-use plastic grocery bags passed the state Senate (Sens. Annette Cleveland and Ann Rivers voted in favor; Lynda Wilson was opposed) but died in the House. Several cities throughout the state have instituted their own bans on plastic bags in grocery stores, and Seattle has banned plastic straws and dining utensils.
With or without a ban, consumers should recycle plastics — including newspaper bags — whenever possible. It is a perfect example of our ability to think globally and act locally to protect the planet.
