Tackling the Plastic Crisis with the Break Free From Plastic Pollution Act

As plastic continues to suffocate the planet, the first comprehensive legislative plan in the United States to combat plastic pollution, the Break Free From Plastic Pollution Act, was launched today at the US Capitol.

The bill, introduced by Senator Tom Udall (D-NM) and Representative Alan Lowenthal (D-CA), seeks to address the plastic pollution crisis by starting at the source: plastic production. The bill champions a temporary pause on the construction of new plastic production plants until the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has time to investigate the health and environmental impacts of plastic production. Among other things, it also shifts the financial burden of packaging waste management from taxpayers and local governments to the producers, and it phases out some of the most notorious single-use plastic items, like takeout containers, plastic utensils, and styrofoam, starting in 2022. 

Another bill aimed at curbing plastic pollution, the Save Our Seas 2.0 Act, was introduced in Congress late last year. While the premise sounds nice, it’s a prime example of greenwashing at its finest. Save our Seas 2.0 will do absolutely nothing to stop the production of plastic or reduce the plastic pollution entering our environment, meaning it will neither “save our seas” nor do anything to address the broader crises posed by plastic. There is an indisputable link between plastic production and climate change, and in order to stop the climate catastrophe, it is essential that we not just remove plastic waste from waterways and the environment, but also dramatically reduce plastic production. 

The recycling and incineration focus of Save Our Seas 2.0 is entirely insufficient to tackle the plastic pollution crisis. Only 9% of plastic has ever been recycled and most of the “recycling” in the US is sent overseas. For this reason, when China, the primary importer of US plastic, recently stopped accepting contaminated foreign garbage (which describes most US plastic recycling), the market for plastic dramatically shrank. Many small towns across the country now have to pay more to recycle their plastic, and some are canceling their recycling programs altogether. Additionally, even when plastic is able to be recycled, shipping it halfway around the world and remaking it into something usable again emits large amounts of greenhouse gases.

Incineration is not a viable option for reducing our plastic waste either. According to CIEL’s Plastic & Climate report, nearly 16 million metric tons of carbon dioxide were emitted from incineration alone in 2015, not to mention the numerous health hazards to communities located near incineration plants. Should a revised version of the Save our Seas 2.0 Act be passed, it would divert tax dollars toward researching risky incineration processes, something the US Department of Energy already spends $7.6 million on though it is proven to not be a viable option for eliminating plastic waste.

An increased amount of plastic in the environment is detrimental to all humans, but it is significantly more harmful to those living near plastic production plants. Along the Gulf of Mexico, in states like Texas and Louisiana where most plastic in the US is manufactured, frontline communities are exposed to almost nonstop contamination from the harmful petrochemicals used to make plastic. Every day, these communities go to parks and schools and use public transportation just miles from toxic plastic production plants, which contribute to cumulative health impacts such as increased rates of Leukemia among children. These health problems are further exacerbated by natural disasters like hurricanes. And as the climate crisis worsens, natural disasters are only going to increase in frequency and intensity, compounding the negative impacts of petrochemical buildout. 

The only way to fully prevent plastic from flooding our planet is to stop its production. While the Save Our Seas 2.0 Act focuses solely on mopping up the mess as the floodwaters keep rising, the Break Free From Plastic Pollution Act aims to turn off the tap on plastic production.

And while its focus is on stopping plastic at its source, the Break Free From Plastic Pollution Act also includes measures to promote a more effective recycling system. It incentivizes recycling through a nationwide bottle refund program whereby any beverage containers (not just plastic ones!) that consumers turn in will give them a minimum of 10 cents back each. Many US states and 40 countries have already implemented bottle refund programs with great success. In Oregon, 90% of all plastic bottles were recycled after the implementation of their bottle buyback program, up from 64% in 2017. And to facilitate successful recycling of plastic — not just shipping it overseas — Udall and Lowenthal’s bill would also increase the required percentage of post-consumer recycled content in containers and standardize the labels for all recyclable and compostable products. 

While we still have a long way to go to cut off our reliance on plastic, the Break Free From Plastic Pollution Act is a step in the right direction and an excellent dialogue-opener for dealing with the plastic pollution problem. If the US and the world are to truly address the plastic pollution crisis, we need to encourage legislation to turn off the tap on plastic like the Break Free From Plastic Pollution Act, and defeat legislation that distracts from the root cause like the Save our Seas 2.0 Act. 

By Aaron Raubvogel, Communications Intern

Originally posted on February 11, 2020