Whoever ends up in the White House after next week’s presidential election will face a series of crises related to the unchecked production of plastic: toxic pollution and greenhouse gas emissions of manufacturing facilities, leach chemicals of the 20 million metric tons of plastic that ends up in the environment each year, and microplastic pollution throughout people’s bodies, to name just a few.
Fortunately, there are a number of ways the next CEO can address the problem. Before the election, the nonprofit organization released Beyond Plastics a list of 27 priorities for the next presidential administration – a kind of wish list of ways to significantly reduce the production, use and disposal of plastics “for the sake of public health and the environment.” It builds on previous claims for a “Plastic free president,” put together by a coalition of environmental groups just before President Joe Biden took office.
“For whoever is elected president, I think we’re at an important moment” to tackle the plastic crisis, said Judith Enck, Beyond Plastic’s president and a former regional administrator for the Environmental Protection Agency.
According to Enck, the most important thing the world can do to mitigate plastic’s harm is to stop making so much of it in the first place. Of the 420 million metric tons of plastic produced worldwide each year, net 9 percent is recycled — the rest is sent to landfills or incinerators, or becomes litter in the environment. The US president cannot solve the problem on their own, but they can support reduced plastic production as part of the global plastics treaty negotiated by the United Nations. Those negotiations were ongoing since 2022 and were originally scheduled to conclude by the end of this year, but Enck suspects they will be extended to 2025. If so, the next president will have an opportunity to add specificity to the Biden administration’s commitment — announced in mid-August – to support restrictions on plastic production and the use of dangerous chemical additives in the pact.
If the treaty ends up being ratified by Congress — perhaps a tall order, given the Senate’s tendency to rejected international agreements — then it would become legally binding, and the executive branch would have to work with lawmakers to implement it. Depending on what is in the final text of the agreement, this could involve the adoption of a national packaging reduction law, a bill to encourage the recycling and recycling of plastic bottles, or a policy requiring new washing machines to come with filters to to prevent plastic microfibers from escaping. in waterways. Of course, the White House and Congress can still pursue these policies if the US is not a party to the global plastics treaty. Many of them are already included in some form as part of the Break Free From Plastic Pollution ActA Democratic bill introduced for the third time during this year’s legislative session.
Independent of the treaty and congressional considerations, there are many other actions the next president could take to address the plastic crisis.
Beyond Plastics calls on the next presidential administration to issue a moratorium on new or renewed permits for petroleum refining and plastics manufacturing plants, as well as facilities dedicated to “chemical recycling” — a term for processes that supposedly use heat and pressure to reconstruct low-quality plastics into new products, but have largely failed to deliver on that promise. These restrictions can promote environmental justice, as petrochemical and chemical recycling facilities often are located in low-income communities which bear the brunt of associated air and water pollution.
The next president could also issue an executive order for federal agencies to phase out certain types of financial aid to the petrochemical industry — such as Energy Department grants for chemical recycling research and federal loan guarantees for plastic incineration facilities. Federal agencies can also ensure that plastic companies actually pay when they enter into settlement agreements related to the pollution they caused, and that they do not deduct these payments from their taxes. Enck proposed redirecting state funding to building out reuse infrastructure: things like water stations, dishwashing equipment in public schools and commercial bottle washing operations for breweries and wineries.
The next presidential administration could direct executive agencies such as the Justice Department and the Federal Trade Commission to pursue additional interventions. The former can launch investigations into the plastic industry for contributing to sea and land pollution, and for falsely advertising plastic’s recyclability – like some state attorney generals have already done. The latter can strengthen its guidelines on plastic-related sustainability claims through a document called the Green Guidesand it can bring enforcement actions against companies that “chase arrows” recycling symbol on non-recyclable plastic products.
“We need our leaders to guard against the industry’s false solutions, including against plastic recycling,” said Erica Cirino, communications manager for the nonprofit Plastic Pollution Coalition, which was not involved in Beyond Plastics’ list of priorities.
Beyond Plastics is also calling on the next administration’s Labor Department to create a “just transition” plan for petrochemical industry workers affected by plastic reduction measures; for the National Institutes of Health to fund studies on the health impacts of microplastics and nanoplastics, the tiny fragments that peel off larger plastic items over time; and for the General Services Administration to prioritize reusable or refillable options in all federally funded buildings and institutions. The final action item would build on a commitment the Biden administration unveiled in July end federal procurement of single-use plastics of all federal operations by 2035.
The list of regulatory possibilities is so long that some experts argue that there is a need for a “plastics czar”, similar to the role of climate czar played by John Podesta, John Kerry and Gina McCarthy. “Because of the scale and the scope of the plastics issue over its life cycle, all agencies have a role to play,” says Rachel Karasik, a plastics research scientist at the Norwegian Institute for Water Research, who works on a range of water-related issues. , including plastic pollution. “A plastics czar can help mobilize and coordinate this in a very meaningful way.”
Enck said she was “hot and cold” about the title “czar” but agreed that it would be helpful to have a top-level White House representative on plastics to provide leadership. She also said it will be important for the next administration to ensure that various bodies, including the Council on Environmental Quality, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and the Department of Energy, are led by staff well-informed about plastics.
Plastics industry groups do not have their own bulleted list of priorities for the next presidential administration. But if they did, it would likely be in direct opposition to much of what Beyond Plastics is asking. The American Chemistry Council previously appealed to the White House for support increased plastic production in order to “achieve sustainable development and climate change goals.” (Plastics are used in renewable energy technologies and to “deliver clean drinking water,” the industry group said in a April press release.)
The American Chemistry Council and other lobby groups also oppose it restrictions on plastic-related chemicalschemical recycling, and government procurement of single-use plasticsas well as updates to the Green Guides to make it more difficult to advertise products as recyclable. They did come out against proposed legislation on ban plastic foam and turn companies out the release of pre-production plastic pellets into waterways. Instead, benefit the industry policies that promote plastic recyclingincluding loosening federal air pollution regulations for chemical recycling facilities and legitimizing a deceptive way to recycle content known as “mass balance.” Several of these priorities are outlined in a bipartite federal recycling bill introduced last month. The bill is widely supported by pro-plastics lobbyists.
If former President Donald Trump takes the White House next year, advocates worry he will implement some of those wish-list items from the federal recycling bill, since not all of them require congressional approval. During his previous term, he was credited with opening a new petrochemical facility in Pennsylvania and mocking the ban on single-use plastics. And according to a former Trump White House official who spoke to Politico in April, Trump would also have a “hard look” at any outcome of the plastic treaty negotiations and possibly reject it.
“If Trump wins and it’s a good treaty, he’ll just pull us out like what happened with the Paris accords,” Enck said, referring to the United Nations’ 2015 agreement to tackle global warming.
If Vice President Kamala Harris wins, environmental advocates predict she will continues much of the Biden administration efforts to address the plastics crisis, such as supporting production limits as part of the UN Plastics Convention and phasing out single-use plastic items from federal operations. Enck said Harris would likely retain current heads of the Environmental Protection Agency, the Federal Trade Commission and the General Services Administration — plus other agencies — who are more likely to support environmental priorities than potential Trump appointees.