Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

Does the plastics industry support waste pickers? It’s complicated.

News Feed
Tuesday, July 30, 2024

Around the world, an estimated 20 million people make a living by collecting discarded plastic, aluminum, and other refuse from dumpsites and landfills and selling it to recyclers. They’re called “waste pickers,” and though their work is essential — they round up nearly 60 percent of all the postconsumer plastic waste that gets collected for recycling — it is often unacknowledged, unremunerated, and underappreciated. Change may be on the horizon, however, due to a 2022 agreement from United Nations member states to draft a legally binding treaty by 2025 to “end plastic pollution.” Thanks to advocacy from a small group of waste pickers, the treaty mandate recognized “the significant contribution made by workers in informal and cooperative settings,” using a euphemism often understood to refer to waste pickers. It recommended that, over the next two years of scheduled negotiations, delegates consider “lessons learned and best practices” from these informal and cooperative settings. Now, four negotiating sessions later, the global plastics treaty has given waste pickers an unprecedented boost in visibility. The most recent draft of the agreement refers to waste pickers explicitly — albeit in brackets indicating the need for further discussion — and virtually every stakeholder involved has something to say about their importance in waste management and in shaping the treaty. Read Next How waste pickers are fighting for recognition in the UN global plastics treaty Erin X. Wong “We’ve been unusually successful in these negotiations in highlighting the importance of waste pickers,” said Taylor Cass Talbott, advocacy coordinator for the International Alliance of Waste Pickers, or IAWP, a group that promotes the interests of nearly half a million waste pickers across 34 countries. “If this language sticks,” she added, “this is pretty historic, not just for waste pickers but for the representation of labor within a multilateral environmental agreement.” Perhaps counterintuitively, those offering statements of support include the plastic companies and industry groups whose plastic trash gets cleaned up by waste pickers. In a document submitted to the U.N. Environment Programme before the treaty’s third negotiating session last year, the American Chemistry Council — the United States’ main petrochemical industry trade group — said the agreement should “uplift developing economies and the informal sector.” Likewise, the International Council of Chemical Associations and the American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers said in separate submissions that they also support the inclusion of the “informal sector” that waste pickers represent. Consumer-facing food and beverage companies have made similar but more specific statements, sometimes elaborating on how the treaty should advance waste pickers’ interests. These include better labor protections and living wages, as well as formal integration into government waste collection schemes. Waste pickers are also calling for a seat at the table as governments build out or redesign their waste-management systems. They fear that more formalized waste management could cut off their access to dumpsites and landfills and, thus, compensation. Waste pickers call for respect during a protest outside of a dump site in Nakuru, Kenya. James Wakibia / SOPA Images / LightRocket via Getty Images In some ways, the recently heightened recognition represents a success for waste pickers, who, through the IAWP, have systematically sought to elevate their profile throughout the treaty negotiations. That transnational plastic manufacturers and product companies feel compelled to at least allude to them in policy documents could be construed as evidence of the IAWP’s growing power and influence. Still, observers to the treaty negotiations are concerned that all of the talk won’t translate to action. “There is always the question: Is this strategic, or are we just giving them the opportunity to twist our demands?” said Andrea Lema, the global waste picker support coordinator for the nonprofit Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives. She and others worry that the private sector is taking advantage of waste pickers, disingenuously expressing concern for them in order to appear more virtuous than they really are and boost their reputations in the minds of consumers. Soledad Mella, president of Chile’s main waste picker collective, has attended all four of the plastic treaty negotiating sessions so far, and has experienced this tension firsthand. She said she’s wary of corporate greenwashing from companies for whom waste pickers have long provided a free cleanup service. But at the same time, these companies should be concerned about waste pickers, and some of them — mostly the consumer-facing brands that sell plastic products — have genuinely helped to amplify waste pickers’ demands through their own PR efforts and submissions to the U.N. Coca-Cola, for example, has been listed as the number one plastic polluter for six years in a row, based on crowdsourced data from public litter cleanups. But Coke representatives have spoken alongside waste pickers at negotiating session side events, and together with Nestlé, PepsiCo, and Unilever, the company has launched an initiative to extend the U.N. Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights to the informal waste sector. Whether such initiatives will translate to real change for waste pickers is an open question. But the IAWP considers it important to be in conversation with these companies, given the strong hand they could have in redesigning waste-management systems through extended producer responsibility laws known as EPR. These laws, broadly supported by treaty negotiators, seek to make companies financially responsible for the waste they produce. Under some scenarios, this could involve providing compensation and other support for waste pickers. “Companies have a role to play using their leverage to ensure we are being compensated and included in EPR planning and implementation,” said Johnson Doe, founder of the Green Waste Pickers Cooperative in Ghana. His work involves going door-to-door throughout the capital city of Accra to pick up people’s recyclable waste. Others in his organization make daily trips to a landfill in Accra to scavenge, sort, and sell recyclable materials. Involvement in new or improved EPR systems is part of Doe and the IAWP’s principal demand for a “just transition” for waste pickers, a deliberately broad term for policies that recognize and protect waste pickers’ rights as the waste-management sector develops. Crucially, this includes formally integrating waste pickers into government waste-management systems — officially hiring them to provide some of the waste collection services they have already been offering for years. Being on a city, county, or state payroll could deliver such benefits as job security, living wages, health care, and worker protections.  Members of the Green Waste Pickers Cooperative Society in Ghana. Courtesy of Johnson Doe Other just-transition policies might involve formalizing waste picker-led programs to repair broken products or deliver reusable containers to people’s homes, which have the added benefit of reducing the need for new plastic production. Carsten Wachholz, of the Business Coalition for a Global Plastics Treaty — a consortium of more than 200 food and beverage companies, retailers, plastic producers, and other enterprises — said his organization began engaging with the IAWP at their request, and that the two groups agreed to consult each other when developing policy recommendations and position papers. He said he didn’t want to speculate on the intentions of individual companies to support waste pickers, or whether their treaty engagement will translate to tangible improvements for waste pickers. “This will very much depend on how countries will implement their obligations under a future treaty,” he told Grist, “and if dedicated support for ensuring a just transition can be mobilized.”  Charlene Collison, secretariat of the Fair Circularity Initiative — the business and human rights endeavor that Coca-Cola helped launch — said she could not speak on behalf of individual companies but that the initiative’s members have broadly agreed to improve waste and recycling value chains “in robust consultation with stakeholders,” including waste pickers. Earlier this year, the organization published a report offering governments and companies a methodology for determining a baseline living income for waste pickers. A Coca-Cola spokesperson did not directly respond to questions about greenwashing but pointed to its participation in the Fair Circularity Initiative, the Business Coalition for a Global Plastics Treaty, and the Responsible Sourcing Initiative, an effort to “improve livelihoods” of waste pickers through research and investment. While Doe said that he and the IAWP are prepared to work with consumer goods companies and hold them accountable for the pledges they make, companies higher up the plastics value chain — the petrochemical producers and trade groups that say they want to “uplift” waste pickers — are another matter. “They are a lost cause,” he told Grist, describing a fundamental mismatch between the industry’s objectives and those of waste pickers. For example, the petrochemical industry does not support limits on plastic production — in part, according to one waste picker Grist spoke with, out of an insincere concern that making less plastic would deprive waste pickers of their livelihoods. Waste pickers say they have plenty of plastic trash to collect already; even if they ran out, it would be easy to switch to other materials like aluminum cans or cardboard.  Read Next One way a plastics treaty could help the Global South: Fund waste management Saqib Rahim The petrochemical industry also opposes additional restrictions on hazardous chemicals used in plastics, an important priority for waste pickers since they are chronically exposed to these chemicals through their work. Mella, the waste picker from Chile, said the idea that petrochemical companies support waste pickers is “laughable.”  “It’s super nice and super interesting for them to say, ‘We the petrochemical industry are very concerned about what’s going to happen to waste pickers,’” she told Grist in Spanish. But those statements are “obsolete” when considered alongside the industry’s plans to dramatically ramp up plastic production and its promises to deal with the resulting waste through unproven technologies like so-called “chemical recycling,” a suite of technologies that the industry says can melt down plastics and turn them into new products in an endless loop. Investigations from Reuters, Beyond Plastics, the Natural Resources Defense Council, the Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives, and others have shown that, of the handful of chemical recycling facilities in the U.S., none operate at full capacity and most turn plastic into chemicals or fuel to be burned. To Mella’s knowledge, no petrochemical industry group has reached out to the IAWP to develop policy positions that would benefit waste pickers. Mella said the industry’s discourse is mostly about boosting business. It “has nothing to do with waste pickers’ social, economic, and cultural reality,” she told Grist. “There is zero chance of us ever aligning our position with that of the petrochemical industry.” In response to Grist’s request for comment, Matthew Kastner, a spokesperson for the International Council of Chemical Associations, or ICCA, said that his organization is advocating for measures that would support waste pickers, such as design principles to make plastics more easily recyclable, recycling targets that could drive up demand for waste pickers’ work, and chemical recycling — which he said could lead to more types of used plastic having greater value in the future. “Altogether, there is a potential to increase the value and volume of plastics that waste pickers can profit from, and ICCA hopes to be able to collaborate with waste pickers in a responsible and mutually beneficial manner,” Kastner told Grist. He listed a handful of initiatives around the world where industry groups are engaging with local waste picker organizations, including one to integrate waste pickers into South Africa’s formal waste-management system and another to provide $230,000 to “boost recycling cooperatives and promote a humanized circular economy in Brazil.” Plastics Europe, a trade group representing the continent’s petrochemical manufacturers, told Grist: “We indeed recognize this complex situation and urge continued discussion involving all relevant actors as the treaty process continues,” and declined to comment further. American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers did not respond to Grist’s requests for comment. According to Lema, with the Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives, one reason companies have been so quick to latch onto waste pickers is because they represent a more human side of the plastics issue. “When you’re talking about waste pickers, you’re talking about the lives of the people behind the treaty,” she said.  To be sure, it’s not just the private sector that waste pickers have to worry about. Although the waste pickers and advocates Grist spoke with voiced concerns about industry invoking their name and demands, there have also been tensions with nongovernmental organizations. Mella said she’s seen “real alignment” with environmental groups, but only about half of them are incorporating the IAWP’s demands about a just transition for waste pickers into their policy positions. The rest are more single-mindedly focused on limiting global plastic production. Cass Talbott, with the IAWP, said she’s most concerned with the positions of member states, since these are the stakeholders who will be directly responsible for determining what makes it into the final treaty text. She said she’d like to see greater specificity from any group that alludes to waste pickers as part of the treaty negotiations, and, where appropriate, for stakeholders to get in direct contact with the IAWP if they intend to invoke the rights and interests of waste pickers. “We are willing to be at the table — we don’t want to be appropriated,” she told Grist.  A 48-page policy document from the IAWP lists dozens of ways that waste pickers’ rights and interests have already been honored in jurisdictions around the world — for example, in Belo Horizonte, Brazil, where waste pickers’ role in waste management was recognized in the municipal constitution passed in the 1990s, and in Portland, Oregon, where an organization called Ground Source Association has secured contracts with city, county, and regional authorities to allow the formal employment of nearly 50 waste pickers.   Enshrining similar victories at the global level will require more than just words of support. Cass Talbott said one of the IAWP’s main priorities at the next and final round of treaty negotiations this November will be to ensure that an article on a just transition makes it into the final draft. “There’s been some greater will among governments to support the just-transition article and measures throughout the treaty,” she said, “and other stakeholders have to show up for it at this point.” This story was originally published by Grist with the headline Does the plastics industry support waste pickers? It’s complicated. on Jul 30, 2024.

The people who clean up the world's trash say some companies' statements of support are little more than lip service.

Around the world, an estimated 20 million people make a living by collecting discarded plastic, aluminum, and other refuse from dumpsites and landfills and selling it to recyclers. They’re called “waste pickers,” and though their work is essential — they round up nearly 60 percent of all the postconsumer plastic waste that gets collected for recycling — it is often unacknowledged, unremunerated, and underappreciated.

Change may be on the horizon, however, due to a 2022 agreement from United Nations member states to draft a legally binding treaty by 2025 to “end plastic pollution.” Thanks to advocacy from a small group of waste pickers, the treaty mandate recognized “the significant contribution made by workers in informal and cooperative settings,” using a euphemism often understood to refer to waste pickers. It recommended that, over the next two years of scheduled negotiations, delegates consider “lessons learned and best practices” from these informal and cooperative settings.

Now, four negotiating sessions later, the global plastics treaty has given waste pickers an unprecedented boost in visibility. The most recent draft of the agreement refers to waste pickers explicitly — albeit in brackets indicating the need for further discussion — and virtually every stakeholder involved has something to say about their importance in waste management and in shaping the treaty.

“We’ve been unusually successful in these negotiations in highlighting the importance of waste pickers,” said Taylor Cass Talbott, advocacy coordinator for the International Alliance of Waste Pickers, or IAWP, a group that promotes the interests of nearly half a million waste pickers across 34 countries. “If this language sticks,” she added, “this is pretty historic, not just for waste pickers but for the representation of labor within a multilateral environmental agreement.”

Perhaps counterintuitively, those offering statements of support include the plastic companies and industry groups whose plastic trash gets cleaned up by waste pickers. In a document submitted to the U.N. Environment Programme before the treaty’s third negotiating session last year, the American Chemistry Council — the United States’ main petrochemical industry trade group — said the agreement should “uplift developing economies and the informal sector.” Likewise, the International Council of Chemical Associations and the American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers said in separate submissions that they also support the inclusion of the “informal sector” that waste pickers represent.

Consumer-facing food and beverage companies have made similar but more specific statements, sometimes elaborating on how the treaty should advance waste pickers’ interests. These include better labor protections and living wages, as well as formal integration into government waste collection schemes.

Waste pickers are also calling for a seat at the table as governments build out or redesign their waste-management systems. They fear that more formalized waste management could cut off their access to dumpsites and landfills and, thus, compensation.

Two waste pickers in the foreground hold a sign reading, "Respect waste pickers." They stand in front of a fence, and smoke billows in the background.
Waste pickers call for respect during a protest outside of a dump site in Nakuru, Kenya. James Wakibia / SOPA Images / LightRocket via Getty Images

In some ways, the recently heightened recognition represents a success for waste pickers, who, through the IAWP, have systematically sought to elevate their profile throughout the treaty negotiations. That transnational plastic manufacturers and product companies feel compelled to at least allude to them in policy documents could be construed as evidence of the IAWP’s growing power and influence.

Still, observers to the treaty negotiations are concerned that all of the talk won’t translate to action. “There is always the question: Is this strategic, or are we just giving them the opportunity to twist our demands?” said Andrea Lema, the global waste picker support coordinator for the nonprofit Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives. She and others worry that the private sector is taking advantage of waste pickers, disingenuously expressing concern for them in order to appear more virtuous than they really are and boost their reputations in the minds of consumers.

Soledad Mella, president of Chile’s main waste picker collective, has attended all four of the plastic treaty negotiating sessions so far, and has experienced this tension firsthand. She said she’s wary of corporate greenwashing from companies for whom waste pickers have long provided a free cleanup service. But at the same time, these companies should be concerned about waste pickers, and some of them — mostly the consumer-facing brands that sell plastic products — have genuinely helped to amplify waste pickers’ demands through their own PR efforts and submissions to the U.N.

Coca-Cola, for example, has been listed as the number one plastic polluter for six years in a row, based on crowdsourced data from public litter cleanups. But Coke representatives have spoken alongside waste pickers at negotiating session side events, and together with Nestlé, PepsiCo, and Unilever, the company has launched an initiative to extend the U.N. Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights to the informal waste sector.

Whether such initiatives will translate to real change for waste pickers is an open question. But the IAWP considers it important to be in conversation with these companies, given the strong hand they could have in redesigning waste-management systems through extended producer responsibility laws known as EPR. These laws, broadly supported by treaty negotiators, seek to make companies financially responsible for the waste they produce. Under some scenarios, this could involve providing compensation and other support for waste pickers.

“Companies have a role to play using their leverage to ensure we are being compensated and included in EPR planning and implementation,” said Johnson Doe, founder of the Green Waste Pickers Cooperative in Ghana. His work involves going door-to-door throughout the capital city of Accra to pick up people’s recyclable waste. Others in his organization make daily trips to a landfill in Accra to scavenge, sort, and sell recyclable materials.

Involvement in new or improved EPR systems is part of Doe and the IAWP’s principal demand for a “just transition” for waste pickers, a deliberately broad term for policies that recognize and protect waste pickers’ rights as the waste-management sector develops. Crucially, this includes formally integrating waste pickers into government waste-management systems — officially hiring them to provide some of the waste collection services they have already been offering for years. Being on a city, county, or state payroll could deliver such benefits as job security, living wages, health care, and worker protections. 

A group of people poses in front of a banner reading, "Green Waste Pickers Cooperative Society, Limited."
Members of the Green Waste Pickers Cooperative Society in Ghana. Courtesy of Johnson Doe

Other just-transition policies might involve formalizing waste picker-led programs to repair broken products or deliver reusable containers to people’s homes, which have the added benefit of reducing the need for new plastic production.

Carsten Wachholz, of the Business Coalition for a Global Plastics Treaty — a consortium of more than 200 food and beverage companies, retailers, plastic producers, and other enterprises — said his organization began engaging with the IAWP at their request, and that the two groups agreed to consult each other when developing policy recommendations and position papers. He said he didn’t want to speculate on the intentions of individual companies to support waste pickers, or whether their treaty engagement will translate to tangible improvements for waste pickers. “This will very much depend on how countries will implement their obligations under a future treaty,” he told Grist, “and if dedicated support for ensuring a just transition can be mobilized.” 

Charlene Collison, secretariat of the Fair Circularity Initiative — the business and human rights endeavor that Coca-Cola helped launch — said she could not speak on behalf of individual companies but that the initiative’s members have broadly agreed to improve waste and recycling value chains “in robust consultation with stakeholders,” including waste pickers. Earlier this year, the organization published a report offering governments and companies a methodology for determining a baseline living income for waste pickers.

A Coca-Cola spokesperson did not directly respond to questions about greenwashing but pointed to its participation in the Fair Circularity Initiative, the Business Coalition for a Global Plastics Treaty, and the Responsible Sourcing Initiative, an effort to “improve livelihoods” of waste pickers through research and investment.


While Doe said that he and the IAWP are prepared to work with consumer goods companies and hold them accountable for the pledges they make, companies higher up the plastics value chain — the petrochemical producers and trade groups that say they want to “uplift” waste pickers — are another matter.

“They are a lost cause,” he told Grist, describing a fundamental mismatch between the industry’s objectives and those of waste pickers. For example, the petrochemical industry does not support limits on plastic production — in part, according to one waste picker Grist spoke with, out of an insincere concern that making less plastic would deprive waste pickers of their livelihoods. Waste pickers say they have plenty of plastic trash to collect already; even if they ran out, it would be easy to switch to other materials like aluminum cans or cardboard. 

The petrochemical industry also opposes additional restrictions on hazardous chemicals used in plastics, an important priority for waste pickers since they are chronically exposed to these chemicals through their work.

Mella, the waste picker from Chile, said the idea that petrochemical companies support waste pickers is “laughable.” 

“It’s super nice and super interesting for them to say, ‘We the petrochemical industry are very concerned about what’s going to happen to waste pickers,’” she told Grist in Spanish. But those statements are “obsolete” when considered alongside the industry’s plans to dramatically ramp up plastic production and its promises to deal with the resulting waste through unproven technologies like so-called “chemical recycling,” a suite of technologies that the industry says can melt down plastics and turn them into new products in an endless loop. Investigations from Reuters, Beyond Plastics, the Natural Resources Defense Council, the Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives, and others have shown that, of the handful of chemical recycling facilities in the U.S., none operate at full capacity and most turn plastic into chemicals or fuel to be burned.

To Mella’s knowledge, no petrochemical industry group has reached out to the IAWP to develop policy positions that would benefit waste pickers. Mella said the industry’s discourse is mostly about boosting business. It “has nothing to do with waste pickers’ social, economic, and cultural reality,” she told Grist. “There is zero chance of us ever aligning our position with that of the petrochemical industry.”

In response to Grist’s request for comment, Matthew Kastner, a spokesperson for the International Council of Chemical Associations, or ICCA, said that his organization is advocating for measures that would support waste pickers, such as design principles to make plastics more easily recyclable, recycling targets that could drive up demand for waste pickers’ work, and chemical recycling — which he said could lead to more types of used plastic having greater value in the future.

“Altogether, there is a potential to increase the value and volume of plastics that waste pickers can profit from, and ICCA hopes to be able to collaborate with waste pickers in a responsible and mutually beneficial manner,” Kastner told Grist. He listed a handful of initiatives around the world where industry groups are engaging with local waste picker organizations, including one to integrate waste pickers into South Africa’s formal waste-management system and another to provide $230,000 to “boost recycling cooperatives and promote a humanized circular economy in Brazil.”

Plastics Europe, a trade group representing the continent’s petrochemical manufacturers, told Grist: “We indeed recognize this complex situation and urge continued discussion involving all relevant actors as the treaty process continues,” and declined to comment further. American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers did not respond to Grist’s requests for comment.

According to Lema, with the Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives, one reason companies have been so quick to latch onto waste pickers is because they represent a more human side of the plastics issue. “When you’re talking about waste pickers, you’re talking about the lives of the people behind the treaty,” she said. 


To be sure, it’s not just the private sector that waste pickers have to worry about. Although the waste pickers and advocates Grist spoke with voiced concerns about industry invoking their name and demands, there have also been tensions with nongovernmental organizations. Mella said she’s seen “real alignment” with environmental groups, but only about half of them are incorporating the IAWP’s demands about a just transition for waste pickers into their policy positions. The rest are more single-mindedly focused on limiting global plastic production.

Cass Talbott, with the IAWP, said she’s most concerned with the positions of member states, since these are the stakeholders who will be directly responsible for determining what makes it into the final treaty text. She said she’d like to see greater specificity from any group that alludes to waste pickers as part of the treaty negotiations, and, where appropriate, for stakeholders to get in direct contact with the IAWP if they intend to invoke the rights and interests of waste pickers.

“We are willing to be at the table — we don’t want to be appropriated,” she told Grist. 

A 48-page policy document from the IAWP lists dozens of ways that waste pickers’ rights and interests have already been honored in jurisdictions around the world — for example, in Belo Horizonte, Brazil, where waste pickers’ role in waste management was recognized in the municipal constitution passed in the 1990s, and in Portland, Oregon, where an organization called Ground Source Association has secured contracts with city, county, and regional authorities to allow the formal employment of nearly 50 waste pickers.  

Enshrining similar victories at the global level will require more than just words of support. Cass Talbott said one of the IAWP’s main priorities at the next and final round of treaty negotiations this November will be to ensure that an article on a just transition makes it into the final draft.

“There’s been some greater will among governments to support the just-transition article and measures throughout the treaty,” she said, “and other stakeholders have to show up for it at this point.”

This story was originally published by Grist with the headline Does the plastics industry support waste pickers? It’s complicated. on Jul 30, 2024.

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

Humans Pollute the Environment With 57 Million Tons of Plastic Each Year, Study Suggests

Scientists used A.I. to model local waste management in 50,000 municipalities worldwide and say the results suggest a need to improve access to waste collection systems

Plastic pollution in Madagascar Mouenthias via Wikimedia Commons under CC BY-SA 4.0 If you organized the plastic pollution that entered the environment in 2020 in a line, it could circle the Earth more than 1,500 times. Simply dumped into a pile, the refuse would fill up New York City’s Central Park in a layer as high as the Empire State Building. Put another way, that’s about 57 million tons (52 million metric tons) of plastic waste that was not properly disposed of—and pieces of it could now be floating in the ocean, sitting at the top of a mountain or even infiltrating your bloodstream. In a new study published in the journal Nature on Wednesday, scientists tallied these numbers, creating the first-ever global plastics pollution inventory. “It hasn’t been done before,” study co-author Costas Velis, an expert in resource efficiency systems at the University of Leeds in England, tells New Scientist’s Madeleine Cuff. Researchers used artificial intelligence to model waste management in more than 50,000 municipalities around the world and predict the total amount of plastic that enters the environment. The plastic pollution measured in the study represents just one-fifth of the global total of plastic waste. But the results, the authors argue, demonstrate how improving access to waste collection services across the world can reduce the scale of the problem. “Uncollected waste is the biggest source of plastic pollution, with at least 1.2 billion people living without waste collection services forced to ‘self-manage’ waste, often by dumping it on land, in rivers, or burning it in open fires,” Josh Cottom, lead author of the study and a research fellow in plastics pollution at the University of Leeds, says in a statement. This “self-managed” plastic waste makes up more than two-thirds of the modeled plastic pollution, per the statement. Plastic burning has become a substantial problem, with 30 million tons of plastic burned in 2020 without environmental oversight—an uncontrolled process that can release carcinogens, particulate pollution and heavy metals that have severe consequences for human health, alongside greenhouse gas emissions. The study also calculated the largest contributors to plastic pollution in the world: India is in first place, producing 10.2 million tons a year; Nigeria is in second; Indonesia is in third; and China—which had been ranked in first place according to other models—instead comes in fourth. The U.S. ranks 90th, with more than 52,500 tons of plastic pollution produced annually. In the words of Interesting Engineering’s Sujita Sinha, the findings outline a “trash apocalypse.” The ranking highlights a large gap in plastic pollution between the Global North and Global South. Even though low- and middle-income countries produce less plastic waste in total, a larger portion of it is disposed of improperly, which overall becomes a greater source of plastic pollution. Even low-income countries with limited plastic pollution are considered hotspots when scientists analyze their plastic pollution per capita. Higher-income countries, on the other hand, produce more plastic waste but have more efficient waste disposal systems, so less of it turns into pollution. However, “we shouldn’t put the blame, any blame, on the Global South,” Velis tells Associated Press’ Seth Borenstein. “And we shouldn’t praise ourselves about what we do in the Global North in any way.” He adds that people’s ability to dispose of waste properly depends on their government’s power to provide the necessary services. Therese Karlsson, science and technical advisor to International Pollutants Elimination Network, tells the Associated Press that the study doesn’t focus enough on the plastic waste trade through which wealthy countries send their waste to poorer ones. While the study says this trend is decreasing, Karlsson, who was not involved in the paper, disagrees on the basis that overall waste trade is increasing, which she adds is likely an indicator for an increase in plastic waste trade as well. Now, the scientists are calling for waste collection to be seen as a basic necessity ahead of negotiations on a global plastic waste treaty planned for November in South Korea. The study also nearly coincides with Plastic Overshoot Day, which was projected for September 5—the day of the year where the Earth’s plastic waste production surpasses our waste management systems’ capacity to process it. Get the latest stories in your inbox every weekday.

A fifth of the world's plastic garbage is either burned or littered

Patchy garbage collection services result in more than 50 million tonnes of unmanaged plastic waste each year, and the majority of this is incinerated

More than half of uncollected plastic garbage is burnedTim Gainey/Alamy Around 1.5 billion people around the world do not have access to garbage collection services, and how they dispose of their plastic waste has become a serious environmental problem. Most of these households resort to burning their plastic waste or dumping it in the environment, according to a new analysis, which argues comprehensive collection services are the only way to make a dent in global plastic pollution. Costas Velis at the University of Leeds, UK, and his colleagues used waste data from local governments, as well as census data, to model the flow of plastic waste in city regions around the world. An AI algorithm was then trained on this data to predict how waste is generated and dealt with for more than 50,000 city regions globally. This bottom-up approach provides an “unprecedented” look at how plastic waste is treated and why it becomes pollution in different countries, says Velis. “It hasn’t been done before,” he says. Velis’s team estimates that 52.1 million tonnes of plastic waste, a fifth of the global total, becomes pollution every year, mostly generated in poorer countries where garbage collections are unreliable or non-existent. Instead of being dealt with properly, most of this plastic waste is incinerated in homes, on streets or in small dumps, without any environmental controls. Around 57 per cent of uncollected plastic garbage is dealt with in this way, the researchers estimate, with the remaining 43 per cent left to litter the environment. Burning plastic not only produces greenhouse gases, but also releases cancer-causing dioxins, particulate pollution and heavy metals, all of which are damaging to human health. In general, low-income countries produce much less plastic waste per person, but much more of that waste ends up polluting the environment. In higher-income countries, by comparison, the vast majority of waste is collected and processed, with littering the largest cause of plastic pollution. The findings underscore the need for low-income countries to receive support to establish comprehensive waste collections for all citizens, says Velis. India, Nigeria and Indonesia were flagged as the countries with the highest plastic pollution rates. The research comes ahead of talks set to take place in November in Busan, South Korea, where countries will consider adopting the world’s first plastic waste treaty. Velis is calling for the treaty to contain measures requiring countries to steadily increase the proportion of their waste handled by proper facilities, with high-income countries providing greater funding assistance. “The absence of waste collection is the biggest contributor to the [plastic pollution] problem,” he says.

SpaceX violated environmental wastewater rules at Starbase facility, officials say

Both Texas and federal officials have reportedly found that SpaceX violated environmental regulations discharging wastewater at its Starbase facility. SpaceX responded to the reports, saying that state and federal regulators gave it permission to continue operating its deluge system while it worked toward getting the appropriate permits. The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) had not confirmed waiving the permit requirements as of press time. The latest development in SpaceX’s long-running struggle with environmental regulations at its Boca Chica launch site was first reported by CNBC. SpaceX purchased land on the Gulf of Mexico in 2014 and has developed it to host the development and launch of Starship, its next generation rocket.  Why wastewater matters SpaceX won approval from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for regular launches from the site in 2023—so long as the company met standards set out by various agencies, including rules designed to limit the environmental impact of launches.  After Starship’s first test flight in April 2023 damaged the launch pad, SpaceX built a deluge system that dampens the energy from Starship’s 33 Raptor engines, releasing 422,000 gallons of water per flight, much of which is immediately vaporized. Monday’s news suggests more delays ahead as the company seeks to win approval not just for its next launch, which was expected as soon as September, but also for a higher launch cadence. Yesterday, the FAA suddenly postponed a series of public meetings to discuss increasing launches and landings at Boca Chica. “The FAA is seeking additional information from SpaceX before rescheduling the public meetings,” the agency told Payload in a statement. SpaceX says The company posted a statement on social media that stressed the company’s efforts to comply with environmental rules, including only using clean water in the system. However, SpaceX filings say ablation of its launch structure can contaminate the water, and a Texas ecologist told CNBC that mercury measurements by the company concerned him. SpaceX submitted its request for an individual permit to the TCEQ on July 1, about a year after installing the deluge system.  This story originally appeared on Payload and is republished here with permission.

Both Texas and federal officials have reportedly found that SpaceX violated environmental regulations discharging wastewater at its Starbase facility. SpaceX responded to the reports, saying that state and federal regulators gave it permission to continue operating its deluge system while it worked toward getting the appropriate permits. The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) had not confirmed waiving the permit requirements as of press time. The latest development in SpaceX’s long-running struggle with environmental regulations at its Boca Chica launch site was first reported by CNBC. SpaceX purchased land on the Gulf of Mexico in 2014 and has developed it to host the development and launch of Starship, its next generation rocket.  Why wastewater matters SpaceX won approval from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for regular launches from the site in 2023—so long as the company met standards set out by various agencies, including rules designed to limit the environmental impact of launches.  After Starship’s first test flight in April 2023 damaged the launch pad, SpaceX built a deluge system that dampens the energy from Starship’s 33 Raptor engines, releasing 422,000 gallons of water per flight, much of which is immediately vaporized. Monday’s news suggests more delays ahead as the company seeks to win approval not just for its next launch, which was expected as soon as September, but also for a higher launch cadence. Yesterday, the FAA suddenly postponed a series of public meetings to discuss increasing launches and landings at Boca Chica. “The FAA is seeking additional information from SpaceX before rescheduling the public meetings,” the agency told Payload in a statement. SpaceX says The company posted a statement on social media that stressed the company’s efforts to comply with environmental rules, including only using clean water in the system. However, SpaceX filings say ablation of its launch structure can contaminate the water, and a Texas ecologist told CNBC that mercury measurements by the company concerned him. SpaceX submitted its request for an individual permit to the TCEQ on July 1, about a year after installing the deluge system.  This story originally appeared on Payload and is republished here with permission.

Rising Waters From Tropical Storm Debby Put North Carolina Waste Sites at Risk

Tropical Storm Debby brought intense rainfall and flooding threats to North Carolina on Thursday, highlighting the vulnerability of hog lagoons and wastewater treatment plants.

While rain pelted North Carolina and raised the threat of flooding across the state, officials were monitoring almost 70 dams and lagoons holding animal waste that had overflowed or were at risk of failing on Thursday, a number that more than doubled between the morning and the afternoon.At least 17 animal feeding operations were included in the monitoring. At least three had taken on enough water from Tropical Storm Debby to raise the waste within the lagoons to higher levels than permitted, although they were not necessarily overflowing, according to a North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality tracking website.Most of these animal operations are large-scale hog lagoons that mix the urine, feces and other waste from swine with water and anaerobic bacteria. The resulting slurry is stored in open-air pits that turn bright pink as the bacteria digest the sludge to reduce the odor.The pollution enters waterways when open pits overflow or when the earthen walls of a pit fail. Hog waste that has been sprayed on nearby fields can flow downstream if the fields are oversaturated, although spraying is not allowed when it’s raining. Dead animals, killed in the flooding, can also pollute waterways.North Carolina has issued permits to more than 2,500 animal facilities, the majority of which raise pigs. North Carolina is the nation’s third largest hog producer, and in 2023, the state’s Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services counted eight million swine on farms across the state.During Hurricane Florence in 2018, at least 110 lagoons released pig waste or were at imminent risk of doing so.Subscribe to The Times to read as many articles as you like.

NSW waste industry faces crackdown on recycled soil after asbestos found in more than half facilities tested

Exclusive: Watchdog says it ordered disposal of more than 600 tonnes of soil fill, fined three facilities and is considering ‘significant changes’ to rules following Guardian investigationFollow our Australia news live blog for latest updatesGet our morning and afternoon news emails, free app or daily news podcastThe New South Wales environment watchdog has vowed to crack down on the waste industry after new tests found asbestos at seven of 13 facilities producing or handling cheap landscaping products.A 15-month Guardian Australia investigation revealed earlier this year that the Environment Protection Authority (EPA) had failed to act after compliance campaigns in 2013 and 2019 found potentially contaminated products had been distributed across the state – including at childcare centres, schools, residential areas and parks – thanks to widespread breaches by the industry. Continue reading...

The New South Wales environment watchdog has vowed to crack down on the waste industry after new tests found asbestos at seven of 13 facilities producing or handling cheap landscaping products.A 15-month Guardian Australia investigation revealed earlier this year that the Environment Protection Authority (EPA) had failed to act after compliance campaigns in 2013 and 2019 found potentially contaminated products had been distributed across the state – including at childcare centres, schools, residential areas and parks – thanks to widespread breaches by the industry.The chief executive of the EPA, Tony Chappel, said the watchdog was now considering “significant changes” to the regulations that govern recovered fines – soil fill made from recycled construction and demolition waste.The fill is used in place of virgin materials in construction projects and public spaces such as parks. It is also sold for home use by landscape and garden stores.The EPA visited the 13 facilities to carry out new testing in late 2023 and early 2024. In addition to the asbestos found at seven sites, six had recovered fines that contained glass and chemicals above the legal limits and pH levels outside the allowed range.Chappel said the industry had been given ample opportunity to improve “but it’s time to reassess the regulatory settings”.“The levels of non-compliance we’re seeing are concerning and it’s frustrating to see these issues continue despite working with industry over many years,” he said in a statement.The watchdog will now review the regulations and will consider changes to the testing and sampling regime, where soil products made from recovered fines can be used and how producers are required to manage stockpiles “to improve environmental outcomes across the industry”.“Significant changes to the rules governing recovered fines are being considered by the NSW EPA,” Chappel said. “We’ll also work with industry to improve quality control at the source of material and tracking of that material as it moves through the supply chain.”As a result of the latest tests, nine facilities were required to dispose of more than 600 tonnes of non-compliant recovered fines.The EPA said two facilities had already supplied recovered fines from non-compliant stockpiles to customers and were required to organise an asbestos assessor to assess the risk for each customer.The EPA did not name the seven facilities where it detected asbestos, but prevention notices published on the EPA register show that Rock & Dirt Recycling in South Windsor, operated by N Moit & Sons, and Gow Street Recycling in Padstow were among them. The EPA also did not name the six facilities that it found had breached limits for glass, chemicals and other contaminants and pH levels.Separately, fines totalling $45,000 were issued to three Sydney facilities – Rock & Dirt Recycling, Aussie Skips Recycling in Strathfield South and Canterbury-Bankstown council’s Kelso Waste, Storage and Transfer facility at Milperra – for alleged licence breaches on standards for managing construction waste, including failure to properly label stockpiles.More fines were likely to come, the EPA said, without identifying which facilities might be affected.A Canterbury-Bankstown council spokesperson said the council did not produce recovered fines at Kelso but a “stockpile of recycled soil supplied from an external company did show samples of excess glass and council has had the company take the materials back”.Rock & Dirt Recycling, Gow Street Recycling and Aussie Skips Recycling did not respond to requests for comment.‘I wasn’t crying wolf all those years ago’The full results of the EPA’s 2013 and 2019 investigations, as well as internal calls from its own officials to crack down on the sector, remained secret until they were obtained by Guardian Australia last year under NSW government information public access laws.In one internal document, the EPA estimated up to 658,000 tonnes of material that had not complied with state regulations could have been used in the community every year.But the EPA walked away from a proposal to tighten regulations in 2022 after opposition from the waste industry.skip past newsletter promotionOur Australian morning briefing breaks down the key stories of the day, telling you what’s happening and why it mattersPrivacy Notice: Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. For more information see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.after newsletter promotionAmong the revelations was a 2019 finding that 43% of facilities that produce recovered fines had gamed the testing regime – which was designed to limit toxic chemicals and physical contaminants such as glass and rigid metals in the landscaping products – by asking private laboratories to repeatedly test samples found to contain contamination until they achieved an acceptable result.Waste facilities making recovered fines are required to test their product for hazardous contaminants, such as lead, and report results to the EPA if they exceed legislated thresholds. Retesting of recovered fines is not prohibited, but if any test shows a sample has exceeded a contaminant threshold, the product is considered non-compliant.The facilities are not required to specifically test for asbestos, but the recycling and reuse of asbestos in any form is prohibited.In May, Guardian Australia revealed that some of the biggest waste companies in the state – including Bingo Industries, Aussie Skips Recycling, Benedict Recycling and KLF Holdings – were among those named in state parliament as having broken testing and sampling rules or to have requested retesting in 2013 or 2019.Jason Scarborough led the 2013 investigation which, among its recommendations, said use of the products should be restricted to deeper construction works and its use for landscaping should be prohibited. He welcomed the news the regulator was considering changes to the regulations and said it was “overdue”.“I wasn’t crying wolf all those years ago,” he said. “I’m hopeful that this might actually create some positive change.”He said breaches by the industry represented both a regulatory and a market failure. “If we are moving to a circular economy, consumers have to have confidence that the recycled materials they may be buying are safe and fit for purpose.”In April, Guardian Australia bought four recovered fines products at Sydney landscape stores and had samples of each tested by two private laboratories.Two did not comply with state regulations on pH levels and one was found to contain asbestos fibres. One of the products that passed the laboratory tests contained large physical contaminants, including glass and a metal screw.The EPA has confirmed it is investigating the product found to contain asbestos and looking into the original source of the material.The results prompted the EPA to express concern about the “poor product and levels of non-compliance we are seeing in the industry”.Chappel said the regulator would also closely consider any findings of a review by the office of the NSW chief scientist into minute traces of asbestos in recovered products and whether they posed a risk to public health.The findings are expected later this year.

Suggested Viewing

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

Our team is always growing.
Become a partner, volunteer, sponsor, or intern today.
Let us know how you would like to get involved!

CONTACT US

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Subscribers receive a free day pass for streaming Cinema Verde.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.