Tonnes of invisible nanoplastics in the Wadden Sea
Pioneering research suggests the scale of invisible nanoplastics in the Wadden Sea, and points to the potential dangers for marine life.
New report should convince politicians of the need for an international plastic treaty
11 February
Plastic Soup Foundation and other environmental organisations support the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) in its call for an international binding plastic treaty. This call was made on the eve of UNEA-5.2, the meeting of the United Nations involving all UN member states. Plastic Soup Foundation will attend this summit that will start on 28 February in Nairobi.
To emphasise the need for a treaty, the WWF has commissioned the German Alfred Wegener Institute to write a report about the damaging effects of plastic pollution on ecosystems.
Not only the environmental organisations, but even the biggest polluters in the world are asking for a plastic treaty with binding clauses. But what is their call worth?
EVER MORE ANIMAL SPECIES
The report reflects the current situation of the plastic crisis. To compile its report, the Alfred Wegener Institute analysed no fewer than 2,590 scientific studies. The following are just some of its important findings.
- At least 2,144 animal species are affected by plastic pollution, and this applies to 88% of all marine species.
- Apart from swallowing and entanglement, smothering of the seabed by plastic is also detrimental.
- Clean ups in the middle of the ocean have little to no effect.
- There may be four times as much plastic in the ocean by 2050.
SUPPORT BY MULTINATIONALS FOR BINDING PLASTIC TREATY
In October 2020, the WWF and the Ellen MacArthur Foundation published a report entitled ‘The business case for a UN treaty on plastic pollution’. It sketched the advantages of a worldwide treaty for industry. All these companies in different countries have to deal with different legislations while an international treaty would introduce simple rules. A Manifesto signed by 70 multinationals and banks had previously called for a UN treaty. This manifesto is now called the ‘Pre-UNEA Statement’. What immediately stands out is that not even one producer of new virgin plastic, such as Shell, has signed it.
THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO CALLS
Both calls – that of WWF and that of the multinationals and banks – point to the importance of:
- a circular economy
- to reduce the usage of plastic
- to keep plastic out of the environment
- to design an ambitious international policy framework based on joint principles and definitions.
The big difference is that the companies mostly see the solution in recycling, while the WWF also wants a ban on applications, including certain packaging for single use and intentionally added microplastics.
Without doubt, WWF has played an important role as the driver of the statement of the international companies, but it has not succeeded in turning it into a statement that goes as far as the call that it itself is now making.
SCEPTICISM
There is a lot of scepticism about the intention behind the multinationals calling for an international plastic treaty. In its report Talking Trash, Changing Markets analysed the battery of resources that multinationals use to continue their practices while presenting themselves as sustainable. One of the examples of greenwashing is signing this type of call. The companies present themselves as part of the solution while they are actually part of the problem.
BIGGEST POLLUTERS
According to the 2021 Brand Audit, Coca-Cola, Pepsico, Unilever, Nestlé and Procter & Gamble are the five biggest plastic polluters in the world. This list was compiled on the basis of the most common brands of packaging found during beach cleans. These five have also all signed the Pre-UNEA Statement. How credible is that? What we do not hear from them are statements such as:
- we will stop single-use plastic packaging as long as these cannot be recycled safely
- we will stop producing and selling so-called nonsense plastics
- all our personal care products are guaranteed free of microplastics
- from now on we will actively promote deposit schemes and put all our efforts into reuse and refill.
The support for an international plastic treaty under the United Nations flag is large and is growing by the day. What is needed now is that the most effective measures can be imposed internationally with no escape routes to continue packaging everything in plastic.
You may also be interested in:
What are the chances of a robust international plastics treaty?
Multinationals keep the plastic soup alive through the Alliance to End Plastic Waste
New greenwashing trick by Unilever and Nestlé: plastic waste for cement kilns
More news
Read more
Mea culpa from Ocean Conservancy for its influential 2015 report. Who will be next?
Industry can no longer deny adding to the plastic soup. Apologies are now being given for a report dating from 2015
€3bn INEOS plastics project finally faces court action
ClientEarth has taken the Flemish authorities to court to block petrochemicals giant INEOS’ plastics project.
Less plastic = less dependence on fossil fuels
Level one of the gas crisis issued. To be less dependent on fossil fuels, we can also use less plastic.
