Calls against lobbying grow as researchers find plastic production could “completely consume” carbon budget

22 Apr 2024 --- Ahead of the fourth round of UN’s negotiations for an international plastics treaty in Ottawa, Canada, from April 23–29, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL) has released a study revealing plastic production’s “enormous” climate impact, reinforcing the importance of mandatory production cuts in the Global Plastic Treaty.

The report’s key findings include that plastics’ impact on the climate starts with extraction: 75% of all GHG emissions from primary plastic production happen before the polymerization stage. 

LBNL explains that to fully capture, measure, evaluate and address the impacts of plastic pollution, assessment and regulatory controls must consider the complete lifecycle, beginning with extraction. 

The laboratory further finds that growth in plastic production alone will “doom” international climate goals. 

“Even if every other source of GHG emissions — such as transportation, electricity, agriculture and heavy industry — were to miraculously and completely decarbonize in 2024, at current growth rates, primary plastic production alone would completely consume the global carbon budget as early as 2060 and no later than 2083,” says LBNL.

Plastic production cuts are required by the Paris Agreement. It says that to avoid breaching the 1.5 degrees Celsius limit, primary plastic production must decrease by at least 12% to 17% annually, starting in 2024. 

Plastic production growth will “doom” international climate goals, finds LBNL.

Calls for lobbyists’ removal 
Based on this study, the Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives (GAIA) has created a policy brief that shows how rapidly the world must reduce plastic production in time to avert catastrophic warming.

The vast majority of countries engaged in the negotiation process have remained open to including production reduction targets in the treaty. 

However, GAIA warns that a small but vocal minority, primarily made up of fossil fuel-producing nations, have sought to “sabotage” the talks through obstruction tactics and by arguing that plastic pollution exclusively starts at the disposal stage.

“In light of the new data from LBNL, this small group’s obstruction imperils the world’s ability to decarbonize in time to avoid climate disaster,” asserts the alliance.  

The petrochemical industry has had a significant presence at the negotiations — 143 industry lobbyists registered to attend INC-3, a larger group than any national delegation or civil society organization and has gained extensive access to government representatives from around the world. Civil societies are calling for their removal from further negotiations to avoid conflict of interest. 

Last week, civil societies signed a letter calling for corporate groups to be removed from INC-4.

GAIA science and policy director and senior fellow at UC Berkeley’s Goldman School of Public Policy, Dr. Neil Tangri, says: “While global leaders are trying to negotiate a solution to the plastic crisis, the petrochemical industry is investing billions of dollars in making the problem rapidly worse. We need a global agreement to stop this cancerous growth, bring down plastic production, and usher in a world with less plastic and less pollution.” Civil societies stress the importance of involving countries unproportionally affected by climate change and plastic pollution. 

Integrating affected actors
Dr. Sam Adu-Kumi, former director of the Chemicals Control and Management Centre at the Environmental Protection Agency of Ghana and co-author of the policy brief, says: “Africa has been one of the most ambitious regions in the plastics treaty negotiations.” 

“We recognize the impact of plastic pollution on our people’s health, environment and livelihoods, and we know from experience that upstream measures are needed to enable downstream success in combating plastic pollution.”

Co-author Dr. Jorge Emmanuel, adjunct professor and research faculty fellow at Silliman University, Philippines, adds: “The Philippines is on the frontlines of climate change and plastic pollution.”

“Heat waves, powerful typhoons and flooding are getting worse, and the petrochemical industry has displaced our traditional systems with mountains of plastic that poison our communities. Whether the treaty includes plastic production cuts is not just a policy debate. It’s a matter of survival.” 

By Natalie Schwertheim