By Steve Toloken
STAFF REPORTER / ASIA BUREAU CHIEF
Published: November 12, 2014 11:31 am ET
Updated: November 12, 2014 3:14 pm ET
Image By: Rich Williams
When it comes to how to fight ocean pollution, the plastics industry always likes to say that it wants sound science to guide government policy.
But when it comes to marine litter and plastic bottles, the good science may not be on the industry’s side.
A comprehensive study released in September by Australia’s national science agency argues that bottles bills are a “very successful’’ strategy for fighting marine litter — a point that the plastic industry’s lobbyists are probably not happy to see.
The 364-page report from Australia’s Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization analyzed beach litter data from all over Australia and compared it with the state of South Australia, which is the only state government there with a bottle bill system.
What they found was that in the beaches of the state of South Australia, one in 10 items recovered in cleanups were beverage containers.
Elsewhere in Australia, where there are no container deposits, bottles made up between 20 and 30 percent of the litter on beaches.
“South Australia’s container deposit scheme … appears to be very successful, reducing the number of beverage containers, the dominant plastic item in the environment, by a factor of three,” CSIRO said. “We found that beverage containers make up a significantly smaller fraction of litter in cleanups from South Australia, in comparison with the other states.”
The lead author of the report, Denise Hardesty, expanded on the point in an interview with the Australian Broadcasting Corp.
“The waste that’s associated with the beverage industry comprises about a third and some estimates are as high as a half of the marine debris we find globally,” Hardesty said.
She continues: “Observationally, we do not find full plastic bottles or cans or glass bottles in South Australia, and I would likely attribute that to the container deposit scheme that they have there.”
So the conclusion the Australian scientists draw is that bottle bills are a good way to reduce marine litter, and those bottles are a significant contributor to marine litter.
But when I go and read the plastics industry’s reports on its marine pollution control, it’s silent on container deposits.
The most recent report, out in July, details 185 projects that the industry is working on globally, an increase of 90 percent since 2011. That’s when 47 plastics trade associations worldwide signed the “Declaration of the Global Plastics Associations for Solutions on Marine Litter.”
Image By: Caroline Seidel
Asia Bureau Chief Steve Toloken.
It’s odd to me that the industry’s report on solutions doesn’t address bottle bills, because two of the report’s six major “public commitments” affirm its desire for science to be the guide.
One says the industry will “promote comprehensive science-based policies … to prevent marine litter” as a way to advocate “effective public policy.”
A second says it will “work with the scientific community” on the scope of and solutions to the problem.
So will the industry now be bringing in the Australian scientists to talk about what government policies plastics companies should advocate globally? They should. CSIRO says the study is the world’s largest collection of marine debris information.
My theory about why the industry’s report doesn’t talk about bottle bills is because key customer groups of the plastics industry strongly oppose them as policy.
The American Beverage Association — think the soft drink industry, who are major buyers of plastic resin — fight hard against deposits.
As one example, the Boston Globe said that the ABA and its allies spent $8 million this election cycle fighting against expansion of the Massachusetts bottle bill, more than 10 times what supporters spent.
On Nov. 4, the ABA won and voters in Massachusetts voted against expanding the bottle bill to include more containers, even though states with bottle bills have container recycling rates two and three times higher than states without. Bottle bills would be good for companies that use recycled plastic by making more of the material available.
Of course, I’m sure some people reading this will say, “Hey, Steve, what’s the big deal? You’re being naïve. Every politician and public group (including the media) have conflicts between our words and our actions.”
From a purely political point of view, the plastics industry’s position is normal — you do what your customers want.
But that’s obviously letting politics, not science, drive your policy.
It undermines the plastics industry’s broader science message, which you hear a lot at conferences when marine litter comes up — it’s those tree huggers who are the problem, with their unreasonable product bans and anti-plastic feeling. If we’d all just follow the good science of the plastics industry, everything would be better.
But in this case, the science seems to be with the tree huggers.
If the industry is sincere about wanting science to drive what it advocates in marine pollution policy, I think the next report it prepares on the topic should honestly address container deposits.
Steve Toloken is Plastics News’ Asia bureau chief.
| 
