On plastics, Canada needs to listen to the science

[Ka-El]

Some interesting perspectives on the use of plastics …

On plastics, Canada needs to listen to the science

In recent years, Canada’s federal government has demonstrated its support for science and research by investing heavily in innovation. Part of the current government’s vision is that Canada’s laboratories and institutions strengthen science, support evidence-based decision-making and nurture a culture of curiosity and creativity. At Dow, we applaud these actions.

But the federal government’s proposal last year to designate plastic manufactured items as “toxic” abandons this vision and backtracks on the dedication to and investment in science. The proposed order to add such items to Schedule 1 of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA) does not directly address the problem of plastic waste and would place plastic in the same category as asbestos and lead. The government’s own assessment identified scientific knowledge gaps and concluded that further research was needed in order to understand the impacts of plastic pollution on the environment and human health.

Society does have a plastic waste problem. But a political designation of plastic as “toxic” is not the solution. We need a better approach – one based on scientific evidence and facts. According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, plastics represent approximately 12 per cent of all waste. Replacing plastics with other materials would actually increase the overall weight of waste by more than four times , requiring more landfills and additional infrastructure investments to handle this greater overall amount of waste.

We need to examine the problem of waste in its entirety, not just target one material. Resolving the issue of plastic waste is complex. Solving it will require collaboration across the value chain – all the way through to the consumer. It will call for new legislation, which should include extended producer responsibility and further investments in waste management infrastructure, recycling options, and creating new end-markets that drive towards a circular economy.

In a world set to add two billion people by 2050 and to need 30 per cent more water, 40 per cent more energy and 50 per cent more food, plastics are vital to a low-carbon future. In their effect on climate change, plastics outperform substitute materials such as glass, aluminum and steel, which have an environmental impact approximately four times greater than plastics on average. One study of six product categories in the U.S. and Canada – several involved directly in the proposed government bans – demonstrated compelling evidence of reduced energy demand and therefore less climate harm when using plastics instead of alternative materials. Put another way, limiting or banning plastic will increase the use of alternatives that clearly generate more environmental harm than good.

Plastic makes cars lighter and more fuel-efficient. It improves the energy efficiency of our homes, so that less carbon enters the environment. It keeps food safe and fresh longer, which is especially important considering that food waste is responsible for about six per cent of total global greenhouse gas emissions. Plastics are on the front lines of the current COVID-19 pandemic, from providing personal protective equipment for healthcare professionals to ensuring sterility for medical devices. The vast economic, social and health benefits of plastic are indisputable. Limiting its use poses the real risk of accelerating our world’s climate change crisis.

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/money/topstor ... li=AAggNb9

[The Green Barbarian]

While using the man-made climate change hoax to justify anything is just silly, I can see a lot of benefits to plastics for sure.

[Glacier]

I used to be anti-plastic, but have warmed up to the net benefit of its use in recent years.

[77TA]

It's called seeing the big picture and is very difficult for some.

[TylerM4]

It's called seeing the big picture and is very difficult for some.

Totally. Declaring it as toxic waste is just a crappy shortcut to getting the end result they're looking for which is mandatory secure disposal. Totally not appropriate.

Other than that - I found the title to be very misleading and click-bait. This is in no way related to "Canada not listening to the science".

[cyruslosco66]

the problem isnt a plastic like material , it is what its made from . we can make biodegradable plastic from sources other than oil its not a option to keep using oil.


https://www.hempplastic.com/



KEY FEATURES OF HEMP PLASTIC BIOPLASTICS
A near term solution to a customer’s sustainability objectives
Gorgeous ‘earthy’ appearance
10% lighter than many other filled plastics
Affordable – we are competitively priced against other bio and specialty resins
Incremental sustainability transition for customers – similar plastic properties
Replace conventional “virgin” resins without significant additional capital or operating expense
Immediately Positive – Reduce CO2 and Consume Waste!
Consume a massive and growing industrial waste problem
Our products feature significant improvements in CO2 sequestration, use renewable sustainable materials, and, in some cases, are compostable.

Conveniently, they are generally designed to be drop-in replacements for conventional fossil fuel-based polymers.

[cyruslosco66]

It's called seeing the big picture and is very difficult for some.

Totally. Declaring it as toxic waste is just a crappy shortcut to getting the end result they're looking for which is mandatory secure disposal. Totally not appropriate.

Other than that - I found the title to be very misleading and click-bait. This is in no way related to "Canada not listening to the science".

so you plan on eating some plastic to prove it isnt toxic?

[TylerM4]

the problem isnt a plastic like material , it is what its made from . we can make biodegradable plastic from sources other than oil its not a option to keep using oil.

Well you sure fell for the marketing.

1st off - only a small subset of their products are biodegradable. The concern in this thread is disposal - for the majority of the plastics this company sells, they're no better than regular plastics when it comes to disposal. Plastic made from hemp oil is very similar to plastic made from crude oil and that includes similar disposal problems.

2nd - the products they sell that are biodegradable are not suitable for MANY applications. Great if they don't come in contact with liquids and you only need a 12 month lifespan. Not appropriate for just about anything else. There is either a compromise or some other challenge with using biodegradable plastics in up to 90% of applications where plastics are currently used.

3rd - cost. In many cases it'd be cheaper for manufacturers to switch to glass or metal alternatives.

This isn't new technology. Ever stopped to wonder why it's not commonly used?

[Ka-El]

I found the title to be very misleading and click-bait. This is in no way related to "Canada not listening to the science".

The title is "On plastics, Canada needs to listen to the science"

Wouldn't you agree?

[TylerM4]

The title is "On plastics, Canada needs to listen to the science"

Wouldn't you agree?

I agree that's the title sure

But you won't get me to say it's not a clickbait title until you can articulate what scientific learnings or facts Canada isn't "listening to".

[Ka-El]

I used to be anti-plastic, but have warmed up to the net benefit of its use in recent years.

I admit I had not even considered the points brought up in the article. Very interesting. All a lot of people probably see when we talk about plastic garbage is those plastic islands floating around in the Pacific. People need to be better informed.

[Ka-El]

But you won't get me to say it's not a clickbait title until you can articulate what scientific learnings or facts Canada isn't "listening to".

I can't say I know enough to say what scientific learnings or facts Canada isn't "listening to". I know we've banned single use plastics when perhaps that is not necessary (I hate paper straws). I know there is great protest against fossil fuels (and presumably, by default, all the by-products). Is Canada listening to the science? I'd love to know more if you got something.

[Gone_Fishin]

the problem isnt a plastic like material , it is what its made from . we can make biodegradable plastic from sources other than oil its not a option to keep using oil.


https://www.hempplastic.com/



KEY FEATURES OF HEMP PLASTIC BIOPLASTICS
A near term solution to a customer’s sustainability objectives
Gorgeous ‘earthy’ appearance
10% lighter than many other filled plastics
Affordable – we are competitively priced against other bio and specialty resins
Incremental sustainability transition for customers – similar plastic properties
Replace conventional “virgin” resins without significant additional capital or operating expense
Immediately Positive – Reduce CO2 and Consume Waste!
Consume a massive and growing industrial waste problem
Our products feature significant improvements in CO2 sequestration, use renewable sustainable materials, and, in some cases, are compostable.

Conveniently, they are generally designed to be drop-in replacements for conventional fossil fuel-based polymers.

Did you type that out on a hemp keyboard?

[The Green Barbarian]

the problem isnt a plastic like material , it is what its made from . s.

Yes its made from amazing petroleum! It's fantastic!

[Bsuds]

I recently read an article about the use of recycled plastic to help build roads.

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/2021 ... other-ride

It is quite interesting and would certainly help with the waste.