Single-use plastic products or more commonly known as SUPs are typically only used once or over a short time frame before being discarded. SUPs are deposited in the oceans in huge quantities. According to National Geographic, there are a minimum of 5.25 trillion plastic particles also known as microplastics in the ocean.
Microplastics have recently taken over the discussion concerning plastics. Microplastics are minuscule fragments of plastic waste that end up in the environment as a result of consumer goods and industrial waste being disposed of and broken down. These microplastics can even infiltrate our bodies and according to scientists based in the Netherlands they have already got into many ecosystems. Plastics have entered various ecosystems in several different forms and they are affecting them to a great extent.
The anomalous question or as the UN postulates ‘a planetary Crisis’ presented is thought by everyone as something very obvious, something which is unquestionable but there are several adverse effects of banning SUPs as well, although this will have innumerable positive effects on the climate, humanity should ambidextrously analyze the causes and consequences pertaining the issue from varied perspectives.
According to the Environmental Health News, many countries across the world have placed several laws to alleviate plastic pollution and production. The Environmental Health News is a website which is dedicated to delivering all environmental news. This source was published in 2021 which makes it quite up to date. The author also has been mentioned and the article quoted shows how many countries are looking at plastic as a problem, these factors show how strong the source is. It is a news service which may relate to a potential bias, this shows a weakness of the provided source.
Several Small Island nations in the Caribbean have also put strict bans on SUP products but they haven’t been as successful because of excessive tourism, several tourists don’t adhere to the regulations placed by the government there. This shows how tourism directly relates to plastic waste and waste production overall. According to UNEP, rising tourism is a huge contributor to this planetary crisis. Approximately 8 out of 10 tourists travel to coastal areas, this is accountable for most of the microplastics and waste which is deposited in the ocean every year. A 2019 World Bank report showed, around 320000 tons of plastic remains uncollected annually which is causing a huge problem to oceanic life, also affecting the local population who rely on the ocean extensively. The World Bank(established in 1944) gave a forum to foremost political and cultural leaders, it is affiliated with the UN. The source was published on 30th May 2019 which makes it a bit outdated. As this source comes from the World Bank, it means that many nations agree with it. All these things make it a credible source. The only weakness of this source is that there is no author mentioned which is expected as multiple personalities may have contributed to it. Overall this is a dependable source. The Caribbean is an example of plastic entering the marine ecosystem and damaging over 35 Distinct economies in just one part of the world. This is a problem with almost every coastal area which has excessive tourism. When polythene is exposed to sunlight in water or in air it releases methane and ethylene. Around 18 billion pounds of plastic waste is discarded in just the Caribbean Islands. Globally, polyethylene is the most produced and discarded synthetic polymer, and it emits the most of both gasses. This is a prevalent cause of SUPs being banned.
India, a developing country seeing rapid growth in its economy, the annual usage of SUPs also has been constantly increasing. India uses about 14 million tons of plastic annually, but as a still developing nation it lacks an organized system for recycling plastic. According to the PIB, the nation is making a significant move to reduce pollution brought on by discarded and improperly handled plastic garbage. India has banned, from July 1, 2022, the production, importation, storage, sale, and use of certain single-use plastic products that have a reduced efficacy and have a high potential for polluting and littering. The Press Information Bureau is managed and is part of the Government of India. It relays information about what the government is doing, it publishes press releases made by the parliament of India. The fact that the site is managed and controlled by the government of India makes this a very strong source of information. The date of publication is also mentioned which is another strength, the fact that the contributors to the source are not mentioned was very much expected because this is a press release and more than 50 people contribute to a press release. Overall this is a very strong source which provides information about the current happenings in India. Only 30% of plastic waste is recycled but the overall quantity is humongous. India imposed a ban on some specific plastic materials to reduce this quantity. Although businesses have no choice but to use these banned plastics to cut costs, for them it's a choice between plastic and acquiring subsistence. This makes it difficult for the legislature to go forward with the ban.
These causes exist both nationally and globally making this a worldwide dilemma, these also show why nations try to implement a ban on SUPs even with its many negative implications.
Banning plastic will have several global and national consequences. Eighty percent of all marine waste, from surface waters to deep-sea debris, consists of plastic. This statement from the IUCN shows how plastic makes up most of the water pollution. This will certainly bring these numbers to a stand still but what about the plastics that are already in the ocean which need to be removed as well.
Taking the example of the US, it has imposed no bans on SUPs. This has led to an all time low recycling rate of around 7%. This has led to the nation being responsible for more than 2,400,000 tons of plastic litter.
Furthermore, companies like Coca Cola and Pepsico –the biggest companies responsible for the most plastic pollution, who cut costs by using plastic bottles, packaging, etc. Actually, the top corporations on the list have been there for years. All of these businesses deal in fast-moving consumer goods. These businesses contribute a lot to the World Economy. This shows the direct relation between the lack of time people have and the usage of plastic as the success of the companies shows the same. These will go through a huge reform which will lead to a major dip in their profits, this will directly impact the world economy seeing the scale of these organisations.
This also entails a great economic setback on a national and global scale. This is the main reason why great economic giants like the US have not placed even a minor ban on SUPs. Economic disadvantages are a major consequence which is one of the main reasons for hesitation in nations to either implement this ban or not. Economic drop can be considered the result of a Domino effect caused by the banning of plastic.
There is a similar situation in India, after implementing its first ban it has had difficulties enforcing it because of the disapproval of commoners. According to the IUCN, India has been facing a major environmental problem from plastic trash. However, the nation has challenges in creating a workable waste management system and a substitute for SUPs. This statement brings out the logistical, political and cultural difficulties in implementing this ban. This has led to more hate against the legislature by businesses and people who require plastic in their daily lives.
Consequently, the market for more sustainable and recyclable products has increased globally. More and more alternatives are coming up. For example, the use of biodegradable garbage bags has increased exponentially. The need for the people to use a plastic like material is driving businesses and entrepreneurs to find suitable supplements. Although, the actual sustainability of these products remains questionable.
Additionally, the relevance of ‘Informal recyclers’ has reduced. Scrap dealers, especially in India, suffer from a decrease in waste. They operate on collecting used objects –widely plastics, recycling them and then selling it for a profit. These small scale recyclers prevented 70% of the total waste from ending up in landfills. Many products like egg trays are made from the waste collected by these recyclers. Banning of said plastics will lead to unemployment in various sectors which acts as a national and a global consequence. This may affect developing economies– India where more than 35% of the population are daily wagers.
A probable solution which the government of India can implement is funding reliable projects which are working towards reducing plastic pollution. As mentioned earlier , these small scale projects make a great impact in the long run and these projects have a great chance to grow and become big scale projects only if they have the funding and the resources. If the government can provide these resources these projects could really flourish and bring about huge change. The only problem is that the government will need to identify projects which are actually reliable and not frauds. This would take time as the government will have to monitor these projects for at least 6 months. The government will also have to talk to the leaders of these projects to understand why they need such funds and what they would use them for, so that the government knows that they are not giving money to fraudulent people but to those who can actually bring about some change.
This solution will take time to implement, but will have a great scale and depth of impact as instead of just the government, thousands of individuals will be working to eradicate this problem. As a short term solution the government can impose a higher tax on plastic usage which will motivate businesses and individuals to switch to alternatives for the time being. Although this cannot be implemented as a long term solution as it may cause backlash from businesses which may lead to a panorama of events.
The UN can also be approached for assistance with funding small scale projects, UNDEF is already running a fund like this but on a pretty large scale because of which instead of funding these small scale projects, they end up funding projects already doing pretty well for themselves which prevents diversification of fund allocations and leads to a smaller scale of impact as not as many people are mobilized to work. Collaborating with the UNDEF will allow those small scale projects to go even beyond India and also get access to different kinds of resources and even more funding.
Contrary to popular belief, the discussion around single-use plastics (SUPs) is far more complex. Although there are unquestionably many environmental benefits to outlawing SUPs, such as lowering marine pollution and safeguarding ecosystems, the ban's economic and social ramifications also need to be carefully examined. A balanced approach is evident from the difficulties developing nations like India experience in enforcing restrictions to the substantial impact on multinational firms and unofficial recycling economies.
Solutions like government-funded recycling programs, higher tax on plastic use, and cooperation with international organizations like the UN could provide more scalable and durable results than a blanket ban. Through a combination of short- and long-term approaches, the international community can address plastic pollution without having an adverse effect on the economy and several social consequences. Only through a well-rounded, inclusive approach can we address this pressing "planetary crisis" and ensure a healthier, more sustainable future.
Answering the question posed in one line – No, banning the use of Single Use Plastic is not the best way towards sustainable living as this is not something the world can practically sustain.
Comments