UN plastic pollution talks must result in ambitious treaty, leading expert says
Prof Richard Thompson, who was named one of Time's 100 most influential people this year for his groundbreaking work on plastic pollution, said decisive action was needed to protect human health and the planet.
He spoke on Monday as delegates from more than 170 countries prepared to meet in Geneva to bridge what have become deep divisions over whether limits on plastic production are included in a final treaty.
Last November, talks in Busan, South Korea, to secure a global treaty to end plastic pollution broke down without agreement. More than 100 countries support legally binding global reductions in plastic production and the phasing out of certain chemicals and single-use plastic products.
But nations with large fossil fuel industries such as Saudi Arabia, China, Russia and Iran oppose restrictions on plastic production, and are pushing for an agreement focused on better management and recycling of waste. The US under President Biden and now President Trump has indicated it is more supportive of a lower ambition treaty which does not include production cuts.
The scale of plastic production and its threat to public health and the environment was underlined once more on Monday when a new report warned that the world is in a 'plastics crisis' which is causing disease and death from infancy to old age and is responsible for at least $1.5tn (£1.1tn) a year in health-related damages.
The huge acceleration of plastic production, which has increased by more than 200 times since 1950 and is expected to almost triple again to more than a billion tonnes a year by 2060, has been fuelled largely by surges in the production of single-use plastics, the majority of which are used for packaging, drink and food containers.
Thompson, head of the international marine litter research unit at Plymouth University, first identified and coined the phrase microplastics to describe how tiny bits of plastic accumulate in marine environments. Attending the Geneva talks as coordinator of the scientists coalition for an effective plastics treaty, he said an ambitious treaty would be a gamechanger for the planet and future generations.
'It is now clear that plastic pollution contaminates our planet from the poles to the equator,' he said. 'We find microplastics in our deepest oceans and our highest mountains. There is evidence of human exposure to them from the womb, throughout our entire lifetime.
'It is really clear to protect future generations we need to take decisive action now on a treaty to address plastic pollution. So I really hope negotiators can look the next generation in the eye and say they acted decisively.'
If agreed, a global plastics treaty would be an international, legally binding agreement designed to end plastic pollution by setting targets that nations would need to meet to try to end the 11m tonnes of plastic pollution that are dumped in the ocean every year.
But since 2022, when the UN first secured an agreement from 173 countries to develop a legally binding treaty to cut plastic pollution, five separate negotiations have failed to secure a final text to sign.
The initial agreement was for a treaty to address the whole life cycle of plastics. But increasing numbers of plastics industry lobbyists have attended each round of talks to push back against production cuts.
Sign up to Down to Earth
The planet's most important stories. Get all the week's environment news - the good, the bad and the essential
after newsletter promotion
In Busan last year, 220 fossil fuel and chemical industry representatives – more plastic producers than ever – were represented, including 16 lobbyists from the plastics industry attending as part of country delegations.
'There are those countries that consider the economic threat because their business-as-usual is threatened by this,' said Thompson. 'But the mandate that brings negotiators from 170 countries to Geneva this week sets out that plastic pollution is harmful. It is really clear that business-as-usual is not sustainable.'
Globally only 9% of plastic produced is recycled, and Thompson, whose work directly led to the ban on microbeads in cosmetic products in the UK, said the evidence showed that plastic production needed to be reduced to tackle plastic pollution.
He said a treaty needed to ensure only plastic that was essential to society was produced, the thousands of chemicals used in plastic were reduced, and that all the plastic produced in future was sustainable, which involved moving to reuse and a circular economy in plastic.
All of that, he said, would effectively reduce the amount of plastic produced globally.
Graham Forbes, Greenpeace's head of delegation to the treaty negotiations, said the science, the moral imperative and the economics were clear. 'Uncontrolled plastic production is a death sentence. The only way to end plastic pollution is to stop making so much plastic.
'World leaders must seize the opportunity in Geneva, stand up to the fossil fuel industry and take humanity's first step towards ending the plastics crisis and create a healthier, safer future for all.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
4 hours ago
- The Guardian
US environmental agency freezing $3bn in climate funds is ‘capricious', court to hear
The Trump administration's decision to abruptly terminate a $3bn program helping hundreds of communities prepare for climate disasters and environmental hazards is unconstitutional and should be overturned, a court will hear on Tuesday. A coalition of non-profits, tribes and local governments is suing the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the agency's administrator Lee Zeldin for terminating the entire Environmental and Climate Justice (ECJ) block grant program – despite a legally binding mandate from Congress to fund the Biden-era initiative. It's the first-of-a-kind proposed class action lawsuit that would force the EPA and Zeldin to reinstate the program and each individual grant, rather than forcing the recipients to sue individually. The $3bn ECJ program was created by Congress through the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) – a long standing source for ire for Trump and his polluting industry allies – to help historically disadvantaged communities come up with local solutions to improve resilience in the face of worsening climate shocks and environmental degradation. It was intended by Congress to fund community-based projects across the country to tackle longstanding and pressing environmental harms that cause death and ill health from hazards including industrial pollution, lead pipes, flooding and urban heat islands. Almost 350 rural and urban groups, towns and tribes were selected by the EPA from 2,700 applicants, through a rigorous process that included longterm accountability and oversight over the funds. In February, Zeldin's EPA, under the direction of the Trump administration, began terminating the entire ECJ program, as part of a broader assault on climate science, climate action and environmental justice measures. In June, 23 grant recipients sued after the entire block grant was terminated and the funds frozen overnight. The plaintiffs come from every region of the country and include the Indigenous village of Pipnuk in Alaska, the Deep South Centre for Environmental Justice in New Orleans, Appalachian Voices which works with legacy coal communities and Kalamazoo county in Michigan. Several non-profit legal advocacy groups – EarthJustice, Southern Environmental Law Center, Public Rights Project and Lawyers for Good Government – filed the proposed class action lawsuit alleging that the wholesale termination violated the separation of powers and is therefore unconstitutional. They also argue that the Trump administration's decision was both 'arbitrary and capricious' – in other words, made without proper reasoning or consideration of the consequences, in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act. On Tuesday, attorneys representing the coalition will argue for preliminary relief at the US district court for the District of Columbia (DDC), to force the EPA to immediately reinstate the ECJ program and unfreeze the funds. 'This was an unlawful action that went against the will of Congress and violated the separation of powers,' said , senior attorney with the Southern Environmental Law Center. 'The administration terminated the entire program simply because they don't like it, without any reasoned decision making or consideration of the impacts. The decision was both arbitrary and capricious, and unconstitutional, and should be overturned.' The Trump administration has filed a motion to dismiss, arguing that the DDC does not have jurisdiction, and this is a contractural case for the US court of federal claims. Under contract law, the 349 grant recipients would be forced to sue individually for breach of contract and damages, but with no possibility of the ECJ program being reinstated as Congress intended. A ruling on if and where the case continues is expected later this month. The judge will rule separately on the plaintiffs' motion for the case to proceed as a class action. The EPA said it did not comment on pending litigation.
The Herald Scotland
10 hours ago
- The Herald Scotland
Trump builds strong Republican legacy as Democrats flounder
Who can blame voters? Under President Joe Biden, inflation hit a 40-year high, Russia invaded Ukraine, Hamas brutally attacked Israel and Iran built a robust nuclear program. Then Americans learned, while he was running for reelection, that Biden suffered from serious cognitive decline, raising questions about what the Democratic Party knew and when. Americans lost trust that Democrats were transparent and honest. Nine months after Trump was reelected, Democrats still lack direction and competent leaders. Here are a few examples: The party's brightest star, failed presidential candidate Kamala Harris, announced she won't run for governor of California, where she previously served as attorney general. New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker, once seen as a rising star, regularly engages in bizarre political theater to make his points, from lengthy filibusters to clashes with members of his own party on the Senate floor. Booker recently told Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minnesota, not to question his motives after a heated exchange about impending legislation. California Rep. Eric Swalwell posted a video of himself bench-pressing weights at a gym while complaining about the Republican Party. Conservatives mocked him, including Fox News' Greg Gutfeld. In response, Swalwell challenged Gutfeld to a bench-pressing match. Are Democrats OK? They appear desperate, and increasingly are becoming a clown show without direction or purpose. Democratic Party's future looks grim The chaos and aimlessness at the national level also exists in Democratic-controlled states. In California and New York, progressive leaders ensure that residents are hurt by high tax rates and other policies that push businesses to relocate. Opinion: In-N-Out owner places order to go - out of California California and New York serve as cautionary tales for much of the country. As Democratic states lose population, Florida, Texas and other deep red states are growing rapidly. A Democrat hasn't won statewide office in Texas since 1994. And no Democrat currently holds statewide office in Florida. Developing new political talent in the second and third largest states in the nation - and in states like Indiana, Ohio and Tennessee - is now almost impossible for Democrats, a reality that is sure to hurt the party's future on the local, state and national levels. Reapportionment after the 2030 Census also is likely to be brutal for Democrats. The Brennan Center, a progressive think tank, reported that "California would lose 4 of its 52 congressional districts in reapportionment - only the second time the Golden State has ever lost representation. New York, meanwhile, would lose three seats, Illinois two, and Pennsylvania one, leaving all three states with congressional delegations half the size they were in 1940." Opinion newsletter: Sign up for our newsletter on conservative values, family and religion from columnist Nicole Russell. Get it delivered to your inbox. It's not just House seats that Democratic states will shed. Red states also stand to gain more Electoral College votes, which gives future Republican presidential candidates a stronger mathematical advantage. GOP is humming now and into the future Meanwhile, Trump has accomplished more in his first six months than Joe Biden did in four years. Trump is overhauling the federal bureaucracy, reworking the global economy on more favorable terms for Americans, persuading American allies to pay more for their own defense, forcing universities to better protect Jewish students and faculty and to finally respect conservatives on campus, safeguarding women's rights, promoting the U.S. energy sector and other industries to a remarkable degree around the world, and pushing for peace from India to Ukraine. Opinion: Trump wins again - Columbia's $200 million fine will reshape higher education Trump also is building a conservative political dynasty that is set to take his place after he leaves office in 2029. Vice President JD Vance is the GOP's most promising star. He has proved to be articulate and passionate on difficult issues, in the U.S. and while representing America overseas. Intelligent and media savvy, Vance has most, if not all, of the positive qualities a leader needs with few of Trump's less savory qualities. Vance is the heavy early favorite to win the GOP presidential nomination in 2028 and could very well lead Republicans to political dominance for years to come. It's not only Vance, however, with a promising future. New York Republican Rep. Elise Stefanik has made a name for herself standing against antisemitism, especially in institutions of higher education. She's sharp, bold and outspoken about her values. At just 31 years old, Texas Rep. Brandon Gill made headlines when he questioned NPR CEO Katherine Maher in a hearing about her leftist political bias. Secretary of State Marco Rubio is strongly and effectively representing U.S. interests around the globe. Only 54, Rubio, a former senator and presidential candidate from Florida, is a potential Republican presidential nominee for the next two decades. The Republican Party is in a strong position now and could be even more dominant after Trump leaves office. Democrats, in contrast, look aimless now, and their future appears even more grim. No wonder voters aren't attracted to them. Nicole Russell is a columnist at USA TODAY and a mother of four who lives in Texas. Contact her at nrussell@ and follow her on X, formerly Twitter: @russell_nm. Sign up for her weekly newsletter, The Right Track, here.
The Guardian
10 hours ago
- The Guardian
UN plastic pollution talks must result in ambitious treaty, leading expert says
Delegates at the UN plastic pollution treaty talks in Geneva must secure an ambitious global agreement so they can look future generations in the eye, one of the world's leading marine litter experts has said. Prof Richard Thompson, who was named one of Time's 100 most influential people this year for his groundbreaking work on plastic pollution, said decisive action was needed to protect human health and the planet. He spoke on Monday as delegates from more than 170 countries prepared to meet in Geneva to bridge what have become deep divisions over whether limits on plastic production are included in a final treaty. Last November, talks in Busan, South Korea, to secure a global treaty to end plastic pollution broke down without agreement. More than 100 countries support legally binding global reductions in plastic production and the phasing out of certain chemicals and single-use plastic products. But nations with large fossil fuel industries such as Saudi Arabia, China, Russia and Iran oppose restrictions on plastic production, and are pushing for an agreement focused on better management and recycling of waste. The US under President Biden and now President Trump has indicated it is more supportive of a lower ambition treaty which does not include production cuts. The scale of plastic production and its threat to public health and the environment was underlined once more on Monday when a new report warned that the world is in a 'plastics crisis' which is causing disease and death from infancy to old age and is responsible for at least $1.5tn (£1.1tn) a year in health-related damages. The huge acceleration of plastic production, which has increased by more than 200 times since 1950 and is expected to almost triple again to more than a billion tonnes a year by 2060, has been fuelled largely by surges in the production of single-use plastics, the majority of which are used for packaging, drink and food containers. Thompson, head of the international marine litter research unit at Plymouth University, first identified and coined the phrase microplastics to describe how tiny bits of plastic accumulate in marine environments. Attending the Geneva talks as coordinator of the scientists coalition for an effective plastics treaty, he said an ambitious treaty would be a gamechanger for the planet and future generations. 'It is now clear that plastic pollution contaminates our planet from the poles to the equator,' he said. 'We find microplastics in our deepest oceans and our highest mountains. There is evidence of human exposure to them from the womb, throughout our entire lifetime. 'It is really clear to protect future generations we need to take decisive action now on a treaty to address plastic pollution. So I really hope negotiators can look the next generation in the eye and say they acted decisively.' If agreed, a global plastics treaty would be an international, legally binding agreement designed to end plastic pollution by setting targets that nations would need to meet to try to end the 11m tonnes of plastic pollution that are dumped in the ocean every year. But since 2022, when the UN first secured an agreement from 173 countries to develop a legally binding treaty to cut plastic pollution, five separate negotiations have failed to secure a final text to sign. The initial agreement was for a treaty to address the whole life cycle of plastics. But increasing numbers of plastics industry lobbyists have attended each round of talks to push back against production cuts. Sign up to Down to Earth The planet's most important stories. Get all the week's environment news - the good, the bad and the essential after newsletter promotion In Busan last year, 220 fossil fuel and chemical industry representatives – more plastic producers than ever – were represented, including 16 lobbyists from the plastics industry attending as part of country delegations. 'There are those countries that consider the economic threat because their business-as-usual is threatened by this,' said Thompson. 'But the mandate that brings negotiators from 170 countries to Geneva this week sets out that plastic pollution is harmful. It is really clear that business-as-usual is not sustainable.' Globally only 9% of plastic produced is recycled, and Thompson, whose work directly led to the ban on microbeads in cosmetic products in the UK, said the evidence showed that plastic production needed to be reduced to tackle plastic pollution. He said a treaty needed to ensure only plastic that was essential to society was produced, the thousands of chemicals used in plastic were reduced, and that all the plastic produced in future was sustainable, which involved moving to reuse and a circular economy in plastic. All of that, he said, would effectively reduce the amount of plastic produced globally. Graham Forbes, Greenpeace's head of delegation to the treaty negotiations, said the science, the moral imperative and the economics were clear. 'Uncontrolled plastic production is a death sentence. The only way to end plastic pollution is to stop making so much plastic. 'World leaders must seize the opportunity in Geneva, stand up to the fossil fuel industry and take humanity's first step towards ending the plastics crisis and create a healthier, safer future for all.'
