Plastics are everywhere and in nearly everything. Environmentalists have long called for reductions in the amount of plastic society uses, pointing to images of fish and seabirds with stomachs full of the stuff as evidence that their toxic chemicals inevitably end up in humans. But balancing the threat posed by plastics with their utility leaves us with tough choices with respect to the materials we use in everything from food packaging to T-shirts, and a new report from McKinsey & Co. has findings that challenge the push for less plastic. In 13 out of 14 applications analyzed by the consulting giant, plastics had a lower greenhouse gas impact than the next-best nonplastic alternative for that product in the U.S. in 2020. McKinsey looked at examples of products within five sectors — packaging, building and construction, automotive, textiles, and consumer durables — which together represent around 90 percent of global plastics volume. The report chose applications for which viable alternatives to plastic exist — though in some cases, like certain food packaging, few alternatives exist at scale. Packaging represented more than half of total global plastics demand, McKinsey found. The research, which McKinsey spokesperson Neil Grace said was conducted independently, takes into account the total greenhouse gas contribution of plastics compared with alternatives — such as paper, glass and steel — and includes product life cycle and impact of use. It also notes efficiencies that plastic offers such as reduced food spoilage. In the end, plastics outperformed alternatives like steel in hybrid fuel tanks in vehicles by contributing 90 percent less greenhouse gasses. In grocery bags, plastics emitted 80 percent less pollution than paper. And in residential water pipes, McKinsey found that plastic produced 25 percent fewer emissions than copper. In the one case where a nonplastic alternative beat plastic — industrial drums — steel produces significantly more emissions than a plastic drum during production, but it lasts twice as long and is typically recycled. On the other hand, paper grocery bags weigh significantly more than plastic bags, resulting in much higher GHG emissions due to production and transportation impacts. The report doesn't shy away from the fact that plastic wreaks havoc on our water systems, soils and wildlife, noting that "the benefits of plastics do not diminish the industry's need to continue improving environmental performance, including meeting net-zero targets, achieving significant improvements in recycling, and eliminating leakage to the environment." It notably doesn't consider the impact of plastic on ocean pollution, and the researchers also note that there are multiple considerations that should go into a material choice, including cost, toxicity, recyclability and GHG emissions. Plus, because plastics are so ubiquitous, they do emit significant emissions across the life cycle — and are projected to grow in emissions through 2050, according to the Center for International Environmental Law . If valid, the McKinsey findings would present an environmental dilemma: cut plastic to save the oceans, but potentially rely on more labor-intensive products that might emit more pollution into an already warming world.
| 
Comments
Post a Comment