Connect with us

Green

How China’s Plastics Ban Threw Global Recycling into Disarray

Published

on

Global Recycling

Global Recycling: Reinventing a Broken System

First developed in the 20th century, plastics have become ubiquitous in our daily lives. Found in everything from food packaging to medical devices, this extremely versatile and cost-effective material has undoubtedly made our lives more convenient.

This convenience comes at a cost, however, and experts warn that plastics’ inability to biodegrade is taking a toll on the planet. To make matters worse, recycling infrastructure around the world is severely underdeveloped.

In this infographic from Swissquote, we recount the end of “easy” recycling, and examine the struggles that many countries are facing as they scale up their domestic capabilities.

The Single-Supplier Global Recycling Model

Since the early 1990s, developed countries have avoided the environmental costs of plastic by outsourcing their recycling to the developing world—more specifically, China.

At the time, this arrangement benefited both parties. On one hand, it was cheaper for developed countries to export their plastic waste rather than process it domestically. China, on the other hand, needed vast amounts of raw materials to fuel its burgeoning manufacturing industries. It also meant that Chinese container ships, which regularly delivered goods to countries like the U.S., would no longer return home empty-handed.

A system that relies heavily on one country can only handle so much, however, and by 2016 China was importing 7 million tonnes of recyclables and waste per year. To make matters worse, plastics production kept growing at a faster rate than the global population:

YearGrowth in Global Plastics Production (%)Growth in World Population (%)
20133.821.19
20144.011.17
20153.541.16
20164.041.14
20173.881.12
20183.161.1

Source: PlasticsEurope, Worldometer

It was clear that this system would soon reach its tipping point, especially with the Chinese government largely committed to going green.

National Sword Policy

China’s solution to cutting down plastic imports was the National Sword policy, which at the start of 2018, implemented an import ban on 24 types of recyclables. The ban was extremely effective—plastic exports to China fell from 581,000 tonnes in February of 2017 to just 23,900 tonnes a year later.

All of this plastic did not simply disappear, though. Plastic-exporting countries scrambled for alternatives, and in some cases, diverted their shipments to nearby countries in Southeast Asia. Governments in the region were quick to respond, either refusing shipments or implementing bans of their own.

Richer countries are taking advantage of the looser regulations in poorer countries. They export the trash here because it’s more expensive for them to process [it] themselves back home due to the tighter laws.

—Lea Guerrero, Greenpeace Philippines

In one noteworthy case, Rodrigo Duterte, President of the Philippines, threatened to wage war on Canada if it did not take back its shipments of waste. An official later clarified this threat was not to be taken literally.

The End of “Easy” Recycling

Western countries tend to produce more plastics per capita than other countries, but are ill-prepared to begin processing their own plastic waste in a sustainable manner. One critical issue arises from their predominant method of recycling known as single-stream recycling.

Under this method, consumers place all of their recyclables into a single bin. This mixture of cardboard, plastics, and glass is then brought to a material recovery facility (MRF) to be sorted and processed. While this method makes it easier for consumers to recycle, it suffers from two weaknesses:

  1. Contamination: Mixing plastics, chemicals, and food waste adds extra costs to the recycling process. On average, one in four items that arrive at an MRF are too contaminated to be recycled.
  2. Sorting inefficiency: MRFs have a difficult time sorting through the wide variety of materials being placed into bins. Approximately one in six bottles and one in three cans are sorted incorrectly.

With outsourcing no longer an option, MRFs across the U.S. are now dealing with significantly larger volumes. To boost their capacity, some facilities have implemented artificial intelligence (AI) empowered robots that can sort items significantly faster than humans. An added bonus to reducing the human workforce is safety⁠—MRFs frequently have some of the industry’s highest injury and illness incidence rates.

Investing in Domestic Solutions

China’s ban on foreign plastics has exposed the frailty of a single-supplier global recycling model, and is forcing many countries to begin developing their domestic infrastructure.

One emerging leader in this space is the EU, which has passed ambitious legislation to promote recycling industry investment. Recognizing the unsustainability of single-use plastics, the EU has mandated its member states to achieve a 90% collection rate for plastic bottles by 2029. It’s also set a target for all plastic packaging to be recyclable or reusable by 2030, an initiative that could create up to 200,000 new jobs.

Aside from the environmental benefits, the global recycling industry could also be a source of economic growth. It’s estimated that between 2018 and 2024 that it will grow at a CAGR of 8.6% to reach $63 billion.

Subscribe to Visual Capitalist
Click for Comments

Green

Can We Close the $11 Trillion Climate Investment Gap?

$11 trillion needs to be invested in nature-based solutions between 2022 and 2050 to combat climate change.

Published

on

The following content is sponsored by Carbon Streaming Corporation

Can We Close the $11 Trillion Climate Investment Gap?

Nature-based Solutions (NbS) include actions to preserve or restore natural ecosystems to address social, economic, and environmental challenges effectively, while simultaneously providing benefits to the community. 

To achieve its goal of limiting climate change to below 1.5°C by 2050, the UN says that substantial investment in NbS needs to happen. The same investments will also help stop biodiversity loss and deliver land degradation neutrality.

This visualization, sponsored by Carbon Streaming Corporation, explores the investment requirements for various NbS sectors and highlights the critical role of protecting many ecosystems in achieving climate targets.

The Crucial Role of Ecosystem Protection

Terrestrial and marine ecosystems are invaluable when it comes to addressing climate change. They act as natural carbon sinks, effectively absorbing and storing approximately 40% of global carbon emissions. 

More specifically, the conservation and restoration of forests, wetlands, grasslands, coastal areas, seagrass, and peatlands is essential to keeping greenhouse gas emissions out of the atmosphere. 

But to effectively combat climate change, the estimated cumulative investment required in nature-based solutions between 2022 and 2050 is $11 trillion

NbS Investment AreaCumulative Investment Required 2022-2050 (US$ Trillion)
Agroforestry$3.6 Trillion
Reforestation$3.4 Trillion
Restoration (Seagrass & Peatlands)$1.6 Trillion
Protection$1.3 Trillion
Other Land Management$1.1 Trillion

This investment will drive large-scale restoration, conservation efforts, sustainable land-use practices, and ecosystem protection.

A Closer Look at the Investment Gap

Currently, only 17% of NbS investment comes from private sources. However, the annual investment needs to increase fourfold by 2050, which amounts to $520 billion of additional annual NbS investment.

YearNbS Investment Required ($B per year)Increase from 2022
2022$154B-
2025$384Bx2
2030$484Bx3
2050$674Bx4

Collaboration between governments, the private sector, and international organizations is critical to mobilize resources, establish innovative financing mechanisms, and incentivize investments.

Benefits of NbS

Capital allocated to nature-based solutions not only helps combat climate change but also delivers a plethora of other benefits. For example, these solutions promote biodiversity conservation, enhance ecosystem services, support local communities, and foster sustainable development. 

Investment in this space is crucial to meeting the UN’s 2050 goals. By financing the creation or expansion of nature-based carbon projects, our sponsor, Carbon Streaming Corporation secures the rights to future carbon credits generated by these projects. 

Consumers and businesses can purchase these carbon credits to provide the necessary capital and immediate action needed to effectively combat climate change.

Visual Capitalist Logo

Learn more about Carbon Streaming and how you can get involved now.

Subscribe to Visual Capitalist
Click for Comments

You may also like

Subscribe

Continue Reading

Subscribe

Popular