Plastic is problematic from cradle to grave: all stages of the life cycle of plastics release pollution and create physical hazards that plague frontline communities with chronic illnesses, negatively impact local economies, and contribute to the decline of our natural environment. Our dependence on plastics for day-to-day tasks has become a characteristic of the modern industrial era, and it may be difficult to imagine a world without so much waste.

That’s why Debris Free Oceans has recently endorsed the #PlasticFreePresident campaign to amplify demands that can help our country to begin the large-scale transition to a circular economy. A circular economy is an economic system that eliminates waste by keeping products and materials in use through innovative design and technology. 

We can transform our extractive, throwaway economy to a regenerative, inclusive one that’s good for our environment and creates quality job opportunities. We need to stop plastic pollution at its source while improving our waste-management systems, developing new business models, phasing out the worst plastic offenders, and shifting to reusable non-plastic alternatives. The federal government needs to be a catalyst for innovation!

Our sustained civic action and participation in the 2020 general election have led to a moment where this type of change is within reach. We’ve elected a President and Vice President who prioritize environmental justice, environmental stewardship, and economic growth through a sustainable economic system. Once in office, President-elect Joe Biden can take action on the following eight demands without Congressional approval. While some have the potential to catalyze immediate changes, others are longer-term measures that will require consensus at all levels of government and consistency from the general public to be most effective.

The #PlasticFreePresident campaign is advancing the following 8 actions for advocates to promote for President-Elect Biden and his administration:

1. Use the purchasing power of the federal government to eliminate single-use plastic items and replace them with reusable products.

There is a long history of consumer activism in the United States (suggested read: Buying Power by Lawrence B. Glickman). The concept of buying or purchasing power refers to the potential for collective shifts in spending patterns to determine the trajectory of the markets. When it comes to plastics, this would look like diverting our hard-earned dollars from low-quality plastic items and favoring longer-lasting, plastic-free reusables. When sufficient consumers make this change, our preferences are amplified and clearer to producers. Companies selling more sustainable products should succeed, and overtime increased demand for their products enables them to scale their operations and reach more consumers. Meanwhile low-quality plastic producers are forced to assimilate more sustainable alternatives or risk suffering losses. This is an indirect way that market forces can change production and consumption norms over the long-term.

The federal government is the single largest purchaser of goods and services in the United States, spending more than $450 billion on products and services each year. That means the government is likely the country’s largest consumer of disposable plastic products.

By reforming their purchasing practices, the federal government could greatly reduce the footprint of plastic waste and bolster demand for plastic-free and reusable goods.

2. Suspend and deny permits for new or expanded plastic production facilities, associated infrastructure projects, and exports.

When we think about the negative effects of plastic production, it’s easy to focus on the end of the plastic life cycle: its contribution to our global waste footprint and potential to end up as marine pollution. However, it is just as important to recognize that every piece of plastic is derived from fossil fuels and emits excess greenhouse gases throughout each phase of its life cycle (suggested read: Plastic & Climate: The Hidden Costs of a Plastic Planet).

In the next 10 years, the petrochemical industry is projected to increase plastics production by at least 35 percent. This includes over 300 new projects slated for territories within the United States. New and expanded facilities produce raw material for single-use plastics using fossil fuels. Because plastics are made from crude oil or fracked natural gas, these bans would curb the impacts of plastic pollution and the climate crisis simultaneously.

3. Make corporate polluters pay and reject false solutions.

Plastic producers must be held accountable for the social, financial, and ecological damage they are causing. The President can hold corporations accountable by supporting legislation such as the Break Free From Plastic Pollution Act; calling for investigations on plastic producers, transporters, and manufacturers; and imposing more stringent regulation to minimize disinformation about recycling and product sustainability.

Additionally, the Biden administration can minimize greenwashed, false solutions to the plastic pollution crisis by rejecting funding for projects that ultimately worsen the scope and scale of environmental injustices. Some of these false solutions heavily marketed by the petrochemical industry include: chemical recycling, waste-to-fuel, waste-to-energy, incineration, gasification, pyrolysis, and plasma arc.

4. Advance environmental justice in petrochemical corridors.

Plastic production and refining facilities are often sited near fossil fuel infrastructure. In the United States, these clusters marginalize low-income and racial and ethnic minority communities in the Gulf Coast, Appalachia, and the Ohio River Valley (to name a few).

Fenceline communities are most directly impacted by the air, land, and water pollution released throughout the production of plastics. The #PlasticFreePresident campaign demands that executive agencies conduct their responsibilities transparently and facilitate spaces for historically excluded individuals living in fenceline communities to contribute meaningfully in petrochemical permitting decisions.

In order to advance a transition away from the petrochemical and fossil fuel industries, executive actions will be critical. The President can direct federal agencies to collect more data on environmental quality and the health of affected communities, develop mechanisms to increase investment in their local economies, and call for investigations on violations of their rights to sovereignty, dignity, and quality of life.

5. Update existing federal regulations to curtail pollution from plastics facilities by using the best available science and technology.

The mission of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is to protect human health and the environment. This federal agency is required to ensure that our nation’s air, water, land, wildlife and human life are not harmed by industry activities. However, the EPA is not as effective in curbing the effects of advancing industrial processes when its standards are not updated. Public health and the natural environment are increasingly harmed by their reliance on standards that are growing decades old. The President has an important responsibility to direct the EPA to update its performance standards, regulatory guidelines, and research agenda.

6. Stop subsidizing plastic producers.

For most of our nation’s history, the federal government has subsidized the fossil fuel industry. In 2020, the United States provided more unconditional financial support to the fossil fuel sector than any other G20 country has provided to all energy sectors combined (suggested read: The Climate Transparency Report 2020). It’s time to stop the flow of federal funds to the petrochemical industry and the fossil fuel industry (which supplies the inputs for plastic production). These funds can be redirected to advance innovation in sustainable waste management and support the growth of reusable plastic-free alternatives.

7. Join international efforts to address the global plastic pollution crisis through new and strengthened multilateral agreements.

The United States’ extractive and wasteful economy does not exist in a bubble. Our actions have a direct effect on the global economy and an indirect effect on the decisions made by other countries. For many years, the United States has been counterproductive in others’ efforts to address the global plastic crisis. It is time for the U.S. to become an active champion of circular economics, encourage our allies to address the global plastic crisis, and begin targeting global patterns of production, consumption, and disposal. This can be achieved by forging legally-binding agreements with other major players in the production and waste management of plastics. Cooperative action can be a powerful agent in bringing justice to the low-to-middle income groups that have been marginalized by the life cycle of plastics beyond our borders.

8. Reduce and mitigate the impacts of discarded and lost fishing gear.

Some of the most dangerous hazards posed by marine debris come from lost or discarded fishing gear in the open ocean. This includes gill nets, traps, and heavy metal equipment that change the biochemical composition of the marine environment, entangle and kill marine organisms, impede navigation, introduce toxic chemicals into the food web, and impose massive cleanup costs for coastal communities. The President can work with other federal agencies to mandate more stringent reporting, monitoring, and retrieval projects to recover lost materials. There are many unique, innovative solutions that can be employed generate new products from the materials that are recovered. One example is Netplus, an alternative to virgin fibers that’s made of recovered fishing nets. They’ve worked with 50 fisheries in South America and collected over 2.6 million pounds of discarded material to date!

In 2021, we will urge President Biden to take these actions during his first year in office so that we may collectively build a safer, healthier, and more equitable society. We urge you to learn more about the power of having an actively plastic-free president and join us in this advocacy throughout the coming year!

On Tuesday, February 11^th, US Senator Tom Udall and US Representative Alan Lowenthal introduced unprecedented federal legislation to address the plastic pollution crisis.

“The plastic pollution crisis is past the tipping point: our communities, our waterways, and even our bodies are at risk. We are already bearing the cleanup costs of mountains of plastic waste, and it will only get worse for future generations. We have a responsibility to act now before the overwhelming public health, environmental, climate and economic effects of plastic pollution reach the point of no return. Our solutions are not only possible—they are practical and are already being implemented in cities and states across the country, including in my home state of New Mexico. But we need a comprehensive, national strategy to tackle this tidal wave of pollution before it is too late. We must drive the innovation necessary to break free from this unnecessary, toxic waste stream that is also accelerating the destruction of our planet via climate change. This bill calls on all of us, from companies to communities, to address this crisis head-on so that we can create a plastic pollution free world.” – US Senator Tom Udall

In short, the Break Free From Plastic Pollution Act of 2020 offers a common-sense, comprehensive systems-based approach to address the plastic pollution crisis. It has tremendous potential to launch our nation’s resources in the right direction— increasing accountability, responsibility, and management efficacy.

Here’s an overview of its key provisions:

Mandating Producer Responsibility

Each time we dispose of packaging materials—whether plastic, paper, glass, or metal—the waste management burden trickles down to local and state governments. In effect, there is a strong disconnect between the design, production, and waste management phases associated with any given product.

The Break Free From Plastic Pollution Act sets forth requirements for producer responsibility including the development, implementation, and administration of necessary collection and reprocessing programs. This includes co-ops between producers, cleanup efforts through the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and investment in recycling and composting infrastructure.

Requiring Nationwide Container Refunds

Incentives are a powerful force for motivating changes in individual and corporate practices. With that in mind, this bill proposes a requirement for customers to be eligible for a 10 cent refund in return for used beverage containers. If unclaimed, the refunds would go back to beverage producers to supplement their investments in collection and recycling infrastructure.

Source Reduction

The bill also sets important benchmarks for changes in production and consumption: “Beginning in January 2022, some of the most common single-use plastic products that pollute our environment, cannot be recycled, and have readily available alternatives will be source reduced and phased out from sale and distribution.”

This will include prohibitions on plastic carryout bags, some food and drink containers, and expanded polystyrene products (also known as Styrofoam).

Additionally, the bill calls for federally-funded studies and literature analysis on plastic tobacco filters, electronic cigarette parts, and derelict fishing gear to guide federal agencies in enacting pollution mitigation policies.

Carryout Bag Fee

What’s more effective than incentives? Disincentives— that’s right! This boils down to a principle of behavioral economics called loss aversion: people dislike losses more than they enjoy benefits.

As a disincentive for consumers to use fewer plastic bags, the bill proposes a fee on carryout bags. The money generated by this fee would be used to fund access to reusable bags, local cleanup efforts, and improved recycling infrastructure. Alternatively, a business could retain the fee if they implement an incentive program that credits customers who opt for bringing their own reusable bags.

Minimum Recycled Content Requirement

With a new wave of investment and research being devoted to recycling infrastructure across the nation, this bill intends to support a growth in the supply of recycled plastic. The minimum recycled content requirement would mandate for beverage containers, such as plastic bottles, to be produced with a certain percentage of recycled content. This threshold would be set to increase overtime so that producers are constantly being encouraged to use less virgin plastic.

The EPA would also be required to implement recycled content minimums for other products, but this is dependent on assessment of technological feasibility by the National Institute of Standards and Technology.

Recycling and Composting

Conflicting and out-right misleading labels on packaging have made responsible waste management frustratingly inconsistent and demoralizing for most well-meaning consumers. To address this issue, the Break Free From Plastic Pollution Act calls for the EPA to develop standardized recycling and composting labels for both products and receptacles to encourage proper sorting and disposal.

Encouraging Domestic Responsibility

Every minute, it is estimated that the equivalent of 60 doubledecker busloads of plastic waste are burned or dumped in developing countries. Current rates of mismanagement due to exploitative trade policies pose serious health, safety, and environmental risks beyond our borders. Poorly managed waste serves as a breeding ground for vector-borne diseases, contributes to global climate change, and has even been found to increase rates of violence in urban areas. Conservative estimates attribute over one-million annual deaths to the adverse health effects of these practices.

The Break Free From Plastic Pollution Act addresses the export of plastic waste, scraps, and pairings to non-OECD countries.

Protecting Existing Action

One of the reasons that this bill is a significant achievement for plastic waste reduction advocates is its unmatched scope. We have never seen a body of federal legislation proposed to directly address the plastic pollution crisis; any existing progress has been the result of market-based changes or efforts from lower levels of government. This Act has the potential to elevate accountability and sustainability in product design, manufacturing, distribution, and waste management in much more comprehensive way.

“We are running out of time to deal with this crisis of our own creation, and this legislation is a bold first step on the path to implementing lasting solutions.”  – US Senator Tom Udall

Although we have not seen any federal action on these issues, state and local governments have already enacted legislation to address the plastic pollution crisis within the bounds of their reach. Many of these local officials have been motivated by a more intimate understanding of the threats posed by single-use plastics on local economies in coastal communities, poor health outcomes for vulnerable populations exposed to their eco-toxic effects, and the substantial contribution of the plastic life cycle to heat-trapping greenhouse gas emissions. Importantly, this bill protects state and local governments’ previous actions. It also supports their enactment of more stringent standards, requirements, and product bans as deemed appropriate.

Pause New Plastic

Finally, the Break Free From Plastic Pollution Act provides time for federal agencies to “investigate the cumulative impacts of new and expanded plastic-producing facilities on the air, water, climate, and communities before issuing new permits to increase plastic production.”

To address the impacts of existing producers, this legislation would call for the EPA to update regulations for the elimination of plastic pollution from industrial facilities. It would also encourage updates to the Clean Air and Clean Water Act emission and discharge standards to ensure that plastic-producing facilities integrate the latest technology for pollution prevention.