Plastic pollution is not your fault, and recycling wasn’t designed to work. Part Two.

First, holding producers responsible for the full life cycles of their products. In the United States, Democratic lawmakers introduced the “Break Free from Plastic Pollution Act 2020,” analogous to the EU’s “extended producer responsibility” schemes, that would require plastic producers to “collect and recycle their own waste” and “phase out certain single-use plastic items” (Goldsberry, 2020). Needless to say, this faced strong opposition from those such as the CEO of the Plastics Industry Association Tony Radoszewski, who advocated instead for improved recycling infrastructure so that plastic companies need not take on the extra burden (we know that recycling only increases waste). As a consumer, you can make your voice heard by contacting your state representative to support the Plastic Pollution Act.

The second movement with promising traction is the right to repair movement. This would require companies to disclose information regarding electronic products’ parts, processes, and equipment so that consumers can extend the life cycles of their purchases. This right is technically given to consumers under Consumer Guarantees Act. (However, a loophole exists for manufacturers — consumers may be informed before their purchase that repair facilities and spare parts will not be provided by the manufacturing firm). To support the enforcement of this consumer right, reach out to your government representative, or sign the right to repair petition.

Finally, a model that has gained traction in recent years is the circular economy. In comparison to the traditional linear economy and “take-make-dispose” mindset, this would preserve natural resources, cut back on pollution, and generate financial savings for the plastic industry (McKinsey & Company, 2019). According to a collaborative study between the McKinsey Institute and Ellen MacArthur Foundation,

“a [circular] approach could boost Europe’s resource productivity by 3 percent by 2030, generating cost savings of €600 billion a year.”

– McKinsey & Companies, 2019

The promising thing about these movements and the circular model is that it creates a profit incentive to manufacturers and suppliers along the supply chain and improves the quality of goods that consumers are buying, and benefits the environment. Wins all round!




We build bio-products of the future that improve global environmental health.

Love podcasts or audiobooks? Learn on the go with our new app.

Recommended from Medium

Telling the boiling frog what he needs to know: thresholds of risk and opportunity in the science…

Imagining The Rich As Bird-Like Predators

Ford Ad Encourages Harmful Outdoor Behavior

Readings to combat anti-Black racism in nature & the outdoors

a list of readings on climate justice to help reflect on how race shapes our outdoors experiences

Want to hit 17 sustainable goals with one stone? Try tree planting

Postcard from Iowa to Hawaii, regarding your 4.9 quake — the land remains steady here.

A History of Disruption in the Energy Industry

Sustainable Agriculture, Part 2: Measuring Sustainability

Get the Medium app

A button that says 'Download on the App Store', and if clicked it will lead you to the iOS App store
A button that says 'Get it on, Google Play', and if clicked it will lead you to the Google Play store
Humble Bee Bio

Humble Bee Bio

We build bio-products of the future that improve global environmental health.

More from Medium

The 2021 Heisman Trophy Awarded Saturday

The Owner Shapes the Difference — How Ownership Patterns Affect Forest Conservation and…

UK: Covid Uncertainty Disguises the Impact of Post-Brexit Migration Policy Changes

A Pig Heart Was Transplanted Into a Human.   Is This The Future of Organ Transplants? Hopefully