Guest Blog: Progress on Plastics Update Issue 11: Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm COPs 2019
PLASTICS AT THE BRS COP
Many countries are taking steps to mitigate plastic
pollution, recognizing it as a serious and rapidly growing issue of concern
worldwide that needs an urgent global response. The Basel and Stockholm
Conventions have a direct impact on the plastic waste trade, on standards for
the management of plastic waste, and on the toxic exposure inherent in the
plastic pollution crisis for large and microscopic plastics on the land and
in the marine environment. The UN Environment Assembly (UNEA) had invited the
Basel Convention “to increase their action to prevent and reduce marine
litter and microplastics and their harmful effects,” and the Basel,
Rotterdam, and Stockholm Convention (BRS) Secretariat has participated in and
presented at UNEA’s Ad Hoc Open-Ended Expert Group on Marine Litter and Microplastics.
In 2018, Norway proposed amendments to the Basel Convention annexes to bring
the global trade in dirty, hard-to-recycle, or unrecyclable plastics under
the scope of the Convention.
Several members and partners of the #breakfreefromplastic movement issued positions,
statements,
and letters of support for the proposed changes and attended the
concurrent meetings of the Conferences of the Parties to the BRS Conventions
(BRS COP). The BFFP member and partner engagement at these meetings is in
concert with the ongoing work to support development of an
international legally binding agreement on plastics and plastic pollution to address the entire life cycle of plastics,
including: binding global reduction targets; caps on production and
consumption of plastics; and requirements for loss prevention, collection,
and recycling of all plastics.
In this issue:
●
Success!
○
Basel Restricts Waste
Exports
○
Stockholm Bans PFOA
○
Rotterdam Votes
●
Plastics & the
Conventions
●
Recycling: Toxics In,
Toxics Out
●
Side Events
●
What does Plastic
Pollution look like?
|
29 APR - 10 MAY: CONVENTIONS TAKE MAJOR
STEPS
In addition to our
detailed updates below from the BRS COP, you can find press coverage of the
significant decisions here: The Guardian, National Geographic, and The Hindu Times (via AFP wire).
Basel Convention Restricts Waste
Exports, Allows for More Ambitious Action on Toxic Chemicals in Plastic Waste
187 countries took
a major step forward in curbing the plastic waste crisis by adding plastic to
the Basel Convention, a treaty that controls the movement of hazardous waste
from one country to another. The amendments, originally proposed by Norway,
require exporters to obtain the consent of receiving countries before shipping
most contaminated, mixed, or unrecyclable plastic waste. This provides an
important tool for countries in the Global South to protect themselves from
plastic waste dumping.
The decision
reflects a growing recognition around the world of the toxic impacts of plastic and the
plastic waste
trade. The majority of countries expressed their
support for the proposal and over one million people globally signed two public
petitions from Avaaz and SumOfUs.
Yet leading up to
the amendments' adoption, such a positive outcome looked anything but certain.
Within the contact group negotiations, a handful of parties tried to stymie
effective action on plastic waste by using delaying tactics and opposing the
listing dirty plastics as wastes that require special consideration.
Delegates celebrate amendment adoption.
Among the vocal
outliers opposing action were the United States, the largest exporter of
plastic waste in the world; the American Chemistry Council, a prominent petrochemical
industry lobbying group; and the Institute of Scrap Recycling Industries, a
business association largely comprised of waste brokers.
Because the US is
not a party to the Convention, the amendments adopted act as an export ban on
unsorted, unclean, or contaminated plastic waste for the US towards developing
countries who are parties to the Convention and not part of the OECD or other
similar agreements. The amendment will have a similar effect for the EU, a
party to the Convention, whose own internal legislation bans such exports of
waste.
Countries also
preempted a major loophole that would have allowed the continued unregulated
export of non-functioning electronic waste under the guise of
"repair." The African region, India, and other countries, supported
by civil society, raised a red flag about the inclusion of a loophole that
would have allowed countries to send equipment for repair without the prior
informed consent procedure. The guidelines were ready for adoption with support
from powerful members, but countries chose instead to continue
negotiating the guidelines at the next COP.
Countries also left
the door open for Low POPs Content Levels (LPCLs),
which define the value at which waste is considered hazardous waste. Under this
designation, the waste must be disposed of in a way that destroys or
irreversibly transforms its POPs content, and cannot be recycled. LPCLs are
key: For some chemicals, they are the only thing subject to a global mechanism
that can prevent the international trade of waste contaminated by POPs from
wealthy countries to developing countries, as well as toxic recycling.
Following last
week’s decision, a Basel Convention Small Intersessional Working Group (SIWG)
will continue to meet regularly and discuss possible updates to the technical
guidelines on POPs in waste. This technical expert group is now tasked with
establishing lower LCPLs, in particular for BBDEs and SCCPs. Unfortunately,
there remains division between countries who want overly high levels and those
who advocate for low levels for these chemicals. The discussions allow for
countries to move in the right direction, to concentration limits that are
genuinely protective of human health and the environment. These recommended
levels should be discussed within two years at the Basel Convention COP15 in
2021.
These definitions
and guidelines have major implications for the regulation of plastic waste
exports under the Basel Convention, as they define waste that can or cannot be
exported to other countries. As the technical guidelines are discussed and
updated, many countries also have the opportunity and the political will to
introduce national bans or limitations, furthering protecting their populations
from toxic imports. Indeed, recent decisions made by the EU will allow toxic
flame retardants, including DecaBDE, to be recycled into new plastic products, endangering human health and the environment. DecaBDE was listed under the Stockholm Convention in 2017 without an
exemption for recycling, so the levels the EU has adopted will in practice mean they are not
following their obligations under the Convention.
Partnership on Plastic Wastes
Proposed by Norway,
this voluntary, multi-stakeholder initiative focuses on reducing the
contribution of plastic waste to environmental pollution, while avoiding
duplication of work by other bodies such as the Global Partnership on Marine
Litter (GPML), the UNEA's Ad-Hoc Open-Ended Expert Group on Marine Litter and
Microplastics, and the Basel Convention Partnership on Household Waste. Parties
and observers reluctant to commit to binding measures to tackle plastic
pollution argued that the Partnership should be the sole vehicle for action.
However, binding restrictions on global plastic trade were approved separately
(see above), and the Partnership proposes to coordinate their efforts with the
UNEA process exploring global governance options to tackle plastic pollution
and the work of the Ad-Hoc Open-Ended Expert Group.
Observers warned
that the Partnership should focus on reducing plastics to tackle plastic
pollution effectively, refrain from promoting false solutions such as
incineration and plastics-to-fuel that pollute the environment and contribute
to climate change, and also allow fair access to grassroots community actors on
the frontlines of the plastic pollution problem.
The decision on Further Actions to
Address Plastic Waste under the Basel Convention
In addition to
officially adopting the Partnership, countries also committed to other work on
plastic waste under the Basel Convention. The decision includes language on
prevention and reduction, gives the framework for the Partnership on plastic
wastes, recalls the UNEA-4 ministerial declaration and UNEA resolutions related
to plastics, and importantly, mandates the revision of the technical guidelines
for the identification and environmentally sound management of plastic waste
and for their disposal.
In addition, the
decision encourages parties to the Convention and others, particularly in the
private sector, to take action to reduce the use of toxic chemicals in every
stage of the plastic lifecycle.
More plants, less plastic.
The decision also
aims to increase public awareness and information exchange by inviting
"behavioural change by all
stakeholders towards its prevention, minimization, collection and
recycling." Initially, the language focused solely on consumers' behavior change,
and while there was not enough support to specifically call out the private
sector's responsibility in changing behavior, countries widened their focus
beyond consumers alone in the final decision.
Stockholm Convention Bans PFOA
The Stockholm Convention
passed a global ban of PFOA, a suspected carcinogen and endocrine disruptor
that has contaminated drinking water in many parts of the world. However,
countries weakened the PFOA ban by bringing in a number of exemptions. Some of
these exemptions were not recommended after undergoing a thorough scientific
review, while others did not undergo scientific review at all as they were
proposed at the COP instead of during the review process. One such exemption
was an exemption for PFOA in electrical wires and plastic accessories for
interior car parts. Shockingly, even industry groups did not support some of
the exemptions included in the global ban, as there are widely available
alternatives to these chemicals.
The Stockholm
Convention also lists brominated POPs
HBCD and PBDE for global elimination: Evidence shows that these highly toxic
chemicals are entering into the plastic recycling stream, moving from products
with limited human exposure into products that vulnerable populations are
regularly exposed to — including food packaging and children's toys.
Rotterdam Convention Adds Compliance
On May 8, the
Rotterdam Convention took a vote to add a compliance mechanism in its Annex,
the first vote ever taken under the Convention. Though rare (this was the first
vote in the history of the Convention), the vote was not unexpected, as the
compliance mechanism had been negotiated for nearly fifteen years without
consensus. The Parties decided that fifteen years of negotiation was enough to
satisfy the criterion for voting, being that “all efforts to reach a consensus
have been exhausted.” 126 Parties voted, of which 120 "yes" and a
mere 6 "no."
Delegates vote. IISD/ENB
| Kiara Worth
NGOs Face Threats to Participation
During the meeting
of the plastic contact group under the Basel Convention, a delegate falsely
accused NGOs of targeting her, after information already in the public domain
was communicated to the media. While the Secretariat found no breach of
guidelines, one NGO’s effective participation in the plastics contact group was
suspended for 24 hours while the Secretariat investigated the issue. At the
same time, countries agreed to exclude NGO observers from meetings of the
budget contact group. NGOs have not only deep connections to the communities
impacted by the measures passed under the chemicals and waste Conventions but
also bring technical knowledge and solutions, so civil society must continue to
defend our critical role in this space.
PLASTICS
& THE CONVENTIONS
Basel and Stockholm Have Important Implications for
Plastics, Gaps Remain
Basel
At its core, the
Basel Convention aims to reduce the international trade and export of hazardous
waste, specifically from developed to developing countries. Much of the waste
currently moving between countries is comprised of different types of plastics,
and developed countries often rely on waste trade and export to manage waste,
in particular through recycling. Thus, adjustments to the Convention will have
significant impacts on what countries are allowed to do with plastic once it
becomes waste, potentially having upstream impacts on how plastic is produced,
used, and discarded.
Norway's amendments
to the Basel Convention annex proposed in the lead-up to the COP were designed
to clean up the international trade in plastic waste. This would have implications
not only for reducing the leakage of plastics into the marine environment but
also for local communities affected by plastic waste dumping by exporters,
usually in the Global North. The amendments crucially recognized that most
dirty or mixed plastic wastes "require special consideration,"
bringing them under the mandate of the Convention. In practice, the key
amendment requires exporters to obtain prior informed consent from importing
countries for such waste, where trade was previously unregulated. In addition,
it restricts the destiny of plastics traded globally just to recycling, rather
than incineration, plastics-to-fuel, and similar technologies that carry a
significant environmental and climate impact.
Meanwhile, some
categories of plastic wastes will continue to be traded without regulation,
including near-clean shipments of single types of non-halogenated plastic
polymers, mixed shipments of PE, PP, and PET, fluorinated polymers, and cured
plastic resins.
China made an
unexpected, trailblazing proposal for the global trade in all plastic wastes to
be regulated under the Convention as "wastes requiring special
consideration," with the exception of clean flakes of single types of
non-halogenated plastics ready for reuse as secondary raw materials. While
several (mainly Global North) parties were clearly not ready for China's level
of ambition, the proposal made an important contribution by highlighting that
even the recycling of cleaner streams of plastics can bring environmental
pollution and requires transparency and regulation.
Stockholm
Many chemicals
listed in the Stockholm Convention are toxic chemical additives to plastics
(including flame retardants and plastic softeners). The Stockholm Convention
regulates persistent organic pollutants (POPs) — some of which can be found in
plastic and which present deeper concerns if recycled, dumped, or incinerated.
POPs are chemicals of global concern because they are toxic to humans and
animals, long-lasting in the environment, and prone to accumulate in the food
chain and in people. Under the Stockholm Convention, parties have taken major
steps toward preventing the recycling and dumping of POPS, some of the world's
worst chemicals.
Gaps
Analyses prepared
by and for the Secretariat of the UN Environment Assembly outlined the clear gaps still
present in the international management of marine plastic litter:
●
No coordination mechanism exists solely
dedicated to the prevention of plastic pollution or marine litter;
●
There are major geographic gaps in existing
mechanisms, especially on the high seas;
●
No conventions or partnerships focus on
managing plastic pollution prevention upstream - i.e., from extraction of
materials, through to production (additives, toxicity, design, and use) and
final disposal;
●
No global binding restrictions currently
exist for reducing plastic production or pollution from plastic wastes;
●
No global standards exist for adopting or
assessing national efforts;
●
No global industrial standards exist for
protecting the quality of plastics or the environment during production and
use;
●
There is little recognition of the risks to human health and the
application of the precautionary principle and of freedom of information in
this regard.
FACING FACTS:
RECYCLING:
TOXICS IN, TOXICS OUT
What is recycling? Recycling is likely what you think it is: the process of converting
waste into new materials or things. Implied in that definition is that a
product will be somehow ‘melted down’ and its base materials will be remolded
or reshaped into another product. So what does that mean if the original
material itself was toxic?
All
plastic contains toxic additives.
Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) in plastics, like flame retardant DecaBDE, are listed to the
Stockholm Convention. Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals (EDCs) like bisphenols and
phthalates have no global regulation mechanism. A great many more additives are
present in plastic, but not revealed by manufacturers, so we have no idea what
their effects are.
Toxics
persist in the recycling process.
When toxic POPs,
EDCs, and chemicals of concern like dioxin are in the original plastic
products, they also persist through the recycling process — including into children’s toys and food
packaging.
POPs recycling is
occurring on a large scale through the redistribution of dioxin-saturated fly
ash for use in consumer products — including as a food additive and fertilizer in the food
chain.
EDCs disrupt your body’s normal hormonal processes and can lead to reproductive problems, early puberty, neurobehavioral
disorders, and even cancers. POPs accumulate in the body tissues of
wildlife and people, causing disease and disability in humans and disrupting sensitive ecosystems in the environment.
Toxics are accumulating at alarming rates.
Toxics are accumulating at alarming rates.
Plastics are
released into the marine environment from dumping, consumer markets that do not
match local waste management systems, and production spillage. As these
complicated plastics accumulate and contaminate our marine and food systems, so do POPs, EDCs, related chemicals, and additives like BPA
and phthalates.
How are the additives toxic? Toxic chemicals in
products threaten the aims of a circular economy, as those same chemicals can
get recycled into products over and over again. Therefore, we must design
toxics out of our products and recognize that not all products can be recycled.
SIDE
EVENTS AT BRS COP
Controlling Plastic Waste
On May 6, the
governments of Norway and Japan, in partnership with GRID-Arendal, hosted a
side event on how new international regulations can increase accountability for
plastic recycling. Speakers from governments (Norway, Japan, China, Malaysia,
and the EU enforcement authority) and NGOs (Ecology Center (US),
BaliFokus/Nexus3 (Indonesia), and CIEL) highlighted that mixed and contaminated
plastic waste often ends up in facilities with poor environmental and health
controls or, worse, illegally dumped. The influx of mixed and contaminated
plastic waste — particularly into countries in Southeast Asia after China's ban
on plastic waste imports — have deep costs to communities who face health
and environmental impacts, as well as to governments who have to develop and
enforce new policies on plastic waste imports and dumping.
“In 2018,
Indonesia's plastic waste imports increased 150% compared to 2015 levels, but
only 30-40% of it is managed or recycled,” said Yuyun Ismawati of
BaliFokus/Nexus3.
Yuyun Ismawati, BaliFokus
“Only 9% of plastic
gets recycled, 12% is incinerated, and the rest ends up in the environment,
where it continues to concentrate other toxic chemicals from the environment as
it breaks down. When these microplastics re-enter the food chain, that means
people are being exposed again to all of the toxic chemicals included in
plastic. Here, we’re focusing on waste as part of the Basel Convention, but if
we really want to devise a clear solution to the plastic crisis, we must focus
on the entire lifecycle,” said David Azoulay of CIEL.
Civil Society Demands: Time to Break
Free!
On May 4, civil
society groups and members of the #breakfreefromplastic movement held an action
prior to the initial discussions of the Norwegian Amendment. The action
highlighted the human and environmental impact of the plastic waste trade and
engaged delegates, urging them to support the Norwegian Amendment.
Dozens of NGO
observers participated, handing out leaflets and engaging delegates on the
topic as they entered the convention space, while holding placards with images
from plastic-waste-receiving countries.
Mageswari
Sangaralingam, speaking for Friends of the Earth Malaysia at the action, said:
“While the Malaysian government has already issued restrictions on plastic
waste imports, the pollution, disease, and economic burden of cleaning up will
remain in our communities for decades. The rich countries cannot continue
polluting Asia. They have to manage their own waste at home.”
It’s time to #breakfreefromplastic.
At this May 6 side
event, members of the #breakfreefromplastic movement, including
GAIA, BAN, Ecoton (Indonesia), FOE Malaysia, and EIA explained how the proposed
amendments to the Basel Convention annexes could help remedy the global plastic
waste trade crisis and discussed the toxic impacts
of the global plastic waste trade through powerful
first-hand testimony, as well as photographic and video evidence.
The presentations
were met by strong support, including from party delegates from Peru, an
observer from a UK local government authority, India, and more. Recyclers also
shared their perspectives, including Martin Bourque of the Ecology Center and
Ross Bartley of the Bureau of International Recycling. They confirmed that
while recycling has a role to play, there is no way to recycle our way out of
the plastics crisis, and reduction and redesign are crucial.
Plastic
& Circular Economy: Community Solutions
On May 1, the
Global Environmental Facility hosted a side event on community solutions to
address plastic and the circular economy. The event highlighted how some
traditional and indigenous solutions were forgotten in the process of turning
everything into plastic and that they needed to be revived. Hon. Romauld
Ferreira, Minister of the Environment and Housing of Bahamas, used the example
of bags made of palm leaves to illustrate this process. Gillian Guthrie,
Jamaica’s Senior Director for Environment Growth and Job Creation, added that
there is a need for a legal and educational answer to the problem, as Jamaica
faced some difficulties putting into force its ban on single-use plastic, as a
shift in habits was necessary. Speakers discussed the power that importing
countries have at their disposal to oppose and reverse wave of plastic.
Plastics
and Toxic Additives, and the Circular Economy
In this side event
hosted by the Stockholm Convention Regional Center in Spain, speakers from
CIEL, ECHA, SI Group, and Indonesia's Ministry of Environment and Forestry
discussed the toxic impacts of plastic and how the addition of toxic chemicals
impacts the circular economy. Rémi Lefèvre of ECHA revealed that there are 418
substances identified as plastic additives in the EU. David Azoulay of CIEL
highlighted the health impacts throughout the life cycle of plastic, not just in the use or waste phase, as well as key steps to take
under the Basel and Stockholm Conventions to deal with the plastic waste
crisis. In particular, these included supporting Norway's proposal to include
plastic waste under Annex II of the Convention and more stringent low POPs
content to avoid toxic recycling. Looking beyond, Azoulay said that we could
take even more meaningful action by developing a global instrument to address
plastic pollution under UNEA.
WHAT
DOES PLASTIC POLLUTION LOOK LIKE?
BFFP Members Reveal the Many Facets of Plastic Pollution
During the plenary
sessions of the COP, the BRS Secretariat displayed images of plastic pollution
from around the world. BFFP members came together in the weeks before this
meeting to share images from their local spaces. 70 images from 11 countries on
4 continents were submitted and shown to BRS COP delegates in the last two
weeks. Check out the sample of that impressive photo array. Recognize any of
your favorite brands?
Partners in Progress on Plastics Update
#breakfreefromplastic is a global movement envisioning a future
free from plastic pollution. Since its launch in September 2016, over 2,000
organisations from across the world have joined the movement to demand massive
reductions in single-use plastics and to push for lasting solutions to the
plastic pollution crisis. Sign up at www.breakfreefromplastic.org.
Editors:
Marie Mekosh, CIEL (mmekosh@ciel.org), & Jane Patton, No Waste Louisiana (jane@nowastela.org)
Share and find quick updates:
#breakfreefromplastic
#BRSTripleCOPs
#CleanPlanetHealthyPeople
.jpg)
Comments
Post a Comment