Just a day after the conclusion of the United Nations’ annual climate conference in Azerbaijan, diplomats began gathering in Busan, South Korea, for another discussion, this time on plastics.
A fifth and potentially final round of negotiations on a global plastics deal began on Monday, raising hopes that countries can hammer out a deal to tackle plastic pollution by December 1. There is. At the opening ceremony, speakers from the United Nations appealed to delegates. to find “”bold political will” to address the harm of plastics to human health and the environment. South Korean Environment Minister Kim Wan-seop said, “We must end plastic pollution before it wipes out humanity.”
What is particularly at stake in INC-5, the official name of this round of negotiations, is what many participants see as the defining issue of the treaty: the amount of plastic manufacturers can produce in the world. The question is whether to restrict it directly. dozens of countries Countries say production limits are the only way to meet the treaty’s goal of “eradicating plastic pollution,” but they are struggling to persuade oil-producing countries to agree. Virtually all plastics are made from fossil fuels.
Proponents of production caps include environmental groups and coalitions. scientistsome liken the plastic pollution crisis to an overflowing bathtub. Instead of mopping the floor, meaning while the industry plans to produce more plastic, instead of cleaning up the existing plastic waste, they want to turn off the metaphorical faucet. It is. Reducing plastic production also reduces greenhouse gas emissions and people’s exposure to the 16,000 chemicals used in plastic products. At least 4,200 of them have dangerous properties..
There is also an economic case for severe restrictions on plastic production. The Institute for Environmental Economics and Financial Analysis, a think tank, recently argued that placing limits on the production of primary plastic polymers, combined with other supply and demand initiatives, could: Smooth volatility and price instability currently impacting producers.
“World leaders gathered here in Busan must deliver an agreement to phase out the free production of plastics,” said Von Hernandez, global coordinator of the anti-plastic coalition “Free from Plastics”. said. statement. Together with nonprofit organizations Greenpeace and the World Wildlife Fund, Free Plastics delivered a 3 million-signature petition to government officials the day before the debate began, calling for a “significant reduction” in plastic production.
Anthony Wallace/AFP via Getty Images
Much has changed since countries first agreed to negotiate a plastics treaty in 2022, and since the last meeting in April. This summer, the U.S. signaled it would support production caps as part of the treaty, but reversed itself the week after former President Donald Trump’s reelection. Chris Dixon, marine campaign leader for the nonprofit Environmental Research Service, which is attending the talks, said hopes that the U.S. would eventually ratify the treaty have “completely disappeared” because Republicans will soon take control of the Senate. said.
There are other signs that countries may not agree to production caps in INC-5. Ahead of the conference, United Nations Environment Program Executive Director Inger Andersen appeared to put her voice on the balance with several speeches and media appearances, in which she emphasized that: did. Usefulness of plastics for societyis a common topic in the industry. In an interview with international news agency AFP, she characterized the debate over production caps as follows:not an intellectual conversation”
“These comments are part of a worrying pattern of statements that risk undermining the outcome of negotiations,” more than 130 environmental organizations wrote in the report. letter It was sent to UN Secretary-General António Guterres in October.
Luis Bayas Valdivieso, the INC-5 chairman, was also tough on the way he consolidated the previous conference’s text (a thick document packed with words almost everyone wanted) into a more manageable basis for negotiations. It attracted attention. For reasons that aren’t clear, he deleted an article titled “Primary Plastic Production,” which likely dealt with a potential cap. Replaced with a more vague article about “supply”. It focuses primarily on voluntary national initiatives.
Some countries, including the United States, argue that instead of production caps they support so-called market mechanisms that indirectly push down demand for plastic production. This could include everything from plastic taxes to bans on certain plastic products. They want the treaty to focus on promoting plastic recycling Exceed the worst current situation of 9% Cleaning up existing plastic pollution.
The American Chemistry Council (ACC), a U.S. industry group, has said that caps on plastic production will cost jobs.Increased environmental footprintThis is because alternative materials are heavier and generate more greenhouse gas emissions during transportation.
ACC did not directly respond to Grist’s request for comment on the financial issue of production caps, but Ross Eisenberg, head of a group representing plastics manufacturers, said demand for plastic products is increasing as the world’s population becomes wealthier. hinted that it would increase. He cited a 2024 report commissioned by the International Council of Chemical Societies, of which the American Council of Chemistry is a member, stating that restrictions on plastic production could increase the cost of many goods and services. , which “affects those who can least afford it.” that.
“The most efficient way to balance supply and demand is to use natural market forces rather than arbitrary production caps,” Eisenberg said.
Anthony Wallace/AFP via Getty Images
Benny Mirmans, Chairman of the World Plastics Council, said: statement “We have the power to shape a future where society continues to enjoy the immense benefits of plastics without polluting them,” he said ahead of INC-5. He called for an agreement that treats plastics “as a valuable resource, not as waste.”
According to analysis From the nonprofit International Environmental Law Center, 220 fossil fuel and chemical industry lobbyists have registered to join INC-5, more than the European Union and all its member states combined .
It is too early to know what the outcome of the INC-5 discussions will be, but the first few days of the meeting suggest that this week will be very divisive. Two events last Sunday and Monday brought Andersen back under scrutiny from the government. environmental organization and media This time, he is believed to have tried to influence negotiations by holding private meetings with delegates from each country and pressuring them to remove production caps from their priorities. Green groups also expressed concern that the decision to base negotiations on Valdivieso’s brief text has been “largely ignored” and that some countries are trying to overload the text with new proposals.
By Wednesday, some participants expressed frustration with the slow pace of negotiations, saying:The end seems far away”
Among the issues that may or may not be resolved during INC-5 are whether the treaty bans or restricts the list of toxic chemicals used in plastics, how to pay for the treaty’s provisions, and the agreement This includes how it is structured. Many countries, with support from environmental groups, support a top-down format with legally binding global provisions. Other countries, including the United States, support a voluntary approach in which countries are free to set their own goals, whether for plastic production and use or pollution control.
Lennox Yearwood Jr., president and CEO of the social justice group Hip Hop Caucus, told Busan Grist that countries are most likely to live near petrochemical plants and landfills. He said there should be a treaty to protect frontline communities. “INC-5 negotiators are committed to prioritizing binding measures to limit plastic production, address the ongoing harm caused by the fossil fuel industry, and address plastic waste,” he said. We must outline our efforts.”
“Without bold action, treaty negotiations risk becoming yet another missed opportunity to address environmental racism on a global scale.”
