https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/jan/30/eu-european-union-proposes-microplastics-ban-plastic-pollution
EU proposes ban on 90% of microplastic pollutants
European Chemicals Agency draft law aims to cut 400,000 tonnes of
plastic pollution
A wide-ranging ban on microplastics covering about 90% of pollutants has
been proposed by the EU in an attempt to cut 400,000 tonnes of plastic
pollution in 20 years.
Every year, Europe releases a bulk amount of microplastics six times
bigger than the “Great Pacific garbage patch” into the environment – the
equivalent of 10bn plastic bottles.
The phasing out proposed by the European Chemicals Agency (Echa) would
remove 36,000 tonnes a year of “intentionally added” microplastic fibres
and fragments, starting in 2020.
Cosmetics, detergents, paints, polish and coatings would all require
design overhauls, as would products in the construction, agriculture and
fossil fuels sectors.
The draft law targets microplastics that are not necessary but have been
added to products by manufacturers for convenience or profit.
Baskut Tuncak, the UN’s special rapporteur on hazardous substances and
wastes, said: “Microplastics are a growing concern to a number of human
rights. The steps proposed by Echa are necessary to help ensure present
and future generations can enjoy what is their human right: a clean,
healthy and sustainable environment.”
The UK imposed a more limited ban on plastic microbeads in cosmetics and
personal care products last year, focused on items such as shaving foam,
toothpaste and shower gel.
The EU’s measure is “much more comprehensive”, according to its authors,
in terms of the sectors, volumes and product usages covered.
Peter Simpson, a senior scientist at Echa, said: “We are also looking at
‘leave-on’ cosmetics such as makeup or moisturisers as well as
detergents, which aren’t included in the UK ban, and materials such as
encapsulation fragrances that are used in other household products.”
The legislation also phases out the use of microplastics in products
such as fertilisers, from which scientists believe they may be entering
the human food chain.
An Echa spokesperson said it was “unknown for now” whether the measure
would apply in the UK after Brexit.
Seb Dance, Labour’s deputy leader in the European parliament, said
Britons could lose out as a result of leaving the EU. “Clearly these
proposals go much further than the measures so far suggested by Michael
Gove,” he said.
“But even if Gove’s plan was as ambitious as this, there would be little
point in one country taking action on its own to try to solve this
crisis, as the products we buy, and the supply chains they depend on,
cross many borders.
“Whatever the shenanigans in Westminster, let’s hope that the government
and MPs do not lose sight of the need to have comprehensive cross-border
initiatives that scale up the response to the problem.”
Prof Richard Thompson of Plymouth University’s school of biological and
marine sciences said: “Plastics don’t respect borders in the way that
people do and, for me, the appropriate scale to legislate for our
environment on is the European one. I have concerns that we may be
compromised by leaving the EU, because it’s more complicated to manage
things on a country-by-country basis.”
Echa’s scientific committee will review the proposal for 15 months
before sending an opinion to the European commission, which will have
three months to prepare legislation. It could then take up to eight
months for use restrictions to come into force.
The measure is part of an EU clampdown on plastics, ranging from taxes
and bans on single-use items to a €350m (£305m) investment in
modernising the sector through investment and more recycling.
Product bans and use restrictions on microplastics would be phased in
over a six-year period, designed to give companies lead time to change
production processes and parts at minimal cost.
However, it does not tackle the estimated 176,000 tonnes of
microplastics that are unintentionally released into EU surface waters
every year, the lion’s share from road tyre wear and preproduction
pellets. This has added to concerns from some environmentalists that the
process lacks urgency.
Elise Vitali, chemicals policy officer at the European Environmental
Bureau, said the microplastics problem was “fed by irresponsible firms,
such as those making personal care products, that decided to swap
natural ingredients like ground almond, coconut shell and olive seed for
plastic microbeads and ignored the public backlash and scientific warnings”.
She added: “We’ll be pushing hard to tighten this proposal to ensure
real impact. Tackling the plastics inside products is just the tip of
the iceberg when it comes to solving the microplastic blight, but is a
necessary step.”
Microplastics are tiny synthetic polymers that resist biodegradation and
block the digestive tracts of aquatic creatures, turtles and birds,
diminishing the urge to eat and altering feeding behaviour.
With mass industrial production, they have spread to Earth’s peaks,
depths, the Arctic and human bodies, where their health impacts are not
yet fully understood.