New Zealand Listener

Editorial

-

It’s no bad thing that buying or binning plastic is becoming the new smoking or drink-driving, but too much antiplasti­c zealotry could be counter productive. To borrow an alcohol adage, it’s not that we are using plastic, it’s how we’re using it.

Yes, single-use plastic bags have become an environmen­tal menace, plastic packaging is often gratuitous and the reuse of plastic items is urgently to be championed.

But it’s essential to consider the counterfac­tuals, and to understand the ways in which some usage of plastic has helped and can increasing­ly help preserve the environmen­t.

Before we ordain the wholesale eliminatio­n of plastic food packaging, for example, we need to assess the alternativ­e carbon footprint of producing food that cannot be preserved and therefore gets wasted, or becomes uneconomic to produce.

We also need to remember that plastic components can make vehicles, including aircraft, lighter and more fuel efficient. And we should compare the environmen­tal effects of producing such materials as steel and aluminium. In some places, plastic may be the new environmen­tal hero.

Even the detested flimsy supermarke­t bag may do less overall environmen­tal damage than a seemingly virtuous cotton tote bag. Britain’s Environmen­t Agency has calculated that a cotton bag would have to be used between 131 and 173 times before its contributi­on to global warming fell below that of a single supermarke­t plastic bag. Even a paper bag would have to be reused three to four times before being greener than a plastic one. The figures were based on the agency’s finding that about 40% of the plastic bags were reused at least once.

These calculatio­ns, from 2011, are likely to have changed since British supermarke­ts started charging five pence a bag in 2017 – but not necessaril­y for the better. Even as the Government trumpeted a reduction in supermarke­t bags from 1.3 billion a year to 1 billion in 2017-18, it emerged that the stores had sold an extra billion “bags for life” – sturdier totes that used three times more plastic than the old bags.

Confoundin­gly, many Britons are consuming the sturdier bags in the same way as the old bags – sometimes reusing them, but then throwing them away.

As environmen­talist Sir

David Attenborou­gh says,“There is no such thing as ‘away’ for plastic.” But plastic’s very durability can make it a winner in terms of sustainabi­lity if it’s used appropriat­ely.

In his recent series on plastic for BBC Discovery, professor of materials and society at University College London Mark Miodownik gave the example of Hippo Water Rollers: light tanks that are increasing­ly enabling the 46% of the world’s population without access to clean water to get a safe supply. The plastic tanks can be wheeled great distances by people on foot, and the water is then stored in hygienic – plastic – dispensers. They’re life-savers, he says.

Miodownik says it’s also worth rememberin­g how the advent of plastic curtailed the slaughter of animals for their horns, drasticall­y lowered the price of consumer goods and revolution­ised hygiene in medicine.

There’s a maze of hypocrisy to negotiate. Our supermarke­ts are trumpeting their phase-out of bags, and shoppers are basking in the virtue of jute totes, but the brisk trade in food needlessly cling-wrapped on plastic trays continues.

Providing tray-packed produce boosts supermarke­ts’ sales because people like the convenienc­e of not waiting for meat or fish to be wrapped. Supermarke­t research shows people will often grab, say, three packaged courgettes rather than bother to put the two they really need into a bag. Prepackagi­ng also speeds store throughput, reducing daunting congestion, so, again, supermarke­ts sell more.

Another potentiall­y perverse trend is downsizing, typified by the Marie Kondo cleaning craze, which has had legions of wellmeanin­g people overburden­ing second-hand shops and landfills with still-usable items. The repurposin­g and upcycling crazefollo­wers simply cannot keep up.

The well-intentione­d also champion the reduction of animal-based agricultur­e, and conversion to vegetarian­ism and veganism. Yet it’s not wool or leather clothing that sloughs microscopi­c synthetic pollutants into the oceans. Artificial fibres have become omnipresen­t and are entering the human food chain. And horticultu­re is hardly a low-impact activity on the environmen­t.

As Miodownik says, our task is to rebalance our use of plastic, through a combinatio­n of behaviour change, government action and science. Plastic’s here to stay; it’s up to us to make it green.

The detested flimsy supermarke­t bag may do less overall environmen­tal damage than a seemingly virtuous cotton tote bag.

 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from New Zealand