Reducing Plastic Waste Tops 2001 Legislative Agenda

Enacting a major Plastic Waste Reduction Law for California is Californians Against Waste (CAW's) Top Priority for 2001.

Plastic recycling in California is failing. While overall recycling in the state has reached record levels, recycling of plastic containers and packaging is in decline. After peaking at just over 24% in 1995, recycling rates for plastic containers have dropped to less than 18% in 1999. And the recycling rates are even lower for plastic bags, wraps and polystyrene foam.

Plastic Generation Grows

Both state and national waste characterization studies indicate that plastic is one of the fastest growing components of our solid waste stream and a major contributor to litter.

An analysis for the US Environmental Protection Agency shows that plastic waste is growing seven times faster than the waste stream as a whole. Additionally, a 1999 study for the State of California shows that Californians are throwing away more than three million tons of plastic waste every year.

"In California and across the country plastic waste is growing exponentially," said CAW Executive Director Mark Murray. "Last year California generated enough disposable plastic products and packaging waste to completely cover Lake Tahoe's 191 square miles with a sheet of plastic more than one inch thick."

Today, California is landfilling more than 17 million cubic yards of plastic waste. By some estimates, this represents nearly one-fourth of the volume of all material landfilled.

More than a Landfill Problem

Plastic is more than just a landfill problem. The more than 75 billion pounds of plastic products and packaging produced in this country every year poses a wide variety of dangers to human health and the environment. At every step in the production of plastics, hazardous substances are used and hazardous wastes are produced.

Plastics are made from finite, nonrenewable petroleum and natural gas.

Production of plastic products and packaging is one of the most chemically intensive activities. According to the US EPA, 35 of the 47 chemical plants ranked highest in carcinogenic emissions are involved in plastic production. Workers at these chemical refineries (along with nearby residents), are at increased risk of injury or death due to toxic emissions and/or chemical explosions.

Plastics contain additives (i.e. colorants, stabilizers, and plasticizers) that may include toxic constituents such as cadmium and lead.

Plastics may harm human health. Some plastic chemicals, such as ethylene dichloride and vinyl chloride used to produce vinyl are considered to be carcinogenic. They may also trigger other health problems such as liver, kidney and neurological damage.

Chemicals in plastics may reduce sperm counts. In October, a panel convened by the National Institutes of Health found that the most commonly used plasticizer, DEHP, was a developmental toxin. Studies showed that male rodents exposed to DEHP had decreased sperm levels. DEHP, which is used in plastic food packaging, children's toys and medical devices, has the potential to leach out of plastics. Exposure can occur through breathing, ingestion and possibly through absorption of the skin.

Plastic Litter and Waste Cleanup Costs Approach a Billion Dollars

Plastic litter and waste represents a significant and growing cost to the state, local government and ultimately ratepayers and taxpayers. California's annual garbage bill for cleaning up and landfilling plastic waste is conservatively estimated at more than $750 million annually.

Studies show that plastic represents 50 to 80 percent of the volume of litter collected from roads, parks and beaches, and 90 percent of floating litter in the marine environment.

State and local agencies spend millions picking up litter each year- of which plastic is often the largest component. Last year Cal Trans alone spent $16 million cleaning up litter on California highways. This sum excludes the costs incurred by volunteers and businesses participating in the Adopt-a-Highway program.

California's total cleanup cost for plastic litter and waste cleanup will easily top one billion dollars this year.

The Legislative Focus

State Senator Wes Chesbro (D-Arcata), has once again agreed to carry CAW-sponsored legislation to reduce plastic waste and increase recycling.

Last year, Chesbro authored CAW-sponsored Senate Bill (SB) 1110, which would have established recycling requirements on plastic food, drink, and cosmetic packaging, while strengthening existing requirements on non-food packaging. While that measure passed the State Senate, it was defeated in the Assembly Consumer Protection Committee due to opposition from lobbyists for the plastics industry and product makers.

Just one day after SB 1110 failed passage, the California Integrated Waste Management Board released a study showing that the recycling rate for plastic containers had fallen to just 17.9% in 1999- well below the 25% requirement in state law. "Over the last two years, more than 80% of plastic containers were littered or landfilled in California, at a substantial cost to taxpayers and the environment." Said Chesbro. "In light of the State Waste Board's new analysis of the plastics problem, I am hopeful that the legislature will take another look at this important recycling issue."

This year, Senator Chesbro and CAW intend to take a simpler approach to plastic waste reduction, modeled after Germany's successful "Green Dot" program. The proposal will require manufacturers of plastic packaging to pay a fee to cover the cost of recycling plastic waste.

Using a weight-based fee equal to the difference between the cost of recycling and any material scrap value, manufacturers will have a market-based incentive to:

  • Reduce packaging size and waste;
  • simplify product materials and design to reduce recycling costs;
  • support the development of recycling markets in order to increase scrap values.

Revenue from plastic packaging fees would be used to cover the cost of recycling, increase opportunities for recycling, and potentially even provide incentives for litter cleanup.

Despite the simplified approach, Senator Chesbro and CAW will undoubtedly face still opposition from plastic manufacturers, chemical producers and product makers and their trade associations.

During this past legislative session, opponents of SB 1110 reported spending more than $4.5 million to lobby members of the California legislature. Additionally, many made campaign contributions directly to swing members of key legislative committees. CAW will never be able to match this level of political expenditure.

Reprinted from CAW's The Recycling Advocate, Vol. 6 No. 2

For more information call them at 916.443.5422 or visit www.cawrecycles.org.

From the Spring 2001 issue of the Environmental News.