In today’s Finshots, we tell you why countries are torn over ending plastic production and pollution.

But before we begin, we’d like to know if you’ve read ‘The Little Book of Indian Business’ by Finshots yet.

If so, we’d love to have a chat!

Just like with everything we do, we want to get your thoughts, feedback and suggestions about our debut book. Fill out this quick form and we’ll get in touch with you soon. Thanks in advance :)

Also, if you’re someone who loves to keep tabs on what’s happening in the world of business and finance, then hit subscribe if you haven’t already. If you’re already a subscriber or you’re reading this on the app, you can just go ahead and read the story.

The Story

In 1862 a British chemist, Alexander Parkes, invented a revolutionary material, which he called Parkesine.¹ It’s something he made by dissolving cotton fibres in a cocktail of nitric and sulphuric acids, blended with a bit of vegetable oil.

Parkesine wasn’t just a cool invention. It tackled a pressing problem of the time. Before its invention, everyday items like combs, billiard balls and piano keys were made from precious animal materials like ivory and tortoise shells. This took a toll on elephants and certain turtle species, which were even on the brink of extinction. So Parkesine simply offered a cheaper, cruelty-free alternative, that was light on both wallets and wildlife. And guess what? It was actually considered the world’s first manufactured plastic.

As industries grew, fully synthetic plastics took centre stage. In the early 1900s, Bakelite emerged. It was a wonder material used in telephones, radios and even art decor. And for a while, it seemed like there was no real need for anything else.

Sidebar: In 1907, Belgian chemist Leo Baekeland developed Bakelite, the first fully synthetic plastic.

Then something unexpected happened at Britain's Imperial Chemical Industries (ICI). The company was trying to combine two chemicals and turn them into a new industrial material. Although the experiment failed, it led to a surprising discovery. A little oxygen leaked into the mix, forming a white waxy substance that would later be known as polyethylene or the most widely used plastic in the world today.

Polyethylene transformed industries, popping up in everything from plastic bags to food containers and even medical implants like artificial hip and knee joints.

But here’s the thing. What was once created to solve a problem has now become a massive issue of its own. Plastic has turned into a major contributor to uncontrollable pollution — so much so that the world is now working on something called a Global Plastic Treaty to put a lid on it.

You see, plastic production is becoming a ticking time bomb for our planet. Between 2000 and 2019, plastic production doubled to 460 million tonnes. And by 2040, it could exceed 700 million tonnes.² That’s 70% more than 2020’s levels.

That’s not even the worst part. Less than 10% of this plastic gets recycled. And the rest is either improperly burned or dumped into landfills and water bodies. In fact, nearly a truckload of plastic enters our rivers, lakes and oceans every minute. Over time, this plastic breaks down into smaller particles, finding its way into nearly every aspect of our lives.

Just this month, a plastic trash overflow in the Democratic Republic of Congo shut down a hydroelectric dam, causing power cuts.³ Plastic is also responsible for about 4% of global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. And if that wasn’t troubling enough, microplastics have been found in human placenta, arteries, semen and even breast milk.⁴ It’s a harsh reality we can’t ignore.

And doing nothing about it could only worsen the situation. Mismanaged plastic waste could increase by 50%, while recycling rates might drop to just 6%. So, imagine a world where we’re literally building homes on heaps of plastic waste.

That’s why nearly 70 countries, including Rwanda, Norway and the UK, are pushing for a global treaty to cut plastic production, regulate harmful chemicals used to make them and phase out single-use plastic products like cutlery. And while the detailed demands are still being ironed out, the OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) suggests the strictest plan ― cap plastic production at 500 million tonnes by 2040 and pump up recycling rates to over 40% and ensure any rise in plastic use comes from recycled materials, not new production.⁵

This could reduce mismanaged plastic waste by 97% compared to the original 2040 estimates and prevent 70 million tonnes of plastic from entering rivers and oceans. Plus, plastic-related GHG emissions could fall by 40%.

Sounds like a no-brainer, right?

Well, not to everyone.

Oil and gas producers like Iran, Saudi Arabia and Russia aren’t on board. These countries’ economies depend on fossil fuel and plastic production. And they argue that the problem isn’t plastic production itself, but how we use and dispose it. Their point is simple. Plastics are lighter than alternatives like metals or glass, making them essential for transporting goods. Lighter materials mean less weight, which in turn reduces fuel consumption and cuts carbon emissions. So instead of limiting production, they’re rooting for better waste management.

And this dilemma is exactly what’s stalling the Global Plastics Treaty, which countries are trying to hash out in Busan, South Korea, right now as you read this.

So, what’s the way out, you ask?

Well, it’s more complicated because Iran and its allies aren’t entirely wrong. Think about it. Cutting plastic production means finding alternatives. And that’s not as easy as it sounds. For one, most plant-based plastics are molecularly identical to fossil-fuel-based ones, and they linger in the environment just as long. Other substitutes need toxic chemical additives to be waterproof, flexible and durable. Even fibre or paper products often need a plastic lining to prevent leaks. So, cutting plastic production alone won’t solve much.

What about recycling the plastic?

That isn’t simple either. Different plastic products use different chemicals and fillers, meaning you can’t recycle a PET bottle, a chips packet and a plastic toy together. Recycling companies often can’t identify the exact materials they’re dealing with, and most plastics can’t be blended into a single product. This requires segregation, transport and separate recycling — a process that’s more costly and complex than producing new plastic itself.

Pooling money from rich countries to help poorer nations?

Well, that’s also a tricky proposition. For context, at COP29 (the United Nations Climate Change Conference), wealthy nations, who are often the biggest culprits behind historical emissions, offered $300 billion a year by 2035 to fight climate change.⁶ But that’s way short of the $1.3 trillion that developing nations requested. If they couldn’t agree on that, expecting a breakthrough for plastic recycling seems equally unlikely.

That’s why the real solution might be a mix of compromise and eliminating single-use plastics. It won’t fix everything, but it’s still a start. Cutting single-use plastics by 90% could prevent 280 million tonnes of plastic from polluting our oceans by 2050.⁷ That’s enough plastic to cover the distance to the sun and back 6 times!

So yeah, maybe countries could focus on actually eliminating single-use plastics, not just on paper but with enforceable rules. After all, bans don’t mean much without enforcement. Just look at India. Despite banning single-use plastics in 2022, you can still get a plastic straw with your tender coconut water, if you ask for one.

Can countries at least agree on something as basic as this? We’ll only have to wait and see when the Global Plastic Treaty talks wrap up on December 1st.

Until then…

Don’t forget to share this story on WhatsApp, LinkedIn and X.

📢Finshots has a new WhatsApp Channel.

If you want the sharpest analysis of all financial news without the jargon, Finshots is the place to be! Click here to join.

Story Sources: Science Museum [1], OECD [2] [5], Bloomberg [3], Al Jazeera [4], Firstpost [6], TIME [7]

A whopping 2/3rd of Indians pay for medical expenses from their savings!

Unfortunately, too many Indians have no health insurance or depend on their corporate plans which can often be inadequate.

This is why Ditto Insurance always tells people to secure a personal comprehensive cover.

If you’re young & healthy, a health insurance plan can be as affordable as ₹10,000 to ₹15,000 a year. Click here to book a FREE call with Ditto’s IRDAI-certified advisors and let them help you find the best plan for your needs!