It’s All in the Packaging: Regulators Work to Adopt Rules to Mitigate Plastic Pollution

It used to be all about glass—glass was too heavy, too expensive, and too dangerous to you or others if it fractured—so we invented plastics—strong, lightweight, less expensive. Half of all plastics ever made have been made in the last 17 years. It is estimated almost 500 million tons was produced in 2018 alone. As much as 50% of all plastics are considered single-use plastics—one use and discard. As incredible as these materials are, however, plastics are very stable and thus have significant recycling challenges. Because of their long-chain molecule structure, they are difficult to break down. Those plastics that cannot be recycled into other uses and are haphazardly discarded into the environment, under certain conditions, can break down into smaller pieces such as microplastics (<5 mm or 0.2 in.) or nanoplastics (<1,000 nm), which can end up in soil, surface water, and air. Microplastics are also present in some cosmetics, clothing, and other chemical products, such as agrochemicals. The full scope and scale of human health and environmental concerns is yet unknown.

In the marine environment, plastics account for at least 85% of marine litter. States such as California have launched legal actions against chemical and consumer products companies about the recyclability of their products and alleged refusal to move packaging to more sustainable options.

Based on U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) estimates, the United States has never recycled more than 10% of the plastics used in the country. Chemical companies are working on new plastics that may be easier to recycle and that produce less harmful by-products. The American Chemistry Council, a major trade group for the chemical industry, is promoting advanced chemical recycling technologies, which break plastics down into molecular building blocks to create new plastic products out of recycled and used materials. A total of 18 states have enacted legislation over the past 5 years to promote chemical recycling of used plastic. Meanwhile, regulators are looking at ways to reduce the immediate impact of plastics in the environment and shift some of the burden to the producers and distributors that manufacture or use the products.

State Initiatives

California was one of the first states with a ban on cosmetic products containing non-biodegradable microbeads, enacted in 2015 and effective in 2020, with several other states following suit. In 2018, the California legislature passed a package of bills to promote monitoring and help increase awareness of the risks of microplastics and microfibers to the marine environment and in drinking water through development of a statewide microplastic strategy. Although not a regulation, the strategy, approved by the California’s Ocean Protection Council in February 2022, sets out a multi-year approach that aims to reduce or eliminate the use of single-use plastics throughout the state and establish strategies to identify extended producer responsibility for plastic packaging and food ware.

In the current California legislative session, lawmakers are working on a bill designed to reduce plastic waste, the Plastic Pollution Producer Responsibility Act, which would prohibit producers of single-use, disposable packaging or single-use, disposable food service products from selling, distributing, or importing such packaging or products starting in 2032, unless they are recyclable or compostable. Simultaneously, an initiative that could appear on the ballot in November, the California Recycling and Plastic Pollution Reduction Act, would require all single-use plastic packaging and food ware used in California to be recyclable, reusable, refillable, or compostable by 2030 and production of single-use plastics be reduced by 25% by 2030. Producers and distributors of single-use plastics would have to absorb the cost of the program. California was been actively investigating and developing information to aid decision-makers in managing microplastics, including studies in San Francisco Bay, Lake Tahoe, and Southern California.

Rhode Island is considering a controversial regulation that would require that extended producer responsibility apply to packaging of all goods sold in the state and anything that may be shipped in (e.g., via Amazon). Under this regulation, producers would be responsible for managing their packaging throughout the entire product lifecycle by imposing fees—higher for nearly indestructible packaging (that is, plastics)—and small or no fees for packaging that is recyclable or refillable and reusable. Several other states are considering similar legislation. Criticisms of such laws include disproportionate impacts for products with no reasonable alternative to plastics (for example, plastic bags for food products and medical supplies), lack of credit for voluntary actions, and lack of adequate supply of recycled materials.

Federal Initiatives

EPA currently regulates microbeads in industrial wastewater but not in domestic. The U.S. Congress passed the Microbead Free Waters Act of 2015, which prohibits the sale of rinse-off cosmetic products containing plastic microbeads. The Break Free From Plastic Pollution Act, if passed, would amend the Solid Waste Disposal Act and place accountability for waste on the shoulders of plastic-producing companies. House Bill 5902, the Micro Plastics Act of 2020 would direct EPA to “establish a pilot program that tests the efficacy and cost effectiveness of tools, technologies, and techniques to (1) remove microplastics from the environment, and (2) prevent the release of microplastics into the environment.”

How Integral Can Assist

Increased scrutiny by states and the federal government, as well as local governments and community organizations, is leading to more stringent regulations on development, manufacturing, use, and disposal of plastic materials due to concern over their toxicity and other impacts on the environment. Integral’s environmental scientists and toxicologists assist clients with assessing the fate and transport of micro- and nanoplastics as well as potential environmental and human health concerns.

References

California Announces First Statewide Microplastics Strategy | Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP – JDSupra

California voters in November likely will decide on plastics – again – Capitol Weekly | Capitol Weekly | Capitol Weekly: The Newspaper of California State Government and Politics.

Plastics industry targets Democrats to head off restrictions – Los Angeles Times (latimes.com)

Complex, Ambitious Bill Before R.I. Legislature Would Require Producers to Pay for Disposal of Their Packaging – ecoRI News

Plastic Recycling Doesn’t Work and Will Never Work – The Atlantic

How Marine Life Can Reduce Our Plastic Consumption (businessinsider.com)

U.S. plastic recycling rates have fallen below 6 percent – The Washington Post

Chemical recycling of plastic gets a boost in 18 US states—but environmentalists question whether it really is recycling (acs.org)

Microplastics – Water Education Foundation

Now’s the Time For Lawmakers to Care About Microplastics (columbia.edu)

H.R.5902 – 116th Congress (2019-2020): MICRO Plastics Act of 2020 | Congress.gov | Library of Congress

Clorox, Coca-Cola Must Face California Plastic Pollution Suit (bloomberglaw.com)

California accuses ExxonMobil of deceiving public on hazards of plastics | Plastics | The Guardian