McDermid, Charles. “Dozens of Companies Launch US$1 Billion Bid to End Plastic Pollution in Asia but Environmentalists Dismiss It as ‘Greenwashing’ Stunt.” Break Free From Plastic, Break Free From Plastic, 13 Feb. 2019, www.breakfreefromplastic.org/2019/02/13/companies-bid-end-plastic-pollution-asia-greenwashing-stunt/.

In the article “Dozens of companies launch US$1 billion bid to end plastic pollution in Asia but environmentalists dismiss it as ‘greenwashing’ stunt” by Charles McDermid,  talks about the plastic crisis facing Southeast Asia and the companies who say they want to help, but seem to have vested interest.  In January 2018,  China banned importing recycling because they had too much waste to deal with already. This has led to several other Southeast Asian countries to step up to replace China. In fact, Thailand’s imports of recycling materials from other countries rose by 2000% just within the first 6 months of the Chinese decree. Many of these countries don’t have proper systems to deal with the trash and only 9 percent is recycled, 12 percent is burned, and a whooping 80 percent ends up in landfill or the ocean. Between  Indonesia, the Philippines, Thailand, Vietnam, and China they generate nearly 60 % of the plastic waste in the ocean. This is not due to them being the greatest producers of trash, but the countries who deal with the waste that other more developed countries don’t want to deal with. 90% of the plastic that ends up in Southeast Asia is from high income countries. Now a group of 30+ companies including Chevron, Dow, Formosa Plastics, Mitsubishi Chemical, Procter & Gamble, Sumitomo Chemical, and Shell all are creating an “Alliance to End Plastic Waste”(AEPW). They plan to dedicate 1 billion dollars over the next five years to better plastic recycling practices in SE Asia. Many think that this is just a publicity stunt to “greenwash” these companies, many of which are companies that rely on the plastic industry for a large chunk of their profits. They think that by supposedly bettering the practices in these countries they won’t have to give up their plastic habits.

I think that these companies definitely have vested interest and this alliance does not come from a place of real concern. It comes from a fear they have that as we see plastic pollution get worse and worse, as we are now, we will want to quit buying from them, thus losing a large chunk of their profits. Many of these companies are related to the oil industry which would be heavily influenced if plastic was to be phased out. I also think that they are trying to make it seem like they care about these issues in order to make their companies look better. In reality, they are the ones causing the issues in the first place. Another issue the article brings up is that this maybe an effort to draw attention to the fact that this is happening in Asia. This makes it seem like an Asian problem, and not something we need to deal with. Many Americans could easily be mislead by reading the statistic saying 60% of the waste in the ocean is from SE Asia, when really the trash isn’t from there, we only shipped it there. Although I applaud these companies effort, even though it may be half hearted, I think that we need to address the real issues with plastic consumption here in the US and other developed nations.

Staub, Colin. “EPA: U.S. Plastics Recycling Rate Declines.” Plastics Recycling Update, Resource Recycling, 1 Aug. 2018, https://resource-recycling.com/plastics/2018/08/01/epa-u-s-plastics-recycling-rate-declines/.

In this article titled “ EPA: U.S. plastics recycling rate declines” by Colin Staub discusses how the recycling rate in the US has changed. According to the EPA in 2014 to 2015 the recycling rate fell, while the production rates increased. The rate of plastic recycling fell from 9.5 percent to 9.1 percent  and also fell in weight from 3.17 million tons to 3.14 million tons. Out of the 34.5 million tons of plastic waste the US generated in 2015, 26 million tons were put in a landfill, and 5.4 tons were burned. Slightly less was put into landfill, but that only means that the US ended up burning more plastic as a result. Plastics also weren’t the only materials that are being recycled less, aluminum, and textiles among other things also saw a drop in recycling rates. At a time when the US is continuing to produce more and more it is quite concerning to see the recycling rate go down.

I was surprised a bit by this article. I thought that it was only logical that as time progressed, our systems to recycle plastics would improve and our recycling rates would rise. It is counter intuitive that they would have fallen when we are producing more waste than ever. This article is specifically talking about rates falling in 2014 to 2015, however that trend has sadly continued and we are now at a recycling rate of only 9 percent. We are also producing more waste than we did in 2015. I think that we need to find a way to amend our recycling program so that all plastic than can be recycled is. I also think that we need to find alternatives to plastics instead of relying on recycling. Bio plastics that are made out of organic materials and can be composted have been around for a long time and I think it is time that they are more heavily used. Plastic needs to be phased out, and we need to stop using recycling as a crutch to make it feel like we are doing the right thing when in reality, much less is being done.

National Law Review. “More U.S. Cities Enact Plastic Bag Bans February 22, 2019.” The National Law Review, National Law Review, 22 Feb. 2019, www.natlawreview.com/article/more-us-cities-enact-plastic-bag-bans-february-22-2019.

In this article titled “More U.S. Cities Enact Plastic Bag Bans February 22, 2019” by the National Law Review, it discusses the cities that have recently joined the growing list of places that have banned plastic bags. Boston is banning bags at the checkout of stores and now they can only distribute bags that can be reused or composted. However, laundry cleaner bags, trash bags, and produce bags are exempt. Hoboken, Gainesville, Anchorage, Salem and Charleston all have enacted a similar bans. Some allow the remaining stock of bags to be depleted before they must comply. Others give more time to small businesses to implement the changes than larger corporations. They also differ on how much the reusable bags must be sold for. The prices vary from 5 cents up to 50 cents. Hoboken’s new ordinance also mandates that the paper bags they replace the plastic ones with must be made with 40% post consumer recycled materials.

I am so glad to hear that more cities are banning plastic bags that are unnecessary. I hope that one day all the states in the US will adopt similar bans. It seems like we are finally seeing some changes in policies in response to the anti plastic movement. I hope that this momentum keeps up, and we are able to see changes in other areas as well. As great as it is we are seeing changes, there are even bigger sources of plastic that need to be tackled. I found it interesting that they had to specify the exact type of plastic bag they were banning in each city. I never really stopped to think that a plastic bag ban would cover anything other than the bags that you receive at the checkout of a store, but at the same time that doesn’t make sense. Why just that specific bag and not the others as well. I think that the plastic checkout bags are low hanging fruit, but I hope to see even more done in the future.

O’Donnell, Noreen. “What Happens When China Doesn’t Want Our Recyclables.” NBC4 Washington, NBC4 Washington, 15 Aug. 2018, www.nbcwashington.com/news/business/US-Struggles-With-What-to-Do-With-Tons-of-Recycled-Material-489971551.html.

In this article titled “Recycling Breaks Down: US Struggles to Keep Plastic From the Dump” Noreen O’Donnell discusses the effects that the new Chinese mandate poses on our current system of waste management. China was the main place that most of our recyclables ended up, however, they ended up getting so much waste that they couldn’t deal with it. It was not only polluting the air and the land, but was turning China into the world’s dumping ground.  Now That means certain items will no longer be recyclable. For example in Sacramento egg cartoons, medicine bottles and some yogurt containers will go to  landfills instead of being recycled. We simply do not have the facilities or resources to handle all of the waste we produce. All of the US was dependent on China, but especially California, who exports ⅓ of its recyclables and 62 percent goes to China. Now cities in California are beginning to restrict the types of plastic that can be distributed to only those that can be recycled easily. Especially now that many recyclables are all thrown into one bin to be sorted later and cross contamination occurs, even fewer plastics make it to be recycled.

This article is a great example of what happens when you produce without thinking of the consequences. The US has been producing and pawning its waste off on China for years now, and now that they won’t take it anymore, we are getting a rude awakening about how unsustainable our habits really are. Our system of making goods coupled with consumerism and poor recycling facilities has left us with few options. Now we must either bury our trash or burn it as the two main options. I find it very sad that common items like egg cartons or yogurt containers won’t be recycled anymore. I hope we can find a way to fix our broken system of production and waste management.

O’Neill, Kate, and Kate O’Neill. “The Plastic Waste Crisis Is an Opportunity for the US to Get Serious about Recycling at Home.” The Conversation, The Conversation, 18 Aug. 2018, http://theconversation.com/the-plastic-waste-crisis-is-an-opportunity-for-the-us-to-get-serious-about-recycling-at-home-93254.

In the article, “The plastic waste crisis is an opportunity for the US to get serious about recycling at home” by Kate O’neil, talks about how China’s reduction of foreign imported plastic waste has affected the us and how it shows just how much work is needed to be done to improve our own systems of dealing with plastic waste in the US.  In the wake of the new China mandate where they are no longer taking foreign materials the US is left to reevaluate its relationship with plastic. Since china was the main place our waste got shipped to, now without it, we are starting to realize just how big of a problem we have which has sparked the anti plastic movement. Plastic is very easy to use and hard to destroy, which is it’s appeal, but also its down fall. Not only is it very hazardous to the environment to make, but they are very hard to get rid of as well. Out of the seven different types of plastics used, only 2 can even be recycled and our recycling facilities throw out over half of what they recieve due to contamination. This partially explains why less than 10% of plastics in the US are recycled and over 70% goes to landfill. The rest is usually burned, which is called combustion energy recovery. If we really want to fix this problem we are going to have to implement better systems and policies to stem pollution than just sending it to landfill or burning it. The European Union is planning on increasing recycling and making all packaging recyclable by 2030. The US should consider doing the same.

The United States is one of the biggest producers of plastic and we have to take responsibility for our actions. If we are going to use that much plastic we have better got to have ways of disposing of it. Currently what we are doing is not working. Having no place to send our trash after China refused to take anymore of it has left us realizing just how big of a problem we have. Personally I think that the best ways to stop plastic pollution is to first have all packaging be at the very minimum recyclable, but hopefully compostable. We also need to fix our recycling system starting with educating citizens. If something is going to be recycled it has got to be clean, but also the different kinds of recycling needs to be separated. We would also need to increase the size and number of recycling plants in the US. This would prevent some of the recycling from going to landfill or being burned, but not all. In the end we should all strive to create as little waste as possible. The government can’t implement policies as fast as people can change their habits.

Timpf, K. (2018, July 27). Santa Barbara Authorizes Jail Time for Handing Out Straws. Retrieved November 17, 2018, from https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/07/plastic-straw-ban-santa-barbara-jail-time-punishment/

In this article published by the National review and written by Katherine Timpf, explains the new  ban on straws in Santa Barbara and the consequences of disobeying the ordinance. A new ordinance passed in Santa Barbara outlaws straws and upon a second offence of an employee giving out straws they could receive a punishment of  up to 6 month of jail time or a one thousand dollar fine. Each individual straw counts as a separate infraction. This is the most severe ordinance that has been passed in the country. Opposition to the ban thinks that it is too extreme especially because straws make up such a small amount of plastic pollution.  

Personally I think It is great that Santa Barbara has outlawed straws and is taking strides to reduce single use plastics. However, this ordinance was extreme, and luckily all the criminal language has since been removed from it. It also allows for straws to be provided for customers with disabilities that need straws to drink. For the majority of the population, however,  straws are not necessary, and so this is a great step to take to reduce plastic waste. Since straws are made from petroleum they are very hard to recycle and end up in landfills or worse, the ocean. Since Santa Barbara and many of the other towns that have banned straws are along the coasts, this will hopefully prevent straws from making their way into the Ocean. Straws are only a tiny fraction of the plastic in the ocean, so as great as it is that cities are banning them, we have to continue to push for more sustainable options for all other single use plastics, not only straws.

Xia, R. (2018, May 28). Straws. Bottle caps. Polyester. These are the new targets of California’s environmental movement. Retrieved November 17, 2018, from http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-california-plastic-pollution-20180528-story.html

In this article by Rosanna Xia, she explores the environmental hazards that new California laws are targeting, including straws, bottle caps, and polyester. A new study analyzed 150 tap water samples from 5 continents and found that a majority contained micro plastics. Ninety four percent of the samples from the US contained micro plastics. This shocking study reveals the  reality that the plastics we use everyday do not just disappear when we recycle or throw them away. The plastic just continues to degrade into smaller particles and incorporate into every aspect of our lives. The new bills include mandating bottle caps be attached to plastic bottles, straws only given upon request, and labeling clothing made with more than 50 percent synthetic material to warn against microfiber shedding during washing. A study by U C Santa Barbara found that a single wastewater treatment plant released 179 lbs of microfibers a day. These measures were met with mixed reactions, some claiming that they would hurt businesses and the economy, and others claiming that they didn’t go far enough.

I think it is great that people are beginning to pay attention to these issues, but I think it is sad that so many still disapprove of them. We all live on this planet and once things like microfibers are released into the ocean they can never be collected again, but businesses can always adapt. Also we all need water to live and no one wants plastic in their water, so this is not a partisan issue, it is a human issue. The effects of plastic pollution are wide reaching and not only affect the ocean and its inhabitants, but humans too. These measures will help protect not only animals and ecosystems, but also people from the harmful effects of plastics.

Daniels, J. (2018, March 07). California looks to ban removable plastic bottle caps, restrict plastic straws. Retrieved November 17, 2018, from https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/07/california-targets-removable-plastic-bottle-caps-plastic-straws.html

In this article by Jeff Daniels, He explains how California is looking to ban removable bottle caps in favor of ones that are connected to the bottle. Coastal cleanup groups found that bottle caps are the third most common plastic item they find when doing beach clean ups. They end up contributing  to a significant amount of waste. If they were connected to the bottle then they are more likely to find their way into the recycling bin. Bottle manufacturers say that this law will negatively impact small and large businesses and drive costs up for consumers. The article also mentions how the fight against plastic pollution is ever more urgent because China, where much of Americans plastics have been recycled in the past, is now no longer accepting plastic waste.

I think that this is a great idea and will result in more bottle caps being recycled. The bottle manufacturers seem to think that educating the public to screw the caps of bottles back on will be just as effective as passing this mandate. I think that that will do little to stop the problem, but having the caps attached will be much more effective and put the responsibility on the plastic producers, not consumers. I don’t think that a small bit of plastic being added to bottles to attach the cap would cost a fortune or cause manufacturers to go out of business. I think it is a necessary cost if we want to stop one of the most prevalent items from polluting the ocean. Bottle caps are found almost everywhere and wildlife often thinks they are food. This law would prevent helpless creatures from dying from ingesting plastics.

Renstrom, R. (2018, August 1). Industry, environmentalists concerned about implementation of California’s reusable bag law. Retrieved November 17, 2018, from https://www.plasticsnews.com/article/20180801/NEWS/180809986/industry-environmentalists-concerned-about-implementation-of-californias-reusable-bag-law

In this article by Roger Renstrom, it explains the concerns that environmentalists have concerning the new California laws pertaining to reusable plastic bags being implemented. The law states that all plastic bags in California will have to be reusable, meaning they are at least 2.25 mil thick and can carry 22 lbs 175 feet at least 125 times. They also will be required to be made of twenty percent recycled material, an amount that will increase to forty percent in 2020. Some plastic bag producers complain that certain unsustainable bags are in compliance, while their more sustainable solutions are not. After the implementation of the law an investigation found that several bag producers were not in compliance. A public interest action was then filed by the L.A. based lawyer, Stephen Joseph, who was going to sue those 10 companies who did not comply with the law. He is hoping it will not go to trial and everyone will comply.

I applaud Jerry Brown for passing this bill, however I am disappointed that another law the article mentioned that would give the funds received from plastic bag sales to environmental causes did not pass. I think it is great that we are no longer using single use plastics and utilizing recycling to create new plastic bags, however I do wonder if people will continue to reuse these bags, or of they will just throw them out. Many single use plastic bags end up in the ocean, and I wonder if fewer of these new reusable bags will end up there. Single use plastics are a huge issue because they are hard to recycle and only used once before they are throw away. Most of the time they end up in landfills or the sea, and lead to the deaths of wildlife. This new law will hopefully result in less waste and less single use plastics being hazardous to the environment.

Rodriguez, O. R. (n.d.). Massive Boom Hopes to Corral Pacific Ocean’s Plastic Trash. Retrieved November 17, 2018, from https://www.usnews.com/news/news/articles/2018-09-08/massive-boom-will-corral-pacific-oceans-plastic-trash

In this article by Olga Rodriguez she explains how scientists in San Francisco have just deployed a huge two thousand foot long boom to collect trash in the Great Pacific Garbage Patch. The boom was created by a 24 year old scientist from the Netherlands who was inspired to create a solution to plastic pollution when he went scuba diving and saw more plastic than fish. The boom is a ten foot deep u-shaped screen that is shallow enough to allow marine life to escape, but deep enough to trap the trillions of pieces of plastic in between California and Hawaii. It will be used to corral all the trash so ships can be scoop out the garbage and return it to land. Periodically the ship will return to land where the plastic can be recycled. The goal of this project  is to remove fifty percent of the trash in the garbage patch in 5 years. In the future they plan to add more ships to the fleet if the boom is successful.

I hope this works because plastic pollution in the ocean is a huge issue, however, this will not fix the plastic pollution problem. The main issue is that we continue to pollute the ocean with millions of tons of trash every year, mainly in the form of single use plastics and fishing gear. If we don’t stop the problem at its roots then trying to rid the ocean of plastic will be an impossible task. If we are able to reduce the Great Pacific Garbage Patch by fifty percent the fish and other wildlife that used to inhabit those waters might be able to return again. This Gyre is the largest garbage patch at twice the size of Texas and has displaced many species. It has created a dead zone because the water is so toxic and filed with micro plastics that clog gills and make it impossible for marine animals to breathe. If  this seemingly simple solution works then it could be implemented across the globe in all of the five garbage patches and could save the lives of countless animals.