Eleventh Hour — How can the world end plastic pollution and create a circular economy?

As the extraction and processing of natural resources cause half of global emissions and over 90 percent of biodiversity loss according to the United Nations, shifting to a circular economy is essential to achieving the goals of the Paris Agreement in limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius — the agreed climate threshold by 2100.

For us in The Climate Reality Project Philippines (Climate Reality Philippines), a circular economy aligns very well with the global and national agenda on climate resilience and sustainable growth. It rectifies our traditional and backward notions and approaches and our hyper-consumeristic behavior and attitude towards development—especially on the aspects of consumption and production where greenhouse gas emissions are mainly concerned.

A report released a few months ago by the United Nations Environment Programme (UN Environment) revealed that we can address plastic pollution using existing technologies and solutions. Here are our key takeaways from the report:

Takeaway #1: We already have the tools to turn the tide on plastic pollution.

Plastic pollution could be reduced by 80 percent by 2040 using existing technologies. To achieve this, the report proposed a systems change scenario focused on accelerating three key market shifts: Reuse, Recycle, and Reorient and Diversify.

1.    Promoting reuse and new delivery options can reduce plastic pollution by 30% by 2040.

The most powerful market shift, as we in Climate Reality Philippines has been highlighting, is reducing waste at source. This means eliminating single-use plastics and adopting reuse schemes.

Bans on single-use plastics is necessary to complement pricing policies, such as levies and Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) schemes.

For re-use schemes, the report mentioned cited the following as examples: refillable bottles, bulk dispensers in-store and in retail, packaging take-back, deposit-return schemes, and low-packaging subscription services.

2.    Increasing the stability and profitability of recycling can further reduce pollution by 20 percent by 2040

Governments and industries need to establish common design rules and standards, including the reduction of polymers and removal of additives that interfere with recycling economics. This should go hand-in-hand with putting in place efficient waste collection and sorting systems within our communities.

It is also critical to remove existing government subsidies for fossil fuels, which currently makes virgin plastics cheaper than recycled materials. Doing this would level the playing field for recycling.

3.    Shifting to sustainable alternatives to plastic (reorienting and diversifying the market) can lead to a 17 percent reduction in pollution by 2040.

Plastic wrappers, sachets, and takeaway items must be replaced with products made of alternative materials, such as paper, compostable materials, and recycled plastic.

According to the UN Environment, imposing a virgin plastic tax would contribute to improving the economics of alternative materials.

Takeaway #2: Dealing with plastic legacy is a complex problem. But with the right mix of solutions, we can make a difference.

Plastic legacy is defined by the UN Environment as “plastics that cannot be reused or recycled, including plastics that are already in the environment as existing pollution, or are stocked or will enter in the economy.”

Even if we succeed at implementing the three market shifts discussed above, the report warned that we are still left to deal with an estimated 100 million metric tons of plastics from short-lived products brought into circularity (meaning not yet reduced and substituted by 2040. 

To manage plastic legacy, the report highlighted the following actions:

1.    We need to prevent microplastics at their source. Private businesses must improve design of garments, ban the use of intentionally added microplastics to personal care products, among others.

2.    Governments need to ensure safe collection and disposal of non-circular plastics. This includes assessing disposal facilities and identifying new capacity needs.

3.    Plastic waste exports must be eliminated. Disposal of waste in the country where waste is generated is always preferred, except for cases where the better option is exporting to neighboring countries with better capacity.

4.    Deal with existing plastic pollution. Financing instruments are needed to improve waste management systems. Plastic credit systems must be implemented with environmental and social safeguard systems.

Takeaway #3: A shift to a circular economy makes economic sense.

Shifting from a linear to circular approach would result in 700,000 more jobs by 2040 than business-as-usual. This is in consideration of the fact that actions needed for the circular economy (collection, sorting, recycling, washing of reusables, are more labor-intensive than mechanized production of new plastics and that highly skilled workers.

The transition is also estimated to result in US$1.27 trillion in savings considering investment, operations, and management costs and recycling revenues. A further US$3.25 trillion is saved from avoided externalities from the adverse impacts of plastic pollution.