29 July 2024 : the month’s most important stories

by Lydia on 29/07/2024 No comments

Our roundup of the month’s most important stories

Over 100 athletes ask Coca-Cola and PepsiCo to champion reuse

Over 100 elite athletes have signed an open letter to Coca-Cola and PepsiCo, urging them to use the Paris 2024 Olympics as a launchpad to increase reusable packaging and reduce single-use plastic. They highlighted the impact of plastic pollution on the environment and athletes’ health.

Shell backs away from pledge to increase “advanced recycling”

Shell has quietly abandoned their pledge to increase “advanced recycling” of plastic due to market challenges and regulatory uncertainty. Critics argue this technology is ineffective and polluting. Shell continues expanding plastic production.

Apparel industry leaks tonnes of plastic waste into environment

The global apparel industry is a major source of plastic pollution, with over 20 million tons of plastic waste generated in 2019. Synthetic clothing is the biggest culprit, but plastic packaging and waste management issues also contribute to the problem. This overlooked source of pollution is getting worse, highlighting the need for industry changes.

Retailers expand the culture of reuse in Germany

Germany, known for recycling, is trying to revive reusable packaging. Small shops offer products in refillable containers, but logistical challenges remain. Store owners believe it needs to be more convenient for people to reduce waste.

“We cannot achieve our climate goals without plastic reduction”

Plastic pollution is a growing crisis fueled by companies prioritising profits over environmental responsibility. This interview with Trash Hero Co-founder Roman Peter reveals the devastating impact of plastic waste, from littering to health risks, while exposing the recycling industry’s deceptive practices. He asks for a systemic shift towards reusable packaging and reduced plastic production. This Swiss article can be translated into English.

What do you think about these stories? Is there one we missed? Let us know in the comments!

Every month we round up the top stories from the world of plastic pollution – and the work being done to stop it. From aquatic pollution to zero waste, you’ll always be up to date with the latest research, trends and greenwashing tactics.

Sign up below to receive the alerts directly to your inbox. There’s no cost and no spam ever.

read more
Lydia29 July 2024 : the month’s most important stories

Are we eating plastic?

by Lydia on 24/07/2024 No comments

“Every week you consume a credit card’s worth of plastic.” You may have seen this claim on social media, but is it an urban myth or reality? We’re looking at why it might well be true.

How does plastic get into our food?

Modern-day food packaging is made almost exclusively from plastic – cling wrap, styrofoam boxes, and sachets are just a few examples. As plastic is used the surface breaks up into tiny particles. These are classified by their size. Microplastics are tiny fragments less than 5mm in length (roughly the size of a piece of rice). Even smaller, and invisible to the naked eye, are nanoplastics. These measure 100 nanometers (0.0001mm) or less. To visualise the difference, if a large piece of microplastic were the size of a football, a “large” nanoplastic would be the size of a sesame seed. For the purposes of this article, we’ll call all these fragments “microplastics”. 

Simply opening plastic packaging releases millions of microplastics into the atmosphere and our food.

Certain environments speed up the deterioration of plastic, meaning it releases even more particles. These include heat, such as from a microwave, and fat, grease and acidity from food. Direct contact with food is part of the reason microplastics end up on our plates, but they’re also found in products that haven’t been wrapped in plastic. So how do they get there? 

  • Environment: Microplastics contaminate soil and water. Plants absorb these, or they are ingested by livestock, passing into our fruit, vegetables and dairy products. 
  • Airborne microplastics: Plastic production, use, recycling and incineration release microplastics into the atmosphere, which are then inhaled by animals in the food chain.
  • Agriculture: Water containing microplastics is used for irrigation. Plastic mulch used to suppress weeds is ploughed into the soil where plants and vegetables grow. Even fertilisers are encapsulated in plastic
  • Processing: High temperatures during food processing can increase leaching from plastic equipment. Contact with vinyl gloves worn by food handlers, plastic tubing in processing machines, and the conveyor belt can contribute to the plastic in our meals. 

So one way or another, most of our food and drink contains some level of microplastic. Eating plastic raises serious concerns. But why is this? 

Chemicals in plastic

Up to 50% of plastic, by weight, is chemical additives. These are used to change how plastic behaves – for example making it flexible, hard, heat resistant, or stretchy – or to give it different colours or shine. A staggering 16,325 different chemicals have to date been identified, but the actual number is likely close to 100,000! You’ve probably heard of some already: 

  • Bisphenol A (BPA) hardens plastic
  • Phthalates make plastic soft and flexible
  • Flame retardants make plastic more resistant to heat

A significant portion (26%) of these additives are known hazardous chemicals. These chemicals are linked to issues like reproductive problems, breathing difficulties, increased risk of cancer and behavioural changes

An even larger chunk, 66%, are a mystery – scientists don’t know enough about them to say what their effects could be. Under current regulations, companies are not required to share full information about the ingredients in their plastic packaging. And many of the chemicals present are not even intentionally added – they are by-products of reactions between other additives. 

This is one of the issues with recycled plastic. Melting down and mixing different types of plastic to make a new material creates a complex “cocktail” of unknown chemicals, further complicating our understanding of the health risks.

A large body of independent research shows our constant exposure to the known chemicals in plastic, even at low levels, could pose a serious risk over time. However, the cumulative nature of microplastic exposure makes it difficult to identify the exact chemicals causing health issues. This lack of clarity is an issue for regulators. 

What regulations are there to protect us?

Some regulations are in place to limit harmful chemicals, but these vary depending on location and the specific types of plastic. The current approach relies on risk-based assessment. This means chemicals can be used freely with limited safety information and need to be proven hazardous before they are banned. This can take up to 20 years! It also allows for “regrettable substitution”, where companies can replace a banned chemical with a structurally similar one with a different name. A prime example is Bisphenol A (BPA). It was commonly found in reusable plastic water bottles until it became restricted due to safety concerns. It’s been replaced with other bisphenols, like BPS or BPF which are likely just as harmful.

Chemicals used in consumer goods and packaging should instead follow the precautionary principle. This says chemicals need to be proven safe before they can be used. With this approach, when there is not enough data to establish safety, we assume there may be risks. 

Negotiations for a global plastics treaty are well underway. Microplastics and chemical migration are high on the agenda. Scientists and activists are pushing for greater transparency in chemical use and a global shift towards the precautionary principle. The plastics industry is resisting, claiming the need for “trade secrets”, and saying a risk-based approach is enough. 

Join us in calling for a strong plastics treaty, that protects us against harmful chemicals, by signing this petition. To learn more about what a strong treaty looks like head to the dedicated section of our website.

read more
LydiaAre we eating plastic?

27 June : the month’s most important stories

by Lydia on 27/06/2024 No comments

Our roundup of the month’s most important stories

The microplastics map: which countries consume the most?

People consume microplastics through food and air. Recent studies have shown that the amount varies depending on your location. This microplastics map reveals which countries are consuming the most.

US state sues Coca-Cola and PepsiCo for plastic pollution

Baltimore takes legal action against plastic manufacturers, arguing they are responsible for plastic pollution harming the city’s environment and public health.  Baltimore joins a growing movement holding plastic companies accountable for pollution and its health consequences.

EU warns “delaying tactics” will block the globals plastics treaty

The EU has warned that other countries’ delays are endangering the global plastics treaty. The key sticking point is whether to set targets to reduce plastic production. A small group of countries want to limit the agreement to addressing plastic pollution, while others want to include reducing plastic production and consumption.

Exposing the myth of chemical recycling

Unveiling the smoke and mirrors of pyrolysis, this article exposes how the plastic recycling industry inflates recycled content figures. While touted as a magic bullet, pyrolysis reduces new plastic production by a tiny per cent. The journalist dives into the calculations creating a misleading perception of its effectiveness.

How a small Pacific island cut plastic pollution

Vanuatu used to have a big plastic pollution problem, but after community pressure for action, the government banned single-use plastics. While there is still work to be done, it has made a big difference.  

What do you think about these stories? Is there one we missed? Let us know in the comments!

read more
Lydia27 June : the month’s most important stories

The key to volunteer motivation: Trash Hero Family Meetings

by Lydia on 26/06/2024 1 comment

What keeps Trash Hero volunteers organising regular cleanups year round? Perhaps the secret lies in our regular Trash Hero Family Meetings. Here, our chapter teams can network, share and better understand the “why” behind our actions. It’s an intense and often deep experience. As one volunteer from Thailand put it: “there is no other seminar as worthwhile to the soul and to the world“.

These meetings bring volunteers together for 3 days of: 

  • knowledge building: workshops and presentations on the issues surrounding plastic pollution
  • skill strengthening: building capacity for community leadership
  • boosting motivation: creating positive energy and inspiration through sharing and connecting with others

This year’s Family Meetings, held in Indonesia and Thailand, centred around a fundamental question: why do we do cleanups?  

The answer – which is not necessarily what people expect – shaped the rest of the content: to provide education about zero waste and build community engagement

  • Workshops encouraged volunteers to think critically about waste. We explored the big picture, understanding that litter is just a symptom of a larger systemic problem.
  • Informative presentations shared new knowledge about the impact plastic has on the climate and our health.
  • Group sessions looked at building trust in communities, leadership skills and effective communication. 
  • Games and quizzes helped keep everyone energised while also reinforcing the learning material.
  • A group cleanup showed the possibility for education, best practices and (in Indonesia) a brand audit.

The Indonesian gathering saw almost 60 participants travel from all corners of the country to Sanur, Bali from 31 May – 2 June.

In Thailand, the event took place from 7 – 9 June in Bangkok. It brought together participants from across Southeast Asia, including Thailand, Malaysia, Cambodia, Vietnam and Myanmar. Sessions took place in parallel in Thai and English, with volunteers happily mingling during the breaks and cleanup activity. As one volunteer from Malaysia said “language was no barrier at all when you feel and see the same things

The sessions with guest speakers, leadership coaches Pak Made Pay (Indonesia) and Khun Amnat (Thailand), proved very popular, with their insights into team building and the qualities needed for effective leadership. Thank you to both for sharing their wisdom, which will no doubt have an impact on our chapter teams. We hope to provide similar training to all volunteers soon.

Following the meetings, we sent out a feedback survey to all participants and the response was overwhelmingly positive. 100% of volunteers who replied felt more knowledgeable about both zero waste and plastic pollution, and 96% felt their motivation increased. One volunteer from Thailand commented: “the event made me know more about plastic waste, from the source to the solutions, with activities that connect people from different regions.”

Trash Hero World fully supports the family meetings, covering the travel, food, accommodation costs for all participants. We also handle the logistics and content design, creation and delivery. 

In July, volunteers from Trash Hero in Switzerland and Germany will hold a zero waste picnic to celebrate their hard work and support new chapter leaders. The shared experiences, the learning and the connections – these are the things that keep us all motivated in our mission to create a world free from plastic pollution.

Let’s keep the momentum going. 

Trash Hero Indonesia Family Meeting 31 May – 2 June

Location: Sanur, Bali

Participants: 57

Chapters: 27

Trash Hero Family Meeting Thailand 7-9 June

Location: Bangkok, Thailand

Participants: 40

Chapters: 22

read more
LydiaThe key to volunteer motivation: Trash Hero Family Meetings

30 May : the month’s most important stories

by Lydia on 30/05/2024 No comments

Our roundup of the month’s most important stories

Microplastics found in every human testicle tested

A new study found microplastics in all human and dog testes tested. This may be linked to declining sperm counts in men.The research is in its early stages, but it adds to evidence of widespread microplastic contamination and potential health risks.

More plastic production = more plastic pollution

A new study reveals a strong link between plastic production and plastic pollution. Every 1% increase in production leads to a 1% rise in pollution.  The Coca-Cola Company is the top polluter, responsible for 11% of branded plastic waste. The study calls for reduced plastic production and stronger regulations on corporations.

Small cheap sachets are causing big problems

Single-use plastic sachets are a major environmental problem in Southeast Asia. They are cheap and popular, but difficult to recycle and often end up in landfills or waterways. A first of it’s kind study, co-produced by Trash Hero Indonesia and members of Break Free From Plastic, dives into who is responsible for this waste.

High levels of toxic plastic chemicals in Shein products

Shein products, including children’s shoes, had toxic chemicals hundreds of times above safety limits. South Korea is requesting removal of these items and inspections show nearly half of tested Shein products contain harmful substances.

Lawyer to plastics makers: prepare for big lawsuits

A lawyer predicts a wave of lawsuits against PFAS, a toxic chemical used in plastic, manufacturers due to potential health risks. PFAS are “forever chemicals” are linked to cancer and other health problems. The legal battle is expected to be massive, potentially exceeding asbestos litigation.

What do you think about these stories? Is there one we missed? Let us know in the comments!

read more
Lydia30 May : the month’s most important stories

Trash Hero Indonesia collaborates on first-ever sachet brand audit report

by Lydia on 02/05/2024 No comments

Break Free From Plastic (BFFP) released a first-of-its-kind report, and Trash Hero Indonesia co-produced it. 

For the past six years, members of the BFFP  movement have worked together, collecting information about who is responsible for the plastic pollution we find on our beaches, rivers, and towns. The annual brand audit report compiles global data and shines a light on the brands responsible for plastic pollution. This information can then be used to advocate for systemic change. In fact, when New York Attorney General James filed a lawsuit against PepsiCo for “polluting the environment and endangering public health through its single-use plastic bottles, caps and wrappers”, data from the brand audits was cited in the press release. 

Previous brand audit reports have collected data on all types of plastic. However, sachet pollution has increased at alarming rates across Asia, leading many environmental groups to demand that companies phase out sachets. To better understand the scale and source of sachet pollution and to be able to push for real change, a group of BFFP NGOs from Indonesia, Thailand, Vietnam, and the Philippines came together to take action. 

A sachet is an environmental nightmare. Most of them have an airtight inner plastic layer that protects the product, a foil barrier against moisture and heat, and an outer flexible layer that can be printed on. An adhesive holds it all together. The multiple layers make it impossible to recycle effectively. Their light weight means they often end up in forests, rivers, and oceans. From here, animals mistake them for food and get sick or even die after consuming them. Discarded sachets also worsen flooding by clogging waterways and drains, leading to more water-borne diseases. For something that is used for seconds, they have a very long-lasting impact!  This devastating impact has been widely recognised, with even former CEO of Unilever, Paul Polman, stating, “We need to get rid of sachets for good”. Yet their use worldwide continues. Our article “Exposing the hidden cost of sachets” dives into the environmental and social issues of sachets in more detail. 

Collecting the data

Between October 2023 and February 2024, 807 volunteers organised brand audits in 50 locations across India, Indonesia, the Philippines, and Vietnam. Together, these volunteers from 25 organisations collected a total of 33,467 sachets

Alongside colleagues from YPBB, Ecoton and Greenpeace, Trash Hero Indonesia adjusted the brand audit methodology to suit sachets. They then collected and collated the data from the sachet brand audits in Indonesia and helped develop and draft the report. 

Trash Hero Indonesia trained volunteers in the new process and rallied Trash Hero volunteers across Indonesia to participate. Data from Indonesia made up 29% of the total data published in the report. 476 volunteers took part, counting 9,698 sachets across 34 locations. 1,212 brands were identified. The Trash Hero Indonesia team collected and verified the data from all participating organisations in Indonesia.  We want to say a big thank you to the 456 Trash Hero volunteers from 23 chapters who conducted sachet brand audits!

What did the report find?

The report identified the top ten brands responsible for sachet pollution across Indonesia, India, Vietnam and the Philippines: 

  1. Unilever 
  2. Wings
  3. Mayora Indah
  4. Wadia Group
  5. Balaji Wafers Private Limited
  6. Procter & Gamble
  7. Nestlé
  8. Yes 2 Healthy Life
  9. JG Summit Holdings
  10. Salim Group 

The audit identified 2,678 brands in four countries—India, Indonesia, the Philippines, and Vietnam—highlighting the extensive use of this problematic single-use packaging format. 

The report also revealed a concerning trend in sachet material composition. Over half (57%) of the collected samples were multilayer sachets, while only 41% were single-layer. This is important because multilayer construction, combining different materials, makes recycling these sachets virtually impossible.

Members of the BFFP movement attended the fourth round of official negotiations for the Global Plastics Treaty and were able to present the report to country delegates. 

What should corporations do?

Urgent action needs to be taken now to stop producing sachets. We, along with other members of the Break Free From Plastic movement, call on corporations to:

  1. Take immediate action to phase out or quit sachets, to effectively address the environmental, social and economic impacts of these single-use plastics.
  2. Reveal their plastic use by providing public data on the type and quantity of packaging used in different markets, and the chemicals in that packaging.
  3. End support for false solutions such as burning plastic and chemical recycling. Sending sachets and other plastic packaging to cement kilns isn’t recycling.
  4. Redesign business models away from single-use sachets and other single-use packaging of any type – including novel materials such as bio-based or compostable plastics.
  5. Invest in accessible, affordable reuse, refill or packaging-free product delivery systems in all markets, while ensuring a just transition for all relevant workers.

Read the full report here

read more
LydiaTrash Hero Indonesia collaborates on first-ever sachet brand audit report

Strong calls for action at plastics treaty talks in Ottawa, but countries make little progress

by Seema on 01/05/2024 No comments

The pressure was on at INC-4, the penultimate round of talks planned to create an international, legally-binding treaty to end plastic pollution. With the clock ticking after the three previous sessions failed to make any substantial progress, member states finally got down to discussing the content of the treaty.

Over the seven days (23 – 29 April 2024) in Ottawa, delegates were able to “streamline” some of the proposed text but, with a deluge of new additions and brackets (which show disagreement with the words placed inside), in the end they were left with a draft that is nowhere near ready for negotiations at the final session in Busan, Korea in November 2024.

A snapshot of the INC-4 streamlined text: all words in brackets have been objected to by at least one member state.

Aware of the amount of work still to do, member states did agree on creating a legal drafting group to help clarify the text of the future agreement. This is much needed because there are now at least 3,686 brackets in the text, making it almost unintelligible.

Countries also agreed to establish two expert working groups that would convene before November to discuss certain aspects of the treaty such as chemicals of concern, product design and financial support. Notably not up for discussion before INC-5 are primary plastic polymers, what Rwanda called “the elephant in the room”. An attempt to create such a working group, which would consider cuts in plastic production was disappointingly rejected at the last minute. This means it will be difficult, though not impossible, to include production caps – the key to ending plastic pollution – in the final treaty.

As is now the norm at INC meetings, a small number of countries continued to obstruct and delay discussions. They attempted to narrow the scope of the treaty to waste management (instead of the full lifecycle of plastic, as mandated) and remove all references to production, chemicals of concern, producer responsibility, human rights and microplastics.

One delegate said that every single material can release particles into the air – even skin – so plastics should not be singled out. Others denied the existence of scientific evidence of human health impacts, suggested wording to acknowledge the ‘critical role plastic plays in sustainable development’ and cautioned against any ‘sudden transition’ away from plastic.

This kind of bad faith negotiation can only be prevented by a strong conflict of interest policy and the right for member states to vote on decisions. The goal of the plastics treaty is to find solutions to a shared crisis caused by a minority of bad actors. But if these actors are present and demanding all text needs their approval, how can we ever hope to achieve this?

Highlights

Juliet Kabera, Rwanda

The highlight of the seven days was a strong push for a limit on new plastic production, championed by Peru and Rwanda. Their proposal to adopt a global target to reduce 40% of the global use of primary plastics polymers by 2040 from 2025 levels, was supported by at least 29 member states during the meeting.

Following the proposal, these countries launched the Bridge to Busan Declaration on Plastic Polymers to rally INC delegates to support reducing primary plastic production ahead of INC-5.

There was a strong presence of rightsholders at the meeting, including the Indigenous Peoples Caucus, waste pickers, women, workers and youth organisations. Rightsholders are different to stakeholders because they possess internationally recognised human or collective rights that will be impacted by the outcome of the treaty. They made moving interventions during the meeting and led the “March to End the Plastic Era” through the city.

Various global bodies were also present, with the World Health Organisation (WHO), recommending that the use of plastic for medical and healthcare should not be exempt from the treaty and the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights calling for a reduction in plastic production, saying that “any person that is given a choice, will chose nature over destruction.”

Low points

There was a clear increase in industry interference in the treaty negotiation process. We saw everything from paid advertising around the venue extolling the virtues of plastic, to reports of harassment and intimidation from the independent Scientists Coalition. There were many industry-sponsored events, including one from the world’s biggest producer of PET resin called “Friends of Zero Waste”, while reps from plastic manufacturers and trade bodies sat alongside members of official government delegations in the negotiating rooms.

The industry lobbying and spread of misinformation to member states was coordinated and calculated. As a result, one of the topics for intersessional work is “enhancing recyclability”, despite clear evidence of the threats to health and the environment from the mixing and concentration of chemical additives during the recycling process.

Analysis by CIEL of the published list of INC-4 participants revealed that 196 lobbyists for the fossil fuel and chemical industry were registered for the event – a 37% increase over the previous meeting six months ago. With side events and informal meetings, many more were likely present.

What happens now

In the final session of INC-4, which ended in the small hours of the morning, countries decided to prioritise intersessional (preparatory) work on:

1) how to finance the implementation of the treaty;
2) assess the chemicals of concern in plastic products; and
3) look at product design, reusability and recyclability.

Other parts of the treaty – including primary plastic polymers, microplastics and extended producer responsibility – were not assigned any time or resources.

Member states agreed to let observers participate in this work. The composition and the schedule of the working groups is yet to be decided.

Additionally, they decided to create a legal drafting group that will conduct a legal review of the text and provide recommendations for the next meeting.

The big two open questions of the negotiation process remain open: will the INC listen to calls for a clear conflict of interest policy to stop the future treaty being derailed by the petrochemical lobby? And will they protect the right to vote on all decisions, so that it does not get watered down?

As Graham Forbes, global plastics campaign lead at Greenpeace put it: if member states “don’t act between now and INC-5 in Busan, the treaty they are likely to get is one that could have been written by ExxonMobil and their acolytes.”

Image credits: all photos taken inside the INC-4 venue by IISD/ENB – Kiara Worth

read more
SeemaStrong calls for action at plastics treaty talks in Ottawa, but countries make little progress

23 April: the month’s most important stories

by Lydia on 23/04/2024 No comments

Our roundup of the month’s most important stories

Unilever scales back social and plastic promises

In an attempt to cut costs, Unilever weakens its commitments to sustainability, reducing plastic use targets and living wage goals. Critics slam the move while the CEO defends it as a shift in focus, not a retreat from responsibility.

Plastics industry heats planet 4 times as much as flying

A new report confirms that plastics play a bigger role in climate change than flying. They release four times as many climate-warming emissions, the equivalent of 600 coal plants (about three times the number that exists in the US). Environmental groups want to see reduced plastic production, while the plastics industry believes recycling can solve the problem.

The Global Plastics Treaty is not protected from vested interests

A UN-backed global plastics treaty is being negotiated to reduce plastic pollution. Countries and corporations dependent on fossil fuels are hindering the treaty’s progress with lobbying and delaying tactics—proposed solutions include requiring conflict of interest reporting and separating scientific discussions from industry discussions.

Plastic pollution found to kill ocean embryos

A new study reveals that plastic pollution harms ocean embryos, disrupting their development and potentially affecting entire ecosystems. Even common plastic types like PVC can be harmful when broken down, releasing chemicals that interfere with cell processes.

Illegally imported trash is swamping Southeast Asia

Southeast Asia has become the dumping ground for plastic waste from developed countries, especially after China banned plastic imports in 2018. This has overwhelmed the region’s ability to manage its own waste, causing environmental damage and health problems. This article discusses efforts to regulate plastic waste trade and calls for stricter enforcement.

Citizens demand a reduction is plastic production

Activists take to the streets to call for a global plastics treaty that cuts plastic production, prioritises human rights, and addresses plastic pollution’s lifecycle, not just recycling. They want a strong treaty that protects communities and workers.

What do you think about these stories? Is there one we missed? Let us know in the comments!

read more
Lydia23 April: the month’s most important stories

28 March: the month’s most important stories

by Lydia on 28/03/2024 No comments

Our roundup of the month’s most important stories

New study finds over 4000 toxic chemicals in plastic.

A huge new survey reveals a shocking 16,000 chemicals are used in plastics, with over 4,200 deemed hazardous. Worryingly, only a fraction are regulated, leaving thousands potentially harming our health and the environment.

Investors are pressuring big brands to reduce plastic waste

Shareholder activism is driving positive change. Investor groups are working directly with companies like Disney and Hormel, encouraging them to set goals and report on reductions in plastic packaging. This approach has already led to commitments to cut plastic use and improve recyclability. While there’s still a long way to go to address plastic pollution entirely, shareholder activism is a promising step.

Microplastics raise risk of stroke and heart attack

A study found people with microplastics in their blood vessels were nearly 5 times more likely to suffer heart attack, stroke or death. While more research is needed, it suggests plastic pollution might damage blood vessels and contribute to heart problems.

Plastic pollution and climate change make a “vicious cycle”

Global warming and plastic pollution are worsening each other. As the temperature rises, plastics break down faster, requiring more plastic production. This increases greenhouse gas emissions and traps more heat, accelerating global warming. The article calls for solutions throughout the plastic lifecycle to address both problems.

Taxpayers money used to fund pollution

A report reveals US plastic factories, despite harming communities and violating pollution permits, receive massive government subsidies. These taxpayer dollars often outweigh environmental regulations, raising concerns for public health and fairness.

What do you think about these stories? Is there one we missed? Let us know in the comments!

read more
Lydia28 March: the month’s most important stories

20 surprising everyday things that contain plastic

by Lydia on 25/03/2024 1 comment

Have you ever thought about how much plastic is in our daily lives? We know to avoid plastic bags and bottles, but what about the plastic hiding in everyday items? Here are 20 surprising things that contain plastics, along with some tips for how to avoid them. 

Clothes: 60% of our clothes contain synthetic fibres such as polyester, acrylic or nylon – forms of plastic. Even cotton items can hide plastic – anything labelled “wrinkle-resistant” likely has a plastic coating. Shedding during washing and wear, and at the end of their life contributes to microplastic pollution.

How to avoid: Choose clothes made from 100% natural fibres like linen, cotton or wool. Opt for a cold, short cycle to minimise shedding when washing synthetic blends.


Tea bags: Tea bags look like simple paper pouches. Unfortunately, many of them contain a type of plastic called polypropylene. It is used to heat-seal the edges and keeps them from falling apart. Others are made entirely from plant plastic – which contains all the same additives and chemicals as regular plastic.

How to avoid: Ditch the bag altogether and enjoy loose-leaf tea. 


Nail polish: Plastic gives nail polish its strength and staying power. Two key ingredients are resin, a type of plastic that forms a hard, protective layer, and plasticisers, which keep the polish flexible and prevent chipping.

How to avoid: Finding nail polish that is entirely plastic-free is impossible. But, water-based polishes tend to contain less plastic than others. Or let your nails go naked!


Chewing gum: The satisfying chew is thanks to its “gum base”. This usually contains synthetic elastomers like polyvinyl acetate, the same plastic found in glue. 

How to avoid: Keep an eye out for plastic-free gum brands.


Tampons(and pads): The absorbent core of a menstrual pad uses superabsorbent polymers, similar to those in diapers, and the leak-proof backing is plastic film. Even “cotton” top sheets usually contain synthetic fibres. Tampon applicators are typically plastic.

How to avoid: Reusable menstrual cups or period underwear are not plastic-free but used over time will vastly reduce the pollution caused by single-use products.  


Car tyres: Modern car tyres are around 1/4 synthetic rubber, a petroleum-based plastic. As the tyres wear down, they release microplastics into the environment – they are likely the biggest source of plastic pollution in the ocean.

How to avoid: Reduce car use whenever possible to minimise wear and tear on your tyres. 


Toothpaste: Manufacturers often use tiny plastic beads for exfoliation, and plastics are added as thickeners. Most toothpaste tubes are non-recyclable plastic, too. 

How to avoid: Plastic-free toothpaste options are available. You can also check the ingredients for “poly-”, which indicates plastic. 


Glitter and sequins: Those shimmering dots are usually made of PET plastic, the same as water bottles, coated with aluminium for shine. 

How to avoid: If you must use loose glitter, try coloured sand or salt. But don’t throw away any sparkly clothes or accessories you already own: the longer you wear them, the longer you’ll keep them out of landfill


Sponges: Sponges were traditionally made from cellulose. But now, most kitchen and bathroom sponges contain plastic for durability and absorbency. 

How to avoid: Look for sponges made of natural materials.


Wet wipes: The base materials of these wipes are usually synthetic fabrics such as polyester. 

How to avoid: Opt for natural, reusable cloth wipes instead. 


Cigarette butts: The filters in cigarettes are made from plastic fibres packed tightly together, adding to the chemicals you’re breathing in with the smoke. Read more about it here.

How to avoid: There’s no plastic-free alternative to cigarette filters. 


Sun cream: Plastic is added to sun cream for several reasons. It stops it from splitting, makes it easier to apply and helps with water resistance. 

How to avoid:  Explore mineral-based sun creams that are often plastic-free. Keep an eye out for ingredients that start with “poly-” or end with “-lene”, as these indicate plastic.


Paper cups: Paper cups have a thin layer of plastic, usually polyethylene or PLA, to prevent leaks. These layers make them difficult to recycle and hot drinks increase the transfer of toxins into your brew.  

How to avoid: Invest in a safer, reusable cup for your takeaway coffee or tea, or choose to dine in instead.


Aluminium can: Inside aluminium cans is a layer of plastic that prevents the metal from reacting with the beverage and extends shelf life. This video on Instagram shows the plastic inside a Coke can.

How to avoid: Currently, there are no aluminium cans without plastic linings, so drink from glass if available – especially as aluminium has a very high environmental footprint. And always recycle your can!


Paint: The vast majority of household paints contain plastic binders for improved durability and moisture resistance. 

How to avoid: Water-based paints often have reduced plastic; or use lime-based or other mineral-based paint for a plastic-free, breathable finish. 


Make-up (and other beauty products): Make-up and toiletries contain microplastic in two primary forms – tiny plastic particles added as exfoliants or glitter, and liquid plastic ingredients that thicken products and help to create a smooth texture on our skin or hair. Most are also packaged in plastic.

How to avoid: Check the ingredient lists on your products and try to avoid those containing words starting with “poly-” or ending with “-lene”. Purchase cosmetics in bar form or in refillable or reusable packaging wherever possible.


Foil wrappers: These are used for packaging everything from chocolate to laundry liquid and often have a thin layer of plastic on one side to make it more pliable and prevent tearing. 

How to avoid: Choose food and other products in reusable, paper or no packaging.  


Store receipts: These are printed on special thermal paper with a plastic coating containing bisphenol A (BPA). When the paper runs through the cash register, a print head heats the paper to create the letters and images you see on the receipt, which saves on ink.

How to avoid: If you’re given the option, refuse a receipt and get digital copies instead. 


Non-stick pans: The non-stick coating on many popular cookware options is made of polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE), commonly known as Teflon, a type of synthetic plastic. 

How to avoid: Use pans made from stainless steel, cast iron or enamel materials. 


Pillows: The filling in all synthetic pillows is made from plastic – usually hollowfibre polyester, but sometimes foam. Manufacturers favour this because it’s cheaper and holds its shape well. 

How to avoid: Try pillows with natural fillings such as feathers, wool or buckwheat hulls.


Being aware of hidden plastic allows us to make more informed choices regarding reducing plastic consumption daily.  Which of these surprised you the most? Let us know in the comments. 

read more
Lydia20 surprising everyday things that contain plastic