Plastic pollution talks must speed up, chair warns
By AFP
November 27, 2024
Plastic production is expected to triple by 2060
Sara Hussein and Roland de Courson
Negotiators must move “significantly” faster to agree on a landmark treaty to curb plastic pollution, the diplomat chairing the talks warned Wednesday, as countries lined up to express frustration about the limited progress.
Nearly 200 countries are gathered in South Korea’s Busan city with the goal of agreeing a deal by the end of the week.
The process caps two years of talks over four previous rounds of negotiations that have been stalled by deep divisions about what the treaty should look like.
Addressing negotiators on the third day of talks, Luis Vayas Valdivieso warned work was not advancing quickly enough.
“I must be honest with you, progress has been too slow. We need to speed up our work significantly,” the Ecuadorian diplomat said.
“We must accelerate our efforts to reach consensus on the binding instrument by December first.”
His call was followed by a string of frustrated speeches from countries including Fiji, Panama, Norway and Colombia.
“While we here sit debating over semantics and procedures, the crisis worsens,” warned Juan Carlos Monterrey Gomez, Panama’s special representative for climate change.
“We are here because microplastics have been found in the placentas of healthy women… We are literally raising a generation that starts its life polluted, before taking its first breath.”
He accused negotiators of “tiptoeing around the truth, sidestepping ambition and ignoring the urgency that demands action” in remarks that received loud applause.
– ‘We are sincere’ –
Other representatives accused some participants of failing to engage in good faith and actively seeking to drag out the talks.
They did not openly point the finger at any countries, but diplomats speaking on condition of anonymity have repeatedly said Russia, Saudi Arabia and Iran are consistently holding up proceedings and showing little willingness to compromise.
All three countries took the floor to hit back.
“We are sincere, we are honest and we are ready to cooperate,” said Iran’s Massoud Rezvanian Rahaghi.
“But we do not want to be blamed for blocking negotiations through dirty tactics.”
Russian representative Dmitry Kornilov meanwhile blasted the “unacceptable” accusations and warned delegates to abandon the most contentious parts of the draft discussions.
“If we are serious about this then we must concentrate on provisions that are acceptable to all delegations,” he said.
In 2019, the world produced around 460 million tonnes of plastic, a figure that has doubled since 2000, according to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.
Plastic production is expected to triple by 2060.
But just nine percent of plastic is recycled globally.
– ‘Bold moves’ –
The main faultline in talks lies over whether the treaty should address the full lifecycle of plastic, including potential limits to its production, chemical precursors, and certain products considered unneccessary, including many single-use items.
The UN decision that kicked off the negotiating process explicitly refers both to the full lifecycle of plastic and sustainable consumption, but countries including Russia, Saudi Arabia and Iran have consistently rejected calls to limit supply.
Saudi Arabia has warned supply restrictions “extend beyond” the treaty’s focus on plastic pollution and risk creating “economic disruptions.”
Iran meanwhile has called for an article on supply to be removed entirely from the treaty text.
There are other sticking points, including financial support for developing countries to implement any treaty, and how a decision to adopt a deal should be made.
The UN standard is consensus, but there are fears that a unanimous deal may be out of reach.
A European diplomat, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the divisions were such that an agreement would only be possible if “bold moves” were taken in the final stretch to “unblock” things.
The question, he said, was “whether those moves, at that stage, will arrive too late.”
“Four days to get to all that seems to me to be too little,” he warned.
By AFP
November 27, 2024
Plastic production is expected to triple by 2060
- Copyright YONHAP/AFP -
Sara Hussein and Roland de Courson
Negotiators must move “significantly” faster to agree on a landmark treaty to curb plastic pollution, the diplomat chairing the talks warned Wednesday, as countries lined up to express frustration about the limited progress.
Nearly 200 countries are gathered in South Korea’s Busan city with the goal of agreeing a deal by the end of the week.
The process caps two years of talks over four previous rounds of negotiations that have been stalled by deep divisions about what the treaty should look like.
Addressing negotiators on the third day of talks, Luis Vayas Valdivieso warned work was not advancing quickly enough.
“I must be honest with you, progress has been too slow. We need to speed up our work significantly,” the Ecuadorian diplomat said.
“We must accelerate our efforts to reach consensus on the binding instrument by December first.”
His call was followed by a string of frustrated speeches from countries including Fiji, Panama, Norway and Colombia.
“While we here sit debating over semantics and procedures, the crisis worsens,” warned Juan Carlos Monterrey Gomez, Panama’s special representative for climate change.
“We are here because microplastics have been found in the placentas of healthy women… We are literally raising a generation that starts its life polluted, before taking its first breath.”
He accused negotiators of “tiptoeing around the truth, sidestepping ambition and ignoring the urgency that demands action” in remarks that received loud applause.
– ‘We are sincere’ –
Other representatives accused some participants of failing to engage in good faith and actively seeking to drag out the talks.
They did not openly point the finger at any countries, but diplomats speaking on condition of anonymity have repeatedly said Russia, Saudi Arabia and Iran are consistently holding up proceedings and showing little willingness to compromise.
All three countries took the floor to hit back.
“We are sincere, we are honest and we are ready to cooperate,” said Iran’s Massoud Rezvanian Rahaghi.
“But we do not want to be blamed for blocking negotiations through dirty tactics.”
Russian representative Dmitry Kornilov meanwhile blasted the “unacceptable” accusations and warned delegates to abandon the most contentious parts of the draft discussions.
“If we are serious about this then we must concentrate on provisions that are acceptable to all delegations,” he said.
In 2019, the world produced around 460 million tonnes of plastic, a figure that has doubled since 2000, according to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.
Plastic production is expected to triple by 2060.
But just nine percent of plastic is recycled globally.
– ‘Bold moves’ –
The main faultline in talks lies over whether the treaty should address the full lifecycle of plastic, including potential limits to its production, chemical precursors, and certain products considered unneccessary, including many single-use items.
The UN decision that kicked off the negotiating process explicitly refers both to the full lifecycle of plastic and sustainable consumption, but countries including Russia, Saudi Arabia and Iran have consistently rejected calls to limit supply.
Saudi Arabia has warned supply restrictions “extend beyond” the treaty’s focus on plastic pollution and risk creating “economic disruptions.”
Iran meanwhile has called for an article on supply to be removed entirely from the treaty text.
There are other sticking points, including financial support for developing countries to implement any treaty, and how a decision to adopt a deal should be made.
The UN standard is consensus, but there are fears that a unanimous deal may be out of reach.
A European diplomat, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the divisions were such that an agreement would only be possible if “bold moves” were taken in the final stretch to “unblock” things.
The question, he said, was “whether those moves, at that stage, will arrive too late.”
“Four days to get to all that seems to me to be too little,” he warned.
By AFP
November 26, 2024
People look through plastic and other debris washed ashore at a beach on Indonesia's resort island of Bali - Copyright AFP SONNY TUMBELAKA
Sara HUSSEIN
Nations gathered in Busan, South Korea have a week to agree the world’s first treaty to curb plastic pollution, a gargantuan challenge given the major divisions that remain.
Here is a look at the key sticking points:
Consensus or majority
Divisions between nations are so deep that they have not yet agreed on how any decision will be adopted — by consensus or majority vote.
Consensus is the standard for many UN agreements, but it has also hamstrung progress on other accords, notably climate.
To avoid gumming up discussions, negotiations are proceeding without resolving this question.
But that creates something of a landmine that could detonate at any point during the talks, particularly if countries feel they are losing ground, warned Bjorn Beeler, executive director of the International Pollutants Elimination Network.
“Because of the consensus decision-making process, the oil states could still blow up the potential final deal,” he told AFP.
Production
The resolution that kicked off the talks urged a treaty that would “promote sustainable production and consumption of plastics”.
But what that means is a key point of difference among negotiators.
Some countries want the treaty to mandate a reduction of new plastic production, and the phase-out of “unneccessary” items, such as some single-use plastics.
They note many countries already limit items like plastic bags or cutlery.
But other nations, led by some oil-producing states like Russia and Saudi Arabia, have pushed back against any binding reduction call.
They insist nations should set their own targets.
Saudi Arabia, representing the Arab group of nations, warned in its opening statement against “imposing rigid and exclusionary policies to address complex global issues”.
They urged members to focus on a treaty “that balances environmental protection with economic and social development”.
‘Chemicals of concern’
The alliance of countries called the High Ambition Coalition (HAC), led by Rwanda and Norway, is pushing for specific measures on so-called chemicals of concern.
These are components of plastic that are known or feared to be harmful to human health.
The HAC wants “global criteria and measures” for phasing out or restricting these chemicals.
But some countries also reject that approach.
And lists are also firmly opposed by the chemical and petrochemical industry, which points to an array of existing international agreements and national regulations.
“A new global agreement to address plastic pollution should not duplicate these existing instruments and voluntary efforts,” warned the International Council of Chemical Associations.
The auto industry says any broad-stroke bans could affect its ability to comply with safety regulations.
Finance
Implementing any treaty will cost money that developing countries say they simply do not have.
India insists the treaty should make clear that compliance “shall be linked to provision of the incremental cost” and backs the creation of a dedicated multilateral fund for the purpose.
That position may struggle to gain traction, particularly after the hard-fought battle at COP29 climate talks to extract more finance from developed countries.
But that is unlikely to sway countries advocating for the funds.
Developed countries “have historically benefited from industrial activities related to plastic production”, noted Saudi Arabia, speaking for the Arab group.
They “bear a greater responsibility in providing financial and technical support as well as capacity-building for developing countries”.
Globally binding or nationally determined?
Will the treaty create overarching global rules that bind all nations to the same standards, or allow individual countries to set their own targets and goals?
This is likely to be another key sticking point, with the European Union warning “a treaty in which each party would do only what they consider is necessary is not something we are ready to support”.
On the other side are nations who argue that differing levels of capacity and economic growth make common standards unreasonable.
“There shall not be any compliance regime,” reads language proposed for the treaty by Iran.
Instead, it urges an “assessment committee” that would monitor progress but “in no way” examine compliance or implementation.
To tackle plastic scourge, Philippines makes companies pay
By AFP
November 26, 2024
Long one of the top sources of ocean plastic, the Philippines is hoping new legislation requiring big companies to pay for waste solutions will help clean up its act
Cecil MORELLA
Long one of the world’s top sources of ocean plastic, the Philippines is hoping new legislation requiring big companies to pay for waste solutions will help clean up its act.
Last year, its “Extended Producer Responsibility” (EPR) statute came into force — the first in Southeast Asia to impose penalties on companies over plastic waste.
The experiment has shown both the promise and the pitfalls of the tool, which could be among the measures in a treaty to tackle plastic pollution that countries hope to agree on by December 1 at talks in South Korea.
The Philippines, with a population of 120 million, generates some 1.7 million metric tons of post-consumer plastic waste a year, according to the World Bank.
Of that, a third goes to landfills and dumpsites, with 35 percent discarded on open land.
The EPR law is intended to achieve “plastic neutrality” by forcing large businesses to reduce plastic pollution through product design and removing waste from the environment.
They are obliged to cover an initial 20 percent of their plastic packaging footprint, calculated based on the weight of plastic packaging they put into the market.
The obligation will rise to a ceiling of 80 percent by 2028.
The law covers a broad range of plastics, including flexible types that are commercially unviable for recycling and thus often go uncollected.
It does not however ban any plastics, including the popular but difficult to recover and recycle single-use sachets common in the Philippines.
So far, around half the eligible companies under the law have launched EPR programmes.
Over a thousand more must do so by end-December or face fines of up to 20 million pesos ($343,000) and even revocation of their operating licences.
– ‘Manna from heaven’ –
The law hit its 2023 target for removal of plastic waste, Environment Undersecretary Jonas Leones told AFP.
It is “part of a broader strategy to reduce the environmental impact of plastic pollution, particularly given the Philippines’ status as one of the largest contributors to marine plastic waste globally.”
The law allows companies to outsource their obligations to “producer responsibility organisations”, many of which use a mechanism called plastic credits.
These allow companies to buy a certificate that a metric tonne of plastic has been removed from the environment and either recycled, upcycled or “co-processed” — burned for energy.
PCX Markets, one of the country’s biggest players, offers local credits priced from around $100 for collection and co-processing of mixed plastics to over $500 for collection and recycling of ocean-bound PET plastic. Most are certified according to a standard administered by sister organisation PCX Solutions.
The model is intended to channel money into the underfunded waste collection sector and encourage collection of plastic that is commercially unviable for recycling.
“It’s manna from heaven,” former street sweeper Marita Blanco told AFP.
A widowed mother-of-five, Blanco lives in Manila’s low-income San Andres district and buys plastic bottles, styrofoam and candy wrappers for two pesos (3.4 US cents) a kilogram (2.2 pounds).
She then sells them at a 25 percent mark-up to charity Friends of Hope, which works with PCX Solutions to process them.
“I didn’t know that there was money in garbage,” she said.
“If I do not look down on the task of picking up garbage, my financial situation will improve.”
– ‘Still linear’ –
Friends of Hope managing director Ilusion Farias said the project was making a visible difference to an area often strewn with discarded plastic.
“Two years ago, I think you would have seen a lot dirtier street,” she told AFP.
“Behavioural change is really slow, and it takes a really long time.”
Among those purchasing credits is snack producer Mondelez, which has opted to jump directly to “offsetting” 100 percent of its plastic footprint.
“It costs company budgets… but that’s really something that we just said we would commit to do for the environment,” Mondelez Philippines corporate and government affairs official Caitlin Punzalan told AFP.
But while companies have lined up to buy plastic credits, there has been less movement on stemming the flow of new plastic, including through redesign.
“Upstream reduction is not really easy,” said PCX Solutions managing director Stefanie Beitien.
“There is no procurement department in the world that accepts a 20 percent higher packaging price just because it’s the right thing to do.”
And while PCX credits cannot be claimed against plastic that is landfilled, they do allow for co-processing, with the ash then used for cement.
“It’s still linear, not circular, because you’re destroying the plastic and you’re still generating virgin plastic,” acknowledged Leones of the environment ministry.
Still, the law remains a “very strong policy”, according to Floradema Eleazar, an official with the UN Development Programme.
But “we will not see immediate impacts right now, or tomorrow,” she said.
“It would require really massive behavioural change for everyone to make sure that this happens.”
By AFP
November 26, 2024
Long one of the top sources of ocean plastic, the Philippines is hoping new legislation requiring big companies to pay for waste solutions will help clean up its act
- Copyright AFP/File Jam Sta Rosa
Cecil MORELLA
Long one of the world’s top sources of ocean plastic, the Philippines is hoping new legislation requiring big companies to pay for waste solutions will help clean up its act.
Last year, its “Extended Producer Responsibility” (EPR) statute came into force — the first in Southeast Asia to impose penalties on companies over plastic waste.
The experiment has shown both the promise and the pitfalls of the tool, which could be among the measures in a treaty to tackle plastic pollution that countries hope to agree on by December 1 at talks in South Korea.
The Philippines, with a population of 120 million, generates some 1.7 million metric tons of post-consumer plastic waste a year, according to the World Bank.
Of that, a third goes to landfills and dumpsites, with 35 percent discarded on open land.
The EPR law is intended to achieve “plastic neutrality” by forcing large businesses to reduce plastic pollution through product design and removing waste from the environment.
They are obliged to cover an initial 20 percent of their plastic packaging footprint, calculated based on the weight of plastic packaging they put into the market.
The obligation will rise to a ceiling of 80 percent by 2028.
The law covers a broad range of plastics, including flexible types that are commercially unviable for recycling and thus often go uncollected.
It does not however ban any plastics, including the popular but difficult to recover and recycle single-use sachets common in the Philippines.
So far, around half the eligible companies under the law have launched EPR programmes.
Over a thousand more must do so by end-December or face fines of up to 20 million pesos ($343,000) and even revocation of their operating licences.
– ‘Manna from heaven’ –
The law hit its 2023 target for removal of plastic waste, Environment Undersecretary Jonas Leones told AFP.
It is “part of a broader strategy to reduce the environmental impact of plastic pollution, particularly given the Philippines’ status as one of the largest contributors to marine plastic waste globally.”
The law allows companies to outsource their obligations to “producer responsibility organisations”, many of which use a mechanism called plastic credits.
These allow companies to buy a certificate that a metric tonne of plastic has been removed from the environment and either recycled, upcycled or “co-processed” — burned for energy.
PCX Markets, one of the country’s biggest players, offers local credits priced from around $100 for collection and co-processing of mixed plastics to over $500 for collection and recycling of ocean-bound PET plastic. Most are certified according to a standard administered by sister organisation PCX Solutions.
The model is intended to channel money into the underfunded waste collection sector and encourage collection of plastic that is commercially unviable for recycling.
“It’s manna from heaven,” former street sweeper Marita Blanco told AFP.
A widowed mother-of-five, Blanco lives in Manila’s low-income San Andres district and buys plastic bottles, styrofoam and candy wrappers for two pesos (3.4 US cents) a kilogram (2.2 pounds).
She then sells them at a 25 percent mark-up to charity Friends of Hope, which works with PCX Solutions to process them.
“I didn’t know that there was money in garbage,” she said.
“If I do not look down on the task of picking up garbage, my financial situation will improve.”
– ‘Still linear’ –
Friends of Hope managing director Ilusion Farias said the project was making a visible difference to an area often strewn with discarded plastic.
“Two years ago, I think you would have seen a lot dirtier street,” she told AFP.
“Behavioural change is really slow, and it takes a really long time.”
Among those purchasing credits is snack producer Mondelez, which has opted to jump directly to “offsetting” 100 percent of its plastic footprint.
“It costs company budgets… but that’s really something that we just said we would commit to do for the environment,” Mondelez Philippines corporate and government affairs official Caitlin Punzalan told AFP.
But while companies have lined up to buy plastic credits, there has been less movement on stemming the flow of new plastic, including through redesign.
“Upstream reduction is not really easy,” said PCX Solutions managing director Stefanie Beitien.
“There is no procurement department in the world that accepts a 20 percent higher packaging price just because it’s the right thing to do.”
And while PCX credits cannot be claimed against plastic that is landfilled, they do allow for co-processing, with the ash then used for cement.
“It’s still linear, not circular, because you’re destroying the plastic and you’re still generating virgin plastic,” acknowledged Leones of the environment ministry.
Still, the law remains a “very strong policy”, according to Floradema Eleazar, an official with the UN Development Programme.
But “we will not see immediate impacts right now, or tomorrow,” she said.
“It would require really massive behavioural change for everyone to make sure that this happens.”
No comments:
Post a Comment