ARE plastic bags bad for the environment? The media gives us that impression. But is it really so?
In January last year, a newspaper quoted Malaysian Plastics Manufacturers Association (MPMA) president Datuk Lim Kok Boon as saying there were many misconceptions of plastic and its negative effects on the environment that should be corrected.
“There is so much information on the Internet but not is are true. Some authorities are also giving inaccurate statements and misleading the public into believing negative stuff about using plastic.”
To prove his point, he cited three popular myths: that degradation is good, that reusable paper and biodegradable bags are more environmentally friendly than plastic bags, and that plastic bags are not recyclable.
He said the truth was just the opposite: degradation emits harmful greenhouse gases, single-use polyethyelene grocery bags have a lower carbon footprint than alternative paper or reusable bags, and that plastic bags are 100 per cent recyclable.
Lim added that the “unfair plastic war” has given a bad reputation to plastic bags.
He questioned whether biodegradable products do “actually degrade in the landfill”.
He said degradation occurs when there is moisture and heat. Landfills in Malaysia, however, are engineered to eliminate moisture and retard biodegradation.
Due to a lack of oxygen, most of the waste goes through anaerobic degradation (without oxygen), releasing methane gas (CH4) instead of carbon dioxide (CO2).
Both are greenhouse gases that cause global warming, with methane 22 times more harmful than carbon dioxide.
“So why are we promoting biodegradation when our aim is to protect the environment? On the other hand, plastic bags are inert and can be recycled many times.”
In a joint statement issued recently, MPMA and Malaysia Plastic Recyclers Association (MPRA) stated that the ban on the import of “plastics waste” imposed by the government was “unnecessary, ill-considered, and will harm law-abiding manufacturers and businesses”.
The two associations said recycling done by legal operators supports local and foreign brands in the electrical and electronics, automotive and other manufacturing sectors as well as in the construction industry.
A total ban would bring Malaysia’s participation in “the global circular economy to a halt”, they said.
They said recycling plays a vital role in protecting the environment as well as managing and disposing of waste. “As an economic activity, recycling benefits society and contributes to sustainability.”
Expressing their displeasure at activists “for lumping permitted imports and smuggled wastes together”, the two associations maintained that they support the government’s efforts to take enforcement actions against smugglers, as well as the crackdown on illegal recycling operations.
They agree “that Malaysia has no place for other countries’ rubbish, and we should not become the developed world’s dumping ground”.
They said that it is time for the regulators and the policy makers to hold “a proper forum” to discuss and formulate “a robust, effective regulatory framework” for Malaysia’s role in the global circular economy.
Last year, Malaysia became a major destination country for plastic waste after China banned imports of such waste.
Dozens of recycling plants were established in Malaysia, many operating without a licence. Many of these illegal plants imported low quality and contaminated plastic waste from developed countries.
Last May, Energy, Science, Technology, Environment and Climate Change Minister Yeo Bee Yin said Malaysia would be shipping back 3,300 tonnes of plastic waste to US, Canada and Saudi Arabia.
The drastic action was taken as part of a clampdown on imports of improperly labelled rubbish in Southeast Asia.
Malaysia has banned imports of contaminated plastic waste since October.
However, 62 companies hold approved permits (AP) to import and process plastic waste. These permits were issued by the National Solid Waste Management Department of the Housing and Local Government Ministry.
I recently came across a 244-page document titled “A circular economy for plastics”, which was published by the European Commission.
It contains information on global plastic pollution, suggests solutions to eliminate plastic pollution, deals with issues of concern to human and environmental health, and provides business models for plastics in a circular economy.
The document concludes that there is a “lack of a coherent regulatory and legislative framework in operation across Europe” on the subject matter and recommends a review of waste legislation to include the latest recycling technologies.
We cannot ignore the fact that we live in “the plastic age” where more than 300 million metric tonnes of plastic are produced every year globally.
Seven of the G20 countries are amongst the top 20 contributors to marine litter. At the same time, we cannot deny that plastic remains a key material in the global economy.
A carefully managed transition to a circular economy will not only be good for human and environmental health but will also keep plastics and their value in the economy.
Netherlands had formulated “A Circular Economy in the Netherlands by 2050”. In 2015, the European Commission had formulated its European Union Action Plan for the Circular Economy.
According to Walter Stahel, the originator of the circular economy concept, if a business person desires to set up a manufacturing plant to make profit, he can make five times as much from opening a remanufacturing plant.
In a circular economy, there is no waste. The key to the success of a circular plastics economy is waste management, and this comes through recyclability, not biodegradability.
The writer formerly served the Attorney-General’s Chambers before he left for private practice, the corporate sector and academia