[OKRA] EPA weighs in on cuts to plastic production, food waste

Tue Apr 25 08:58:27 PDT 2023

[image: image.png]     Here is an update on what is happening nationally
with the National Strategy to Prevent Plastic Pollution and food waste.
The bottom line is that we are moving in the wrong direction when it comes
to reducing food waste.

[image: image.png]

EPA weighs in on cuts to plastic production, food waste
<https://resource-recycling.com/recycling/2023/04/24/epa-weighs-in-on-cuts-to-plastic-production-food-waste/>
Published: April 24, 2023
Updated: April 24, 2023
by Jared Paben
<https://resource-recycling.com/recycling/author/jared-paben/>

*The EPA recently published an estimate of U.S. food waste in the food
retail/service and residential sectors.* | *KariDesign/Shutterstock*

The U.S. EPA released a plastics pollution plan that supports steps to
reduce production of single-use and difficult-to-recycle plastics.
Meanwhile, the agency released data showing the county is moving in the
wrong direction on food waste.

The following are details on the two recent EPA announcements.
Draft plastic pollution plan released

EPA on April 21 published a draft
<https://www.epa.gov/newsreleases/biden-harris-administration-announces-latest-steps-reduce-plastic-pollution-nationwide>
of
its “National Strategy to Prevent Plastic Pollution,” and the agency is seeking
comments
<https://www.epa.gov/circulareconomy/draft-national-strategy-prevent-plastic-pollution>
on
it.

Although it does not include the word “ban,” the 48-page document
<https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2023-04/Draft_National_Strategy_to_Prevent_Plastic_Pollution.pdf>
lays
out a number of steps to reduce plastic pollution, including addressing
impacts during plastic production and post-use material management,
including preventing plastic from entering waterways and cleaning up the
material that’s already in the environment.

Of course, boosting collection and recycling factors heavily in the plan,
but EPA also touched on a point of sharp contention: reducing plastic
production.

In a section focused on reducing “production and consumption of single-use,
unrecyclable, or frequently littered plastic products,” the EPA suggested a
number of steps should be taken.

Specifically, the agency called for creating a list of these products and
alternative materials, then sharing it with public and private entities
around the country so they can use it in their purchasing decisions. And
EPA called for the setting of a new national voluntary goal to reduce
production of the items on the list.

“This new goal would help galvanize action across the country, support and
promote the use of alternative products and reuse programs,” the plan
states.

Additionally, EPA called for the federal government to create a plan to
reduce federal procurement of single-use,
non-recyclable/difficult-to-recycle and often-littered plastic products. It
suggested an innovation challenge to encourage development of alternative
products.

Lastly, the EPA’s strategy suggested the federal government conduct a study
to “identify effective policy tools and approaches to reduce production of
single-use, unrecyclable or frequently littered plastic products.”
Environmental and industry groups react

A number of groups have issued public statements in response to the draft. The
Ocean Conservancy’s Anja Brandon said it’s “particularly notable to see a
commitment to producing fewer single-use, unrecyclable and frequently
littered plastic products. Analysis of 35 years’ worth of data from Ocean
Conservancy’s International Coastal Cleanup shows that roughly 70% of the
most commonly collected items from beaches and waterways across the world
are effectively unrecyclable, and of these, nearly half are food- and
beverage-related items.”

On the other side of the debate, the American Chemistry Council (ACC),
released a statement taking issue with the suggestion of plastics
reductions and embrace of alternatives. In that statement, ACC’s Joshua
Baca pointed to components of the strategy that “risk sending plastic
manufacturing and jobs overseas where plastic is often made with less
stringent environmental standards and more greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.”

“We caution the Administration that prescribing alternative materials,
capping plastic production or limiting innovative recycling technologies
could work against its climate objectives as plastic almost always has a
lower life cycle GHG footprint compared to paper and metal,” he added.

EPA will hold a webinar
<https://www.zoomgov.com/webinar/register/WN_sZdhInHTS8y1DsZU0pVYeg> on the
draft strategy from 1-2 p.m. Eastern time on May 11.
Food waste data unveiled

In other EPA news, the agency published data
<https://www.epa.gov/facts-and-figures-about-materials-waste-and-recycling/food-material-specific-data>
showing
the country is moving in the wrong direction when it comes to the federal
government’s food waste reduction goals.

The EPA aims to cut in half the amount of food that never makes it into a
human’s mouth and is instead composted, digested, landfilled, sent to the
sewage treatment plant, burned, littered or otherwise wasted under the
agency’s definition. Specifically, the agency is looking at the food
retail/service and residential sectors, not any food that’s wasted in the
agricultural sector.

In 2016, those sectors wasted 328 pounds per capita. EPA’s 2030 goal is to
halve that to 164 pounds per person. But according to the newly published
“2019 Wasted Food Report,” the U.S. averaged 349 pounds per capita in 2019.
That was up from 335 pounds per capita in 2018.

That means that between 2016, the baseline year, and 2019, per-capita food
leaving the human food supply chain in the food retail, food service and
residential sectors increased by 6%.

“The U.S. has a long way to go to meet [the 2030] goal,” the report notes.

In terms of overall weight, in 2019 those sectors generated 66.2 million
tons of food waste. Of that, 40% was from households, 40% was from food
service providers and 20% was from food retailers. Nearly 60% of all of it
was landfilled. It’s important to note that the numbers above don’t just
include otherwise edible food but also include peels, bones and other
portions that were never supposed to be consumed by humans anyway.

The report also included data on the 40.1 million tons of food waste in the
food manufacturing and processing sectors in 2019. Much of that went to
anaerobic digestion.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.recycleok.org/pipermail/okrecycles-recycleok.org/attachments/20230425/38342e98/attachment-0001.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image.png
Type: image/png
Size: 21449 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.recycleok.org/pipermail/okrecycles-recycleok.org/attachments/20230425/38342e98/attachment-0002.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image.png
Type: image/png
Size: 36408 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.recycleok.org/pipermail/okrecycles-recycleok.org/attachments/20230425/38342e98/attachment-0003.png>