Search Climate Insights Directory

The report advocates for a mandatory deposit return system (DRS) in Austria to achieve EU targets of a 90% collection rate for single-use plastic bottles by 2029 and a 30% recycled content rate by 2030. It identifies a 'plastic pollution lobby'—including Altstoff Recycling Austria (ARA), major retailers like REWE, Spar, Hofer, and Lidl, and various beverage producers—that opposes the DRS to protect existing financial interests and market positions. The document highlights that a DRS is the most cost-effective method for high-quality recycling and is supported by 83% of the Austrian public, contrasting this with the current system where only 25% of plastic packaging is recycled.

The report argues that a deposit return system (DRS) is the most cost-effective and environmentally sound method for Austria to achieve the EU's target of collecting 90% of plastic bottles by 2029. It identifies a powerful coalition—led by Altstoff Recycling Austria (ARA) and including major retailers like REWE Group, Spar, Hofer, and Lidl, as well as beverage companies—that is lobbying the Austrian government against a DRS to protect licensing fee revenues and market dominance. The document highlights that 83% of Austrians support a DRS and rebuts industry claims that current collection rates are sufficient or that a DRS would be too expensive.

The briefing highlights a crisis in California's bottle bill, where redemption rates have fallen to 66% due to the closure of over 1,200 recycling centers between 2013 and 2019. It proposes reforming the system by implementing 'no-touch' reverse vending machines (RVMs) and bag-drop systems, and expanding the scope to include wine and liquor containers. According to analysis by Eunomia Research & Consulting, moving to a 'best-in-class' (BiC) system with a 96% redemption rate would create 5,000 additional jobs, save 400,000 metric tons of GHG emissions annually, and significantly reduce plastic and aluminum litter in the environment and oceans.

WWF argues that while biobased and biodegradable plastics can support a circular economy, they are not standalone solutions to plastic pollution and must be managed through strict, metric-based assessments and proper infrastructure to avoid environmental trade-offs.

The document defines sustainable material management infrastructure as assets that reduce waste generation by promoting recovery, reuse, and recycling. It distinguishes between 'grey' infrastructure (e.g., unregulated landfills, incineration without energy recovery) and 'green' infrastructure (e.g., sorting facilities, composting, waste-to-energy). The guide details the environmental, economic, and social shortcomings of business-as-usual (BAU) scenarios—such as GHG emissions, resource scarcity, and public health risks—while highlighting the benefits of green investments, including carbon footprint reduction and green job creation. It also analyzes risks to project financing, such as volatile commodity prices and regulatory uncertainties, and provides a comprehensive overview of policy interventions, measurement indicators, and a detailed breakdown of costs and revenues for various waste management technologies.

A public opinion poll of 1,000 Austrian adults reveals strong national support for increased action against plastic pollution, with 86% believing more should be done. There is overwhelming agreement (93%) that plastic producers should contribute to waste management, and 83% of respondents support the introduction of a deposit return scheme in Austria. Support for these measures is consistent across all surveyed age groups and regions, with Tirol showing the highest average support across all polling questions.

The report analyzes how the COVID-19 pandemic acted as an accelerant for the decline of the oil, gas, and plastic sectors. It details the immediate impacts of the pandemic, such as the collapse of air and cruise travel and the resulting oil price war, while emphasizing that the industry was already weakened by high corporate debt, underperforming stocks, and the rise of renewable energy. The document specifically critiques industry lobbying for bailouts and regulatory exemptions, using ExxonMobil as a case study for the intersecting financial and operational risks facing the sector.

The report analyzes the shift of global environmental governance to virtual formats during the 2020 pandemic, noting that while operational decisions (like budgets) were achieved via the 'silence procedure', substantive negotiations on climate and biodiversity were largely delayed. It highlights that pandemic-related emission drops were temporary and structural, and warns that the crisis exacerbated social inequalities and hindered scientific reporting, such as the IPCC's sixth assessment report. The document concludes by advocating for a 'green and inclusive recovery' and a stronger link between biodiversity protection and pandemic prevention.

The 2020 State of Global Environmental Governance report details the shift of international environmental negotiations to virtual platforms due to the COVID-19 pandemic. It analyzes the adoption of the 'silence procedure' for decision-making, the delays in scientific advice from bodies like the IPCC, and the temporary nature of pandemic-related emission dips. The document argues that the pandemic highlighted the interconnectedness of human health, biodiversity loss, and climate change, while warning that structural inequalities and nationalist responses to the pandemic could hinder the global cooperation necessary for a green and inclusive recovery.

The report describes South Africa's plastics economy as a linear "take-make-waste" model characterized by high dependency on virgin fossil-fuel-based materials and a weak waste management system. It highlights that plastic packaging is a major leakage hotspot, with over 50% of converted plastics having a lifespan of less than three years. While a recycling sector exists, it is heavily reliant on an under-supported informal waste sector and is vulnerable to fluctuations in global oil prices. The document argues that recycling alone is insufficient and advocates for a circular economy approach involving the elimination of problematic plastics, mandatory extended producer responsibility (EPR), and the adoption of the South African Plastics Pact to achieve specific 2025 targets for recyclability and recycled content.

The Environmental and Energy Study Institute (EESI) outlines a comprehensive strategy for the U.S. to achieve net-zero emissions by mid-century. Key recommendations include restoring CAFE standards, investing in sustainable aviation fuels and electric aircraft, establishing national energy efficiency and renewable portfolio standards, and targeting net-zero energy for new buildings by 2050. The report emphasizes environmental justice, calling for a national climate bank and increased funding for the Rural Energy Savings Program. It also advocates for carbon pricing with border tax adjustments, the elimination of fossil fuel subsidies, and a transition to a circular economy to reduce plastic pollution.

The report details how plastic production, refining, waste management, and environmental degradation contribute significantly to global greenhouse gas emissions. It warns that by 2050, cumulative emissions from plastic could consume 10–13 percent of the remaining carbon budget, potentially making the 1.5°C climate target impossible to achieve. The document advocates for ending single-use plastics and stopping the expansion of petrochemical infrastructure to mitigate these impacts.

A coalition of 32 NGOs supports a total ban on intentionally added microplastics in the EU to prevent irreversible environmental pollution. While endorsing ECHA's risk assessment that no 'safe level' of microplastics exists, the NGOs argue that proposed exemptions for 'biodegradable' plastics and long transitional periods for cosmetics and fertilizers would undermine the restriction's effectiveness.

The document outlines how plastic contributes to greenhouse gas emissions across its entire lifecycle, from fossil fuel extraction to waste management, and proposes systemic reductions over technical fixes.

The 4th session of the UN Environment Assembly (UNEA-4) focuses on 'Innovative Solutions to the Environmental Challenges and Sustainable Consumption and Production' to advance Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 12. The assembly integrates input from the Global Major Groups and Stakeholders Forum (GMGSF), including the African Ministerial Conference on the Environment (AMCEN), and technical data from the 6th Global Environmental Outlook (GEO-6) report. Key highlights include the exhibition of innovative projects such as the Flipflopi Dhow, a vessel made from waste plastic, and South African environmental risk and anti-poaching technologies.

The document analyzes the scale of plastic pollution in China, noting that China's 2017 plastic production was approximately 75 million tons. It details the EU's comprehensive approach, including the Waste Framework Directive and the Packaging and Packaging Waste Directive, which utilize Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) to shift financial and operational burdens to producers. The paper highlights EU targets under 'Plastics 2030' to make all plastic packaging reusable or recyclable by 2030. It concludes by recommending that China upgrade its legal systems, adopt whole-process management from production to disposal, and cooperate with the EU on transboundary waste treatment and global governance.

The report identifies a systemic failure in the plastic life cycle where the cost of pollution is not borne by producers or converters, leading to a 'tragedy of the commons'. It projects that under a 'business as usual' scenario, plastic pollution will double by 2030, with ocean plastic potentially reaching 300 million metric tons. The document highlights that 37% of plastic waste is currently mismanaged, and carbon emissions from plastic incineration could triple by 2030. To counter this, WWF proposes a 'no plastic in nature' scenario that includes phasing out single-use plastics, achieving 100% waste collection, and establishing a multilateral agreement to hold all stakeholders accountable across the value chain.

The document argues that the current European Maritime and Fisheries Fund (EMFF) primarily supports fishing economic activity rather than environmental protection. It cites severe degradation in EU seas, including plastic pollution and overfishing, and demands that at least 25% of the post-2020 EMFF budget per Member State be dedicated to marine restoration and protection, totaling at least 1.5 billion Euros.

The report details how plastic pollution constitutes a global public health crisis, affecting humans at every stage of the plastic life cycle. It examines the toxic emissions from fracking and petrochemical refining, the leaching of endocrine disruptors from packaging, and the health risks associated with microplastics and incineration. The document emphasizes that current fragmented regulatory approaches are insufficient and calls for a global reduction in plastic production to protect human rights and health.

The report details how plastic poses distinct health risks at every stage of its supply chain. It highlights toxic emissions during extraction and refining, the leaching of endocrine disruptors and carcinogens during consumer use, and the release of heavy metals and dioxins during waste incineration. The document emphasizes that microplastics and associated chemicals contaminate the global food chain, water supplies, and human tissues, while noting significant knowledge gaps and a lack of industry transparency regarding chemical compositions.