Plastic World

November 7, 2017

November 7, 2017


Plastics are ubiquitous; this fact cannot be denied. Many plastics are needed to support our happy modern day lifestyles. But where do we draw the line on our ever-growing production of plastics; and even more importantly, the ever-increasing environmental impacts of plastic materials?


According to the nonprofit Plastic Oceans, the world produces almost 300 million tons of plastic each year. Adding to the environmental burden, fully one-half of the plastics produced are for single use.


For years, the growing Chinese economy provided a reliable market for recycled plastics and other materials. However, in large part because of changes in domestic recycling practices, U.S. exports to China (and other countries) of “recyclable material” increasingly contained dirty and poorly sorted materials, or even materials contaminated with hazardous substances such as lead or mercury. In 2013, China went on the offensive to clean up these imports with its “Operation Green Fence.”


This past July, China notified the World Trade Organization (WTO) of its intention to ban 24 types of solid waste imports, most notably plastics, paper, and textiles. Considering that $5.6 billion in scrap commodities were exported from the United States to China in 2016, one can imagine how the impact on the recycling industry could seem unsurmountable. Just last year, almost a quarter of our country’s largest exporters (by volume) were recyclers of paper, plastic, or metal.


Municipalities and processors are now scrambling to find markets for collected plastics. Many are finding that they will receive no revenue; indeed, they may even have to pay to get rid of materials. Communities are scaling their collection back to accepting only #1 PET or #2 HDPE bottles and containers. Markets for plastic bags and other film plastic, as well as rigid plastics like plastic lids, bins, or crates, and mixed plastics (a category that includes plastic cups and a range of food containers) are particularly constrained.


North America has processing capacity for clean, sorted streams of PET and HDPE bottles, and even polypropylene resins. For films and non-bottle rigids, China’s ban presents more of an issue. End markets for these materials have depended on exports as there isn’t enough domestic processing capacity. The limitation of North American processing capacity is, however, only one facet of the plastic issue.


Exporting our plastics to China allowed us to put a false happy face…a “plastic facade”, if you will, on our overuse of this valuable resource. While our industry voices its opposition to China’s ban, we are all nonetheless culpable for the current situation. We are all responsible for polluted communities in China and other countries that have imported the packaging and remnants of our consumer culture.


I recently viewed “Plastic China,” a movingly poignant film that puts a real face on the people processing so much of our plastic scrap. When the film was made in 2016, China was the world’s biggest plastic waste importer, receiving ten million tons of recycled material per year. Much of this material was processed at small, “plastic waste household-recycling workshops.”


The impact on the local environment, as well as the health of workers and their families that live with them, is staggering. Yes, some of these materials were recycled into new clothing, toys, or other items to satiate consumer habits around the world. Much of this plastic, however, cannot be reprocessed and lives on, polluting the environment and communities surrounding these recycling shops.


Should China be doing more to protect its environment? Yes, of course. Should China be doing more to raise its people out of the cycle of poverty? Yes. However, we as a nation need to also examine the role we have in exporting waste around the world.


As an ever changing, global nation, each of us has a role to play in keeping all of the world’s environments healthy. Our role in exporting unsorted, dirty materials to China and other nations has now come back to haunt us. The fact that we ignored the realities of how our materials were being processed by adults and children in environmentally devastating circumstances is what should truly be haunting us.


The global flow of recycled scrap plastic, which ends up in mountains of burning piles and contaminated waterways, is an image we don’t want to face. 


The more than 8 million tons of plastic that ends up in our oceans every year is another image that troubles some, but hasn’t made a dent in our global production and use of plastics.


We are all responsible for a world which consumes more than one million bags every minute, and the 101 billion plastic beverage bottles sold in just one year in the U.S.


We are all responsible for embracing single-stream recycling without a vetted plan to ensure clean loads of recyclable materials that can be used in the manufacture of new products. We accept government agencies trying to save money by eliminating recycling positions, and thus failing to provide the consumer education needed to clean up the materials destined for processing.



Plastic is a valuable resource, one that needs to be used responsibly and with greater consciousness.


By Athena Lee Bradley

Share Post

By Access Newswire August 20, 2026
We are more than halfway through 2026, making this a good moment to reflect on what stands out from all the recent change in the sustainability landscape. We review news about sustainability all week, every week, but we also work closely with clients in a range of industries who are dealing with the daily work of environmental protection, social advancement, governance integrity, and - perhaps the most complicated aspect - how to talk about it all. So, while the loudest headlines have been about retreat in regulations, target-setting, hiring, and corporate reporting, there is another truth worth telling: what companies do has not changed much. The stories in this issue of Sustainability Highlights explore the two sides of this contrast. In Forbes, Anjali Chaudhry assembles the numbers behind "greenhushing." EcoVadis found 87% of U.S. companies maintained or increased sustainability investment in 2025 and only 7% cut, while 31% of executives invested more and said less. Forbes investigated whether the silence paid off, and found it was not the safe harbor companies expected: 98% of businesses in a 2026 procurement survey had lost contract opportunities for not sharing sustainability credentials. Standard-setters may have a sense of why this is. In Eco-Business, Global Reporting Initiative chief executive Robin Hodess says GRI has seen no decline in reporting numbers, with four in five of the largest global companies still using GRI Standards. Offering a clue about why reporting has stayed strong this year, she makes a business case for robust disclosures: "I've never met an investor who wants less information." The size and tenor of the comment file received by the SEC over the past few months bears out Hodess' view. As Responsible Investor reports, Vanguard - the world's second-largest asset manager - is the largest investor to oppose scrapping the climate rules, telling the Commission there is value in standardized, comparable disclosure of material risks - climate among them. TIAA and Nuveen argued for a simplified rule rather than none, warning of a "mosaic of state-specific requirements." If sustainability were receding, we wouldn't be hearing about more hours for lawyers. Corporate Disclosures picked up Side by Side , our new research with Ropes & Gray, and led with a finding that surprised us too: 39% of the sustainability professionals surveyed now report into the legal department, against 17% reporting to the CEO. According to 87% of them, and 84% of their legal counterparts, interaction has increased because of regulation. California's climate laws and the CSRD each were named by 75% of our respondents as the most pressing reason for greater collaboration between legal and sustainability teams. Majorities in both groups expected legal's role to grow; not a single respondent expected it to shrink. Capital is moving the same way. ESG Dive reports U.S. sustainable funds drew roughly $3 billion in the second quarter - the first positive quarter since 2022, ending 14 straight quarters of outflows and lifting assets to a record $398 billion. But the developments also show signs of caution: the money went to passive strategies, active funds shed $3.6 billion, and 22 funds closed against three launches. Other timely news delves into AI's role in sustainability matters. Inside Climate News reports on applications increasing oil and gas output, MIT Sloan cites the climate costs and benefits of AI tools, and we found two takes on whether data centers and clean power can share a grid. These stories paint the backdrop for our new issue brief on Responsible AI Due Diligence , which is a guide to the OECD's first guidance for the AI value chain. On circularity, the EU's Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation is in force this month, including PFAS limits on food-contact packaging. The Northeast Recycling Council has mapped policies on producer stewardship in 11 U.S. states, offering useful context for our resource paper on the EU's PPWR and our EPR support work. Also inside: $20 billion in climate grants unblocked on appeal, and the world's largest carbon removal plant due online by year's end. This is just the introduction of G&A's Sustainability Highlights newsletter this week. Click here to view the full issue. Read on Access Newswire .
By Nancy Dzija Vaughan | Prime Publishers August 12, 2026
BETHLEHEM – First Selectman Raymond Butkus provided an update to the Board of Selectmen last Tuesday that included an announcement regarding the disposal of tires at the transfer station. Mr. Butkus said the CT Tire Stewardship program has gone into effect, According to the Northeast Recycling Council website, “the Connecticut Tire Stewardship (CTS) is the nonprofit organization responsible for implementing Connecticut’s Tire Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) program. Working with municipal transfer stations, tire retailers, auto shops, car dealerships, and other collection partners, CTS helps ensure discarded tires are responsibly collected, recycled, and put to beneficial new uses.” The website goes on to state, “Approximately 3.5 million tires reach the end of their useful life in Connecticut each year. Through its statewide Roll Recycle Renew program, CTS provides residents with free tire recycling opportunities while giving municipalities a practical solution for managing scrap tires. By making responsible disposal more accessible, the program helps reduce illegal dumping, protect waterways and natural resources, and keep tires out of landfills.” Mr. Butkus said town residents will now be able to bring most tires to the town transfer at no cost. Tires will be accepted both on and off the rim. The exception is large tractor tires, tires for construction equipment, or excessively dirty tires. These tires will still ne accepted, however, there will be a fee for disposal. Mr. Butkus also reported that he held a meeting last week regarding the rewiring of the computer equipment at Town Hall. The project is expected to begin this week and will likely be completed by August 20. A new monitor has been located in the hallway of Town Hall. This monitor will be used to display a list of upcoming meetings along with announcements and photographs. Read on Prime Publishers .
By Erin Finan | Recycling Today August 12, 2026
The Northeast Recycling Council (NERC) has released its 2026 Northeast States Policy Guide, a new regional resource that provides a comprehensive comparison of sustainable materials management policies across 11 states in the Northeastern U.S. “The guide serves as an excellent primer for state and industry stakeholders looking to learn about the various policy frameworks enacted across the Northeast and how they have been applied,” says NERC President Michael Nork, who also works as an environmental analyst for the New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services. Developed through a standardized survey of state government agencies, NERC says the guide serves as a practical reference for policymakers, municipal leaders, industry professionals and researchers looking to navigate and compare policies related to waste reduction, reuse, recycling and circular economy initiatives. The publication includes both regional policy analyses and detailed state profiles covering product bans, product stewardship (including extended producer responsibility), minimum postconsumer recycled content requirements, mandatory recycling laws and disposal bans. “This resource provides high-level insight into materials of interest that the Northeast has focused on managing for decades,” says Shannon McDonald, director at Maryland Department of the Environment in the Waste Diversion Division. “For a regulatory agency, specific resources that provide clear examples of replicable or considerable policy and management strategies are useful tools—having them in one place is even more valuable.” The guide compiles state-level data across Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island and Vermont to highlight core regional policy trends, including: regional policy prevalence-- Regulatory frameworks are established across the region, with 10 of 11 states using product stewardship programs, 10 enforcing disposal bans and nine maintaining mandatory recycling laws; broadest state coverage -- Maine and Vermont regulate the widest variety of items in the region, 20 and 21, respectively, followed closely by New Jersey at 19 categories; top regulated materials -- Electronics are the most widely addressed material (regulated by 10 states), followed by mercury thermostats (9 states), tires (8 states), as well as paint, rechargeable batteries, beverage containers, fluorescent lighting, lead-acid batteries, mercury-added products and yard waste (7 states); funding and mechanism structures -- Among the region’s product stewardship programs, 47 percent are producer-funded, 15 percent rely on consumer point-of-sale eco-fees, 5 percent combine producer and consumer fees and 33 percent utilize alternative measures such as labeling, recyclability standards or disclosure requirements; and regulatory gaps and emerging opportunities -- Significant policy gaps exist in rapidly growing clean-energy waste streams. Currently, only one state addresses electric vehicle (EV) batteries, and zero states have statewide policy programs for solar panels. Unfilled coverage areas present opportunities for cross-state collaboration, policy alignment and regional innovation. By presenting data in a standardized format for each state, the guide enables stakeholders to easily compare regional policy approaches, identify coverage gaps and adapt regulatory models. “By standardizing how we measure product stewardship, PCR [postconsumer recyclables] mandates and disposal bans across all 11 states, this guide allows state leaders to quickly identify where their policies align with neighbors and where transferable models already exist,” says Mariane Medeiros, director of strategic engagement and sustainability programs at NERC. “With 10 of 11 states enforcing stewardship programs and disposal bans, the region has proven its ability to manage complex products. The next frontier is applying that same collaborative momentum to rapidly growing clean-energy waste streams like solar panels and EV batteries.” Read on Recycling Today.