Pollution: Unsolved plastic problem | nd-aktuell.de

Negotiations on a global plastics agreement in Ottawa in April remained inconclusive. Block oil-producing countries and plastic-producing industries. At least the issue has received some media attention as a result. The problem is huge. While 1.5 million tons of plastic were produced annually in 1950, the figure is expected to be 500 million tons by 2025. Almost the same amount is also generated as waste, because even if the material is not used as disposable packaging, plastic products are short-lived. The recycling rate in industrialized countries is currently below 10 percent and therefore below the proportion that ends up in the environment each year either directly or in the form of toxic residues from open-air combustion.

Since 2004, the smallest plastic parts have increasingly become the focus of research. Microplastics are parts and fragments with a size of less than five millimeters; those smaller than a tenth of a micrometer are called nanoplastics. These small particles can now even be found at the poles and in high mountains, but especially in the oceans. Through so-called bioaccumulation, i.e. accumulation in organisms, they find their way back into our food chain. Fish is an important source, but so are honey, salt, sugar, water or simply the air we breathe. Not surprisingly, the plastic particles can now also be detected in our bodies, for example in stool, blood or even the placenta.

Recently, a team led by Viennese researcher Verena Kopatz succeeded in proving that nanoparticles of the commercially available plastic polystyrene can even overcome the sensitive blood-brain barrier by “piggybacking” on the body’s own proteins. The nanoplastics could be detected in mouse brains just two hours after administration through food. Another two hours later, the concentration was lower again, which gives hope that not all of the plastic accumulates in the tissue.

What plastic does to the body is only just beginning to be researched. Inflammation, immune system disorders, neuronal disorders and cancer are on the list of suspected cases. The foreign body not only acts as such, but also as a vehicle for toxic substances that have been added to the plastic or that it absorbs very easily due to its large surface area.

Today, microplastics are added directly to many products, such as cosmetics, medications, insecticides or paints. As a so-called secondary microplastic, it is created when car tires and shoe soles wear off or when larger plastic parts decompose. And that brings us back to plastic waste.

In order to combat this, you have to know where it originates and where it enters the environment. Until now only rough estimates were available, but now a British one is available Studywhich is based on data from over 50,000 communities worldwide and complex computer models, shed more light on the situation. Above all, it allows for a more precise localization of waste hotspots and a better understanding of their local socio-economic causes, which is crucial if one wants to tackle waste.

As expected, the richest countries also produce the most plastic waste, around 170 grams per capita per day. However, these countries have functioning disposal systems. They don’t have a good solution either, because recycling only plays a tiny role, and “thermal recycling”, i.e. incineration, in turn produces greenhouse gases and toxic waste in the form of slag and filter dust. After all, only small amounts end up in the environment uncontrolled, with careless throwing away being the main cause.

In poorer countries the opposite picture emerges. Although the total amount of waste is smaller, disposal is often inadequate where it is not completely missing, which is why large amounts end up in the environment. India is taking quite decisive political action against single-use plastic, but some of the rural areas lack any disposal infrastructure. By the way, exports of plastic waste from OECD countries are playing an increasingly smaller role in the global balance; they are said to have fallen to a third from 2017 to 2022 at 1.7 million tons. However, one should not forget that the EU is the second largest producer of plastic after China and therefore definitely bears responsibility.

The per capita emissions of plastic waste into the environment in emerging and developing countries is particularly interesting. Sub-Saharan African countries, which produce relatively little waste in absolute terms, turn out to be real hotspots from this perspective, which is highly relevant given the significant population growth there. Mind you, this statistical breakdown is not about blaming the poorest people for a problem that is largely caused by industrialized nations. Rather, the statistical evaluation shows where the easiest and most effective countermeasures can be taken in a relatively uncomplicated manner – for example with orderly landfilling.

When it comes to the question of how to tackle the problem, scientific publications agree: the only viable solution is to drastically reduce the amount of plastic used, even if this means very uncomfortable changes in everyday life. In fact, even in the “waste hierarchy” as it has taken highly official form in the circular economy law, prevention has absolute priority over reuse, recycling, thermal recovery and landfilling. However, this is a confession without binding force. In reality, politicians are relying on the miracle technology of recycling, which often doesn’t work well on an industrial scale and, when it does, consumes large amounts of energy. The struggle for a plastics agreement in South Korea will enter the next round from the end of November, but there are no signs of a breakthrough so far.