.png){kind=logo}
When I was in Kindergarten we had a box in our classroom to collect recycling. The class with the most recycling at the end of the semester would get a party. Motivated by the promise of candy and games, I went home and diligently sorted through our empty berry containers, yogurt cups, and juice bottles to bring to school.
From an early age, we are told that recycling can help clean up the planet. It is our moral obligation to the Earth to recycle. By simply sorting through our waste, we are making consumption environmentally friendly. For decades, environmental campaigns, advertisements, and schools have pushed this rhetoric onto the public, placing responsibility for the plastic crisis onto individuals rather than plastic-producing corporations.
To put it bluntly, the idea that plastic recycling is environmentally conscious is a lie. In reality, only a tiny fraction of plastic is ever recycled.
Plastics are seen as this inexplicable material that appears from nowhere and disappears into nowhere as soon as we are done using them. But this substance that appears in almost every aspect of our daily lives poses a threat from its creation.
Plastics are dependent on fossil fuels. It starts when crude oil and methane gas are extracted from the Earth, releasing greenhouse gasses and causing a host of other environmental issues. Then the oil and gas are broken down into ethylene and propylene. These chemicals are subsequently processed to produce the resins used in plastics. This process can be performed in a variety of ways to produce different plastics, indicated by the number on the recycling symbol on the plastic. Often, as the number increases, the substance becomes more difficult to recycle, with numbers 1 and 2 being the most widely accepted and recycled plastics. After processing, the plastic is distributed to the public for use, where it will eventually end up in recycling bins or landfills. At each stage of the plastic lifecycle greenhouse gasses are released: from transportation fuel to powering manufacturing and recycling centers. Even plastic in landfills slowly releases methane as it degrades.
Plastics are not just a pollution problem, but a climate one as well. Over 90% of global plastic is produced from virgin plastics made from petroleum products, which require massive amounts of greenhouse-gas-emitting energy. If plastic production continues to grow at the same rate that it has been, plastic emissions could amount to 15% of the carbon budget estimate to keep global warming below 1.5 °C, a key goal of the Paris Agreement. In the United States, between 9.5 and 10.5 million metric tons of CO2 equivalents are accredited to the extraction and transportation of plastic. Further, the long-term effects of plastic are still unknown. Scientists are investigating theories that microplastics may affect the productivity of plankton in our oceans, possibly reducing the ocean’s ability to store and sequester carbon.
Manufacturing and production capabilities dramatically increased during World War II as America transitioned to a wartime economy. After the war, these factories were converted into consumer production to fulfill Americans’ desires, which had been put on hold for wartime rationing. J. W. McCoy, a DuPont vice president, however, warned that "a satisfied people is a stagnant people." Thus, a consumer culture was born that ensured that Americans could never be satisfied. Amid the Cold War, the government along with corporations began to promote this drive for more. More goods bought meant a higher Gross Domestic Product, which allowed the U.S. to demonstrate the superiority of capitalism. Being a consumer became a key part of what it meant to be a good American. Single-use packaging became a staple in many homes and polyethylene (one of the most popular commodity plastics) started making up many products from garbage bins to bottles.
In theory, all plastic can be recycled. In practice, there are two basic problems with this assumption. First, plastic comes in many different forms and these various types do not mix well when they are melted down together. Even small amounts of different plastics can leave a whole batch useless. In the U.S. recycling normally takes the form of a single stream, taking the burden off of consumers by letting them throw all of their recycling in one place. However, sorting all these different types of plastic is expensive for recycling centers.
The second issue is that each time that plastic is recycled it degrades. With over 10,000 additives, plastics often have different combinations. When the plastics are melted together it often results in unpredictable and substandard additive concoctions. Additionally, each time a plastic is recycled the long polymer chains become shorter. This has led to the term “downcycling.”
However, new plastic– made from oil– is cheap and oftentimes better quality than its “downcycled” counterparts. In short, it is not economically feasible to collect and reuse plastic.
In fact, less than 10% of plastic ever made has been recycled. As of 2022 the amount of plastic turned into something new dropped to 5%. Further, a 2022 Greenpeace report found that none of the plastic packaging in the U.S. qualifies as recyclable according to the standards set by the Ellen MacArthur Foundation’s New Plastic Economy (EMF NPE) Initiative. According to these standards, items must have recycling rates (the proportion of materials recycled out of the total waste generated) of 30% to be classified as recyclable. However, two of the most commonly considered recyclable plastics in the U.S.—PET #1 and HDPE #2—do not meet this threshold, with recycling rates of only 20.9% and 10.3%, respectively. All other types of plastic perform even worse, with reprocessing rates below 5%.
For the oil and gas industry, this is not a new discovery.
Beginning in the 1990s plastic industry giants like Exxon, Chevron, Dow, and DuPont, along with their lobbying organizations released massive recycling campaigns. They spent millions of dollars to tell the public that plastic is valuable and that it is consumers’ responsibility to recycle it. Yet, documents as far back as the 1970s show that the industry knew the truth that recycling was neither economically nor chemically practical. Still, they invested heavily in marketing that promoted plastic recycling though most plastic ended up being burned or in oceans.
By the late 1980s, the public grew upset about the amount of plastic in landfills. So, in 1989 oil and plastic executives launched a campaign in almost 40 states to get the international recycling symbol– the now instantly recognizable arrow triangle– on all plastic. This made plastic look recyclable, which lulled consumers into the illusion that their purchases were not polluting landfills. Still, recycling could not be economically justified and the recycling symbol became a green marketing tool to manipulate consumers into continuing to use plastic.
Currently, plastic generates $400 billion per year for the oil industry. As truck and car demands decline, corporations are increasingly looking towards plastics for future revenue.
The answer is complicated. There are definitely ways to recycle more sustainably. But, fixing our climate crisis requires a much larger scale systematic change in the way that we produce, consume and discard things. Plastics are not really recyclable and they release massive amounts of greenhouse gasses throughout their lifecycle. The best way to help the plastic climate crisis is to stop the plastic tap.
Our society places major emphasis on innovation and the creation of new technologies and products rather than on repair and maintenance. This has led to a throwaway culture that is dependent on single-use plastics. There is increasingly more discourse around the idea of circular economies. A circular economy can be defined as “an economic system that is based on business models which replace the ‘end-of-life’ concept with reducing, alternatively reusing, recycling and recovering materials in production/distribution and consumption processes.” Repairs can be performed by a variety of entities whether that be licensed repairers, community organizations, or independent people. The thought is that by changing tendencies to focus on repair rather than consumption, we can reduce the amount of plastic and other materials being produced and put into the environment. This will require large cultural and political change, most likely slow-moving.
There is good news though. Governments have started to make changes towards reuse and reduction. The European Union has already drafted plans to ban disposable mini-shampoo bottles and plastic cups to reduce waste. In 2021, The city of Denver, Colorado ordered all retail stores to charge $0.10 for disposable bags, a trend occurring in cities nationwide.
The plastic crisis may seem daunting, but there are ways you can make a difference. Reduce your plastic consumption by using reusable water bottles and shopping bags. If you can manage, skip Coca-Cola and Pepsi products, as these two corporations are some of the world’s top plastic polluters. Additionally, sign petitions that call for corporations and governments to take steps to reduce plastic waste. Plastic Pollution Coalition has multiple petitions that take minutes to sign! You can also vote in local and national elections.
Identifying where you use pollutants– including plastic– in your own life is the first step to reducing your ecological footprint. At Aclymate, our Business Emissions Calculator allows firms to calculate their carbon footprint from waste, using factors like recycling, landfill, and composting. You can also use our myaclymate quiz to calculate your individual carbon footprint.
Our mission is to empower everyone to act for humanity’s best climate future. Systemic changes to consumer culture start at the grassroots. Through the avoidance of plastic in our everyday lives, we can translate those actions into broader socio-cultural shifts for a more sustainable world.