Resource Recycling Magazine: Study identifies top solutions for marine debris

Study identifies top solutions for marine debris

By Dylan de Thomas, Resource Recycling

October 1, 2015

The head of the plastics division of the American Chemistry Council recently spoke with Resource Recycling about a holistic study on the largest sources of marine debris and a new report that pinpoints possible pragmatic solutions.

In February 2015, a study published in the journal Science estimated between 5.3 million and 14 million tons of plastic generated by coastal populations worldwide became marine debris in 2010. Yesterday, a new study was released highlighting further findings of that study and "identifies the cornerstones of a concerted program for global action to solve the plastic waste crisis."

In developing this new study, "Stemming the Tide: Land-based Strategies for a Plastic-Free Ocean," the Ocean Conservancy worked with the McKinsey Center for Business & Environment, supported by members of the Trash Free Seas Alliance, including the Coca-Cola Company; the Dow Chemical Company; the American Chemistry Council (ACC); World Wildlife Fund; and the Recycling and Economic Development Initiative of South Africa (REDISA).

Five countries were found to be leaking over half of the materials into the ocean – China, Indonesia, Philippines, Vietnam and Thailand, by order of magnitude. "Plastic is most likely to get into the ocean where there are large coastal populations with access to consumer goods and relatively little access to any kind of waste management to manage those goods," said Steve Russell, the vice president of the ACC’s Plastics Division, in an interview with Resource Recycling.

"And so it’s perhaps not surprising that problems occur where economies are growing very, very quickly, and waste management systems have not yet had a chance to catch up – as we’re seeing in parts of Southeast Asia," Russell continued. "But it’s possible and probably likely that there will be other economies coming into those same conditions, like Brazil, India and parts of Africa, for example."

The report identifies various strategies that the authors say could spark a 65 percent reduction of plastics pollution from the five countries identified, which would mean a "45 percent reduction of plastics flowing into the ocean globally."

These strategies include closing "leakage” points within the collection system, such as working to stem illegal dumping, in part by optimizing transport and closing or improving landfills near waterways, which would account for 26 percent of the waste.

"We’re learning lessons about how to make smart, efficient interventions that capture plastics for recycling and energy recovery in a way that is economically sustainable and culturally sensitive," Russell said. "So that is going to require us to really understand local conditions, local drivers, customs, and, most importantly, how to involve the informal sector that may already be involved in gathering and recycling some kinds of plastics."

Russell was referencing another solution offered to keep leakage points closed: "increasing the value of waste" by working to have high-value scrap plastics manually sorted in rural areas.

All of the suggested changes would come to the tune of an approximately $5 billion annual cost.

But that cost wouldn’t be net, according to Russell. "The goal is to generate systems that, once established, will be revenue neutral or even produce a profit," Russell noted.

"The idea here is not to immediately set up a fund, although resources will be needed. What we need to do first is set up systems that have local buy-in, some degree of local financing and local commitment to make them work," Russell said. "What we really need is shared ownership."

As the report authors wrote, "a renewed commitment to stem the tide of plastics in the ocean is desperately needed."

"Nobody wants to over-promise, but this work feels like a unique and promising approach. Marine debris is a big, complicated issue and many stakeholders have a role to play, and there should not be one to the exclusion of others. But it does strike us that by going after the hardest problems, which is stemming the flow where it’s the worst, it does seem to have probability for doing the most good, the most quickly."

A full question-and-answer article with Steve Russell will be published in the November issues of Resource Recycling and Plastics Recycling Update.

To return to the Resource Recycling newsletter, click here.