By Michael Stephen
PLASTIC BANS ARE COUNTERPRODUCTIVEFollowing my article in Bioplastics News (2 Dec) about the failure of the Busan conference, I noticed Chris de Armitt saying on Linkedin “A comprehensive study concludes that limiting plastic production increases greenhouse and environmental harm – so why are UNEP and NGOs campaigning to do just that? What is their real agenda?
In 93% of cases studied by life cycle analysis, replacing plastics was counterproductive. This agrees with other studies finding that alternatives mean 4x more waste, 3x more greenhouse gas and 2x more fossil fuel used.
Check the science or make serious mistakes!”
Plastic – Fact over Fiction –
MoreI was pleased to see that there is a proposal to remove EU funding for lobbying activities by NGOs -it is remarkable that it was ever thought fit to give them public money to lobby the EU. The EU Parliament has been seriously misled by lobbyists about plastics in general and oxo-biodegradable plastics in particular. Yes Chris – what is their real agenda?
SOLUBLE IN SEAWATER?I see that researchers in Japan have developed “a durable plastic that won’t contribute to microplastic pollution in our oceans. The new material is as strong as conventional plastics and biodegradable, but what makes it special is that it breaks down in seawater. The new plastic is therefore expected to help reduce harmful microplastic pollution that accumulates in oceans and soil and eventually enters the food chain. The experimental findings were published Nov 22 in Science.”
New inventions get a lot of publicity, but more than 40 years ago Professor Gerald Scott and his colleagues in England discovered a way to make plastic so that it would be fit for purpose and recyclable but would biodegrade ANYWHERE in the open environment, without leaving microplastics, not just in seawater. It degrades first by oxidation and then biodegrades, so they called it “Oxo-biodegradable” plastic. See Professor Scott’s textbooks “Polymers & the Environment” (ISBN 9780854045785); “Degradable Polymers; Principles & Applications” (ISBN 1-4020-0790-6). See also
the BPA Briefing Note on oxo-biodegradable plastic.
This masterbatch technology is commercially available here and now. See www.d2w.net
Another company trying to re-invent the wheel is Packaging Systems of Wisconsin, which has partnered with Wrightstown-based Alliance Plastics to distribute a biodegradable film wrap claimed to break down in roughly two years compared to several hundred years of virgin film wrap.
This sounds to me remarkably like oxo-biodegradable plastic.
BIO-BASED ALTERNATIVES?“Bio-based fibre packaging could pose an unexpected threat to the natural environment,” suggests a new study conducted at the UK’s Bangor University and University of Plymouth. The research team calls for novel bio-based plastic alternatives to be studied more extensively, with the new findings indicating threats to animal and soil health.
“This study aimed to compare the effect of viscose and lyocell, two bio-based fibres, and the conventional fibre polyester on earthworms. It showed that at high concentrations of fibres, lyocell and viscose induced a greater maximum mortality of earthworms than polyester.
These findings suggested that while bio-based fibre alternatives to plastic are often touted as inherently environmentally friendly, this might be an example of the “green halo” effect.”
By contrast, oxo-biodegradable plastic has been tested according to the OECD ecotoxicity tests 201, 202, 203, 207 and 208 and found to be non-toxic to bacteria, plants, fish, and earthworms.
Michael StephenMichael Stephen is a lawyer and was a member of the United Kingdom Parliament, where he served on the Environment Select Committee. When he left Parliament Symphony Environmental Technologies Plc. attracted his attention because of his interest in the environment. He is now Deputy Chairman of Symphony, which is listed on the AIM market of the London Stock Exchange, and is the founder and Chairman of the Biodegradable Plastics Association.
