No Planet B

by Lucy Diavolo

  This Earth Day, let us vow to do more than share the usual memes and celebratory greetings on social media. If we truly love this planet and all the life upon it, and want to see our children live, we must act. Now.

  The Fossil Fuel Industry Is Worsening the Global Plastics Crisis

  MAIA WIKLER

  December 21, 2018

  The global plastics crisis has mobilized action around the world, with governments implementing single-use-plastic bans and grassroots groups addressing plastic pollution in the ocean. But these efforts alone cannot address the sheer magnitude of plastics that are saturating water, food chains, and ecosystems worldwide. Only an end to the fossil-fueled plastics industry can.

  The crisis is far greater than a consumer-behavior issue, like recycling: it is directly connected to the fossil fuel industry and to climate change, as 99 percent of plastics are derived from chemicals found in fossil fuels. Despite a recent United Nations climate report that says we only have twelve years to radically transform our entire economy to prevent the worst possible impacts of climate change, plastic production is set to ramp up, tripling the amount of plastic exports by 2030.

  The future of the fossil fuel industry depends on plastics, and in the U.S., the recent rise in cheap shale gas from fracking is driving the plastics boom. Since 2010, over $180 billion has been invested into new plastics production plants that convert natural gas into ethylene, which is used to make many plastics. This means that the fossil fuel industry, responsible for pipelines that fuel climate change, is also responsible for the plastics crisis. When water protectors and activists resist pipelines across North America, organize for divestment from fossil fuels, and campaign for renewable energy and urgent climate action, they are also actively addressing the plastics crisis at the root.

  “Fossil fuels and plastics are not only made from the same materials, they are made by the same companies,” Steven Fei, an attorney for the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) Climate and Energy Program, said in a recent CIEL report. Some of the big players in the fossil fuel industry driving plastic production are Dow-DuPont, ExxonMobil, Shell, Chevron, BP, and Sinopec.

  Petrochemicals come from oil and natural gas feedstocks, which create a wide array of products, mainly plastics. According to a report in the Oil & Gas Journal, plastics and other petrochemical products will drive global oil demand by 2050. A recent International Energy Agency (IEA) report, Te Future of Petrochemicals, shines a light on the petrochemical industry as one of the blind spots in the global energy debate, and also says petrochemicals will be the key driver for oil-demand growth. It is expected to account for more than a third of global oil demand by 2030, and nearly half of oil-demand growth by 2050, according to the Oil & Gas Journal. Oil demand for transportation is expected to slow by 2050, due to the rise of electric vehicles and more energy-friendly engines, but that will be offset by the rising demand for petrochemicals and plastic production.

  From the extraction of fossil fuels for plastics production to waste and degradation, the life cycle of plastics threatens the health of the environment and people. Fracking, a process that involves the high-pressure injection of water and chemicals into shale rock, cracks open shale rock to release natural gas. Plastics production is fossil-fuel intensive and carbon-heavy; the extraction and refining of fossil fuels by fracking contributes to global warming through greenhouse gases emitted by leaks. Not only does the production of plastics release methane, a greenhouse gas, but also plastics continue to release greenhouse gases as they degrade in the environment, which directly contributes to climate change. In turn, this affects sea level rise and and ocean ecosystems, while increasing severe weather catastrophes such as wildfires, drought, and flooding. Once plastics are produced, the pollution impacts are staggering.

  Today, we produce about 300 million metric tons of plastic waste every year. That’s nearly equivalent to the weight of the entire human population. Most plastics pollute the environment for significant periods of time, quite often breaking down into smaller plastic particles that can be swallowed by animals and fish and end up in our food and water. If current trends continue, our oceans could contain more plastic than fish by 2050. The life cycle of plastics shows that the fight against plastics pollution needs a more holistic approach. If we are going to effectively tackle climate change and plastics pollution, we need to stop plastic production at the source, which means transitioning away from fossil fuels.

  A recent report in the Oil & Gas Journal said that regardless of whether aggressive action is taken to pursue renewable energy in the face of climate change, the plastics sector almost guarantees growth for oil and natural gas. The industry knows that plastics pollution is vast: it reports that the amount of plastics in the Pacific Ocean covers an area three times the size of France, while microplastics accumulate below the surface and enter food chains. Because of growing awareness of climate change and plastics pollution, corporations cite their support for recycling, but some would argue it’s a marketing strategy to help maintain the longevity of the fossil fuel industry.

  “The movement to address single-use plastics is a necessary part of the strategy to end plastics pollution, but it isn’t enough unless there is widespread recognition that the plastics industry continues to expand,” Carroll Muffett, CIEL president and CEO, tells Teen Vogue. “The recycle triangle is effective in convincing consumers that they aren’t throwing something away, that it will be reused. But the truth is, less than 10 percent of plastics are effectively recycled.”

  While corporations market recycling and waste management, they are also lobbying against plastic regulations. The American Chemistry Council (ACC) represents companies like ExxonMobil and Dow and is reportedly responsible for lobbying efforts that successfully convinced the California Department of Education to edit environmental-curriculum textbooks to include positive statements about plastic bags, and also lobbied against a plastic-bag ban in the state.

  Some of the companies fueling the plastics crisis are the same as those accused of climate change denial and muddling conversations on the subject. Exxon has spent millions to “confuse the public on global warming science,” according to a report by the Union of Concerned Scientists, and to prevent the U.S. from engaging in early implementations of climate agreements, like the Kyoto Protocol. The fossil fuel industry is now touting its support of recycling through marketing campaigns in order to keep the plastics sector booming.

  There are current plans for a $10 billion plastic production facility to be built in the small town of Portland, Texas, by ExxonMobil and Saudi Basic Industries Corporation (SABIC), and many in the community are resisting fiercely, in defense of their health.

  “We took Exxon by surprise. They thought they were going to come in and convince everyone [that the plant was a good idea],” Errol Summerlin, an organizer with Portland Citizens United, tells Teen Vogue. He says the proposed site would be located across the street from homes and within one mile of local schools. (Teen Vogue has reached out to Exxon for comment but has not yet received a response as of the time of printing.) “We’re up against billions of dollars, Exxon and the Saudi royal family,” Summerlin adds. “We have elected officials saying it’s a wonderful thing for our local area, and we 100 percent disagree.”

  Summerlin claims that the amount of freshwater the plastics production plant requires, which he says is 7.3 billion gallons a year, is more than the 7.1 billion gallons all of the region’s residents use. He says that local counties have been on water restrictions because of ongoing droughts and says further that the government is proposing seawater-desalination facilities to supply more water for industry.

  Many industrial sites are being built in the backyards of marginalized low-income communities that may face health impacts from air and water pollution. These frontline communities have to pay the price of plastics expansion with the quality of their lives. Priscilla Villa, a Hispanic third-generation Texan and organizer for Earthworks, a
nonprofit organization dedicated to protecting communities and the environment from the adverse impacts of mineral and energy development, works on the front lines of Karnes County in Texas, one of the topmost oil-producing counties in the state. “People have been reporting health issues every day since the fracking boom. They have to live with nosebleeds, chronic headaches, trouble breathing, skin reactions, burning eyes, sinus problems,” she tells Teen Vogue.

  Adelita Cantu, PhD, RN, associate professor at UT Health San Antonio, School of Nursing, says these health problems may be related to fracking and the oil industry:

  As a public health nurse, I was concerned about how the environment impacts our health. What’s happening in Karnes County and similar areas with oil and gas drilling and fracking, there are big health concerns. In terms of reducing quality of life and life expectancy and overall what it does for people’s well-being. There are huge health consequences from fracking and oil and gas drilling. We are working with individuals in the community to be citizen scientists, giving them air quality monitors so they can document what is happening in their environment.

  Cantu continues,

  I’ve been a public health nurse for over forty years and the environment does impact health and plays a role in quality of life. Knowing that connection is vital to the well-being of our communities. It’s imperative for us all to think about our environments when thinking about our health. I’ve interviewed people in Karnes County who certainly have nose bleeds, skin rashes, and respiratory issues—these are the main issues that come about from fracking and oil and gas sites.

  Villa describes one plastics facility as being the size of a football field, illuminated twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week, and just four hundred feet away from a family’s back door. Villa adds that these sites are constant sources of noise and light pollution and that people have reported suffering from insomnia. Dr. Cantu tells Teen Vogue, “One man I’ve talked to has an oil well in his backyard and suffers from respiratory issues and insomnia, related to the fact that lights are on all the time at the drill site.”

  “Community members are fed up with living near these sites and wish they could move, but how could they ever sell their house? No one would buy a house there. It’s inescapable,” Villa says. Community members feel that the government is prioritizing industry over the health of local communities.

  The plastics boom means more fracking and greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to climate change while continuing to pollute oceans, food chains, and water supplies. It will perpetuate a fossil fuel economy that undermines efforts to address the climate and plastics crisis, and impacts frontline communities and the wider public at every stage of plastics’ toxic life cycle. With only twelve years to prevent the worst possible impacts of climate change, the world cannot afford an expanding plastics industry in the time of crisis.

  Recycling Isn’t Going Plastic from Destroying to Stop the Earth

  ISABELLA GOMEZ SARMIENTO

  December 20, 2018

  You’re probably familiar with the recycling symbol: the triangular chasing arrows that appear everywhere from your to-go cup to the plastic containers used to pack up leftovers at a restaurant. But although the sign might make it seem like almost everything we use has the potential to be recycled, the truth is, a lot of the items we place in our recycling bin may not end up where we expect them to.

  Not only is it difficult to recycle each type of plastic in every community, but consumers also choose not to. The rest ends up accumulating in oceans or landfills, which disrupts natural ecosystems and degrades the planet. It’s a common misconception that recycling can make up for how much plastic we consume—and even if everyone chose to recycle all the plastics they consume, the process is not as efficient as we may think.

  “Recycling can honestly be really confusing if you don’t put in the time and effort to research about it. I never knew that I had to wash all the food out of plastic containers to recycle it,” Mishka Ba-nuri, an eighteen-year-old high school student and environmental organizer from Utah, tells Teen Vogue. “For years, the plastic I recycled just ended up in landfill because there was food on it. My frustration with recycling is that it isn’t straightforward, and that can make it inaccessible to many people who don’t have the time to know about their local recycling regulations.”

  Ideally, recycling is the circular process in which materials that have already been used are broken down and repurposed into new products so as to cut back on the energy and resources required to produce virgin, or all-new, materials. Since there are different kinds of waste—such as plastic, paper, glass, and aluminum—there are different factors that determine whether a product will ultimately be recycled.

  “The problem is that recycling is a business, so it’s economics that are going to influence whether something is recycled or not much more than the technical ability for that material to be recycled,” Stiv Wilson, a plastics pollution expert and director of campaigns at the Story of Stuff Project, an organization focused on environmental and social change, tells Teen Vogue. Although the current state of recycling partially depends on having a market for recycled waste products, that wasn’t always a driving force behind the process.

  The practice of reusing scrap objects can be traced back to ancient civilizations and was common throughout colonial times, when certain materials could be hard to come by and families tried to get maximum use out of household items, according to historian Susan Strasser’s book, Waste and Want: A Social History of Trash. During the nineteenth century, peddlers who traveled from place to place selling goods bought discarded items that they could salvage and resell, establishing the first markets for used materials.

  Later, as part of the World War II effort at home, the U.S. government also incentivized Americans to gather scrap metal, rubber, and other materials to be turned into weapons and other items for the war (although critics now claim the scrap drives served as propaganda to fuel patriotism more than environmental conservation). After the war, the economic boom of the late 1940s and 1950s created a major shift to a consumer-based “throwaway” culture that saw the introduction of household, disposable plastic products—eventually leading to the development of waste and recycling collection to try to keep up with the resulting pollution.

  Today, most people are familiar with curbside recycling, in which local governments or private companies gather a neighborhood’s recyclable products, take them to facilities, sort them, and reintroduce them into the system. But despite the establishment of these recycling efforts decades ago, only 9 percent of all the plastic produced since the 1950s has been recycled, and the United States recycles and composts just 34.7 percent. What doesn’t get recycled can end up in dumpsites, landfills, or incinerators, which use heat to burn waste and release carbon dioxide into the environment. Although incinerators are believed to follow a “waste-to-energy” model by generating electricity, environmentalist organizations argue that they create a higher demand for waste and pose health risks due to high emissions of pollutants.

  The supply of plastic has skyrocketed in the last sixty years, too. The global production of newly manufactured virgin plastics jumped from 2 million tons in 1950 to 381 million tons in 2015, and companies like ExxonMobil Chemical and Shell Chemicals are investing in new facilities that will reportedly increase plastic production by 40 percent in the next ten years. These plastics, which can take around 450 years to decompose and which release greenhouse gases if exposed to sunlight, are of immediate concern to environmental advocates.

  Although the blame for pollution is often placed on consumers of single-use plastics, experts like Wilson and Martin Bourque, executive director of the Ecology Center in Berkeley, California, highlight the role that corporations play in environmental degradation. In hundreds of cleanups and brand audits led by the Break Free From Plastic movement, Coca-Cola, PepsiCo, and Nestlé were found to be the top plastic polluters worldwide.

  “A lot of the problem wit
h what we call contamination in recycling is people hoping or thinking that something is recyclable or being told by the manufacturer or the brand owner, the company that they’re buying from, that it’s recyclable,” Bourque tells Teen Vogue, “when in fact there isn’t any good way or any economic way to recycle the product or the packaging that’s being sold.”

  By using the recognizable recycling symbol, he says, many companies push the idea that their products are okay to consume because they’re technically recyclable, even though the infrastructure or market to recycle them may not exist. Multi-layer packaging, like in disposable coffee cups or health-bar wrappers, is especially problematic because it’s the combination of different materials that would need to be separated—a complicated and time-consuming process—in order for the products to get recycled.

  “Ever since I was little, I was always told that recycling is the best thing I could do to save the environment. But in reality, it’s just another way neoliberalism places burdens on the individual rather than the systems that are responsible,” Mishka says. “In short, recycling is another way to live a more sustainable lifestyle with a smaller eco-footprint, but individuals recycling isn’t going to stop the problem.”

  Because not all local facilities have the capacity to recycle certain types of materials, much of U.S. waste gets shipped to other countries. According to a report by the Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives (GAIA), the U.S. is the largest national exporter of plastic waste worldwide. Until recently, China was the top importer, but in January 2018, the country implemented a ban on plastic scrap imports to de-escalate pollution. The result has been waste buildup in many Western countries as well as the rerouting of their pollution to Southeast Asian countries like Indonesia, Thailand, and Malaysia. Beyond creating environmental disasters, plastics prove to be a political issue, too.