More than 100 countries favored measures to ratchet back plastic production, while oil-rich nations pushed back, arguing that the world should target plastic pollution, not plastic itself.
“It’s time to end plastic pollution, as the world can no longer wait.” 🌱 Follow Climate & environment Each year, the world produces more than 450 million metric tons of plastic, mostly from fossil fuels, and generates 350 million metric tons of plastic waste.
Delegates were concerned that Washington would become more hostile to a plastics treaty under Trump, he said.
The disappointing results came despite a near-consensus among participants that without urgent action to combat plastic pollution, global warming would be likely to intensify.
Advertisement Negotiators hoping to impose stricter limits on plastic waste openly expressed their displeasure in the final hours of the talks.
BUSAN, South Korea — International negotiations to create a historic agreement to reduce plastic pollution collapsed as negotiators from over 170 nations couldn’t agree on how to reduce the massive amount of plastic waste that is piling up worldwide.
Participants were unable to agree on the best course of action, and the protracted negotiations in this port city ended early on Monday, local time. More than 100 nations supported steps to slow down the production of plastic, but oil-rich countries opposed them, claiming that the focus should be on plastic pollution rather than plastic itself.
Under the U. “N.”. rules, delegates need to agree in order to sign a legally binding agreement. According to the negotiators, they intend to start up again next year.
As plastic industry representatives and environmentalists observed from the sidelines in the corridors of the Busan Exhibition and Convention Center, hundreds of diplomats engaged in late-night negotiations for a week before the breakdown. The result highlights the challenges of reducing the use of a material that is widely used and supports a multibillion-dollar global industry.
At the next meeting, Erin Silsbe, the head of the Canadian delegation, stated, “We need to change our approach.”. “The world can no longer wait for plastic pollution to stop. “”.
🌱.
Monitor the environment and climate.
350 million metric tons of plastic waste are produced annually worldwide, along with over 450 million metric tons of plastic, primarily from fossil fuels. According to data gathered by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, roughly half of that waste is disposed of in landfills. Less than 10% is recycled, and another 19% is burned. A little less than 25% of it is mishandled, and some of it ends up in the ocean and rivers.
Over five dozen nations, led by Norway and Rwanda, as well as allies like Greenpeace, had pushed for a treaty that would restrict the production of plastic, outlaw specific chemicals found in commonplace goods, and include provisions to enforce the agreement.
The negotiations were a “moral failure,” according to Juan Carlos Monterrey Gómez of Panama, whose delegation had suggested a global goal to reduce plastic production. “”.
He declared, “Colleagues, we never accepted a weak treaty here, and we never will.”. Let us be unrelenting, I say to the 120 countries that represent ambition. Even though we were delayed, we won’t be stopped. “”.
Others, such as Saudi Arabia, Russia, and trade associations like the American Chemistry Council, opposed limiting the production of plastic and supported a voluntary, non-binding agreement that improved waste management.
Saudi Arabia’s representative, Abdulrahman Al Gwaiz, stated that “if you can stop plastic pollution, there should be no problem with producing plastics.”.
In an effort to reach a final agreement, South Korean Foreign Minister Cho Tae-yul, whose country hosted the negotiations, urged his colleagues to persevere and call another conference.
“We have made real progress,” he declared. “Making concessions does not indicate weakness. The dot. We cannot let progress be hampered by perfection. “”.
It was not surprising to many participants that an agreement could not be reached at Busan. In November, the most recent round of negotiations began. 25 in an atmosphere of cautious optimism, but it became evident that a consensus was unattainable by the sixth day of negotiations.
Representatives from a number of nations, including those that produce oil and some developing ones like India, contended that restricting the production of plastics should not impede economic advancement.
“Technology has always been the answer in the last century,” Al Gwaiz stated.
The Biden administration had attempted to strike a compromise during the negotiations, stating last week that while it opposes mandatory production limits, it supports the larger objective of lowering plastic pollution. According to a 2021 National Academy of Sciences report, the United States is the world’s largest producer of plastic waste, producing nearly twice as much as China and more than the whole European Union put together.
Negotiators were aware that Donald Trump would be returning to the White House next month, according to an African negotiator who spoke candidly on condition of anonymity. According to him, delegates feared that under Trump, Washington would grow increasingly antagonistic toward a plastics treaty.
After two years of accelerated plastics negotiations, the talks in Busan marked the end of the process. By 2022, the U.S. No. By 2024, the Environment Assembly, which is made up of representatives from all 193 member states, plans to draft a legally binding agreement to address the “high and rapidly increasing levels of plastic pollution” that exist worldwide. After almost six meetings to draft an agreement, member nations had hoped to finalize it in South Korea.
The results were disappointing, even though participants were almost unanimous that global warming would likely worsen if immediate action was not taken to reduce plastic pollution. Fossil fuels are used to make the majority of plastics, a process that can release harmful and warming gases.
In the closing hours of the negotiations, negotiators who wanted to set more stringent limits on plastic waste publicly voiced their disapproval.
Hugo-Maria Schally, the E. U. advisor for global environmental talks, in the plenary session.
And the room erupted in cheers as Rwanda’s representative, Juliet Kabera, urged her colleagues “to stand up for ambition.” Dozens of negotiators stood up and clapped.
Using the most recent 22-page draft text of the treaty as a starting point, nations on both sides of the plastics controversy declared their willingness to continue negotiations. The text’s length, which decreased from 73 pages at the start of the negotiations, was cited by some negotiators as evidence of progress.
Remaining “focused on addressing the primary cause of plastic pollution — mismanaged waste” is essential, according to Chris Jahn, council secretary of the International Council of Chemical Associations, an industry group. “”.
In the meantime, advocacy organizations reaffirmed the necessity of a more comprehensive deal.
According to Graham Forbes, who is leading Greenpeace’s delegation to the negotiations, “it is still possible to secure an impactful plastics treaty that protects our health, biodiversity, and climate.”. “.”.
The director of plastics policy at Ocean Conservancy, Anja Brandon, encouraged the incoming Trump administration to continue to be involved, noting that most Americans consider plastic pollution in the ocean to be “a pressing issue.”. Our hope is that any administration will honor the people’s will and acknowledge the opportunity and responsibility for the United States. S. to participate in the solution. “”.
This report was written by Allyson Chiu in Washington.
