From your own source:
For some reason I can't take a screenshot and upload the graph, but those are the numbers clearly stated.
Packaging includes materials used for shipment of goods and long-term storage of chemicals, food, medicine, and others.
Here is how your source's source broke it down visually:
And here in their abstract and introduction (emphasis mine):
We estimate that 8300 million metric tons (Mt) as of virgin plastics have been produced to date. As of 2015, approximately 6300 Mt of plastic waste had been generated, around 9% of which had been recycled, 12% was incinerated, and 79% was accumulated in landfills or the natural environment. If current production and waste management trends continue, roughly 12,000 Mt of plastic waste will be in landfills or in the natural environment by 2050.
...
[P]lastics’ largest market is packaging, an application whose growth was accelerated by a global shift from reusable to single-use containers. As a result, the share of plastics in municipal solid waste (by mass) increased from less than 1% in 1960 to more than 10% by 2005 in middle- and high-income countries.
...
None of the commonly used plastics are biodegradable. As a result, they accumulate, rather than decompose, in landfills or the natural environment (6). The only way to permanently eliminate plastic waste is by destructive thermal treatment, such as combustion or pyrolysis. Thus, near-permanent contamination of the natural environment with plastic waste is a growing concern. Plastic debris has been found in all major ocean basins (6), with an estimated 4 to 12 million metric tons (Mt) of plastic waste generated on land entering the marine environment in 2010 alone (3). Contamination of freshwater systems and terrestrial habitats is also increasingly reported (7–9), as is environmental contamination with synthetic fibers (9, 10). Plastic waste is now so ubiquitous in the environment that it has been suggested as a geological indicator of the proposed Anthropocene era (11).
We present the first global analysis of all mass-produced plastics ever made by developing and combining global data on production, use, and end-of-life fate of polymer resins, synthetic fibers, and additives into a comprehensive material flow model. The analysis includes thermoplastics, thermosets, polyurethanes (PURs), elastomers, coatings, and sealants but focuses on the most prevalent resins and fibers: high-density polyethylene (PE), low-density and linear low-density PE, polypropylene (PP), polystyrene (PS), polyvinylchloride (PVC), polyethylene terephthalate (PET), and PUR resins; and polyester, polyamide, and acrylic (PP&A) fibers. The pure polymer is mixed with additives to enhance the properties of the material.
...
Most of the packaging plastics leave use the same year they are produced, whereas construction plastics leaving use were produced decades earlier, when production quantities were much lower. For example, in 2015, 42% of primary nonfiber plastics produced (146 Mt) entered use as packaging and 19% (65 Mt) as construction, whereas nonfiber plastic waste leaving use was 54% packaging (141 Mt) and only 5% construction (12 Mt).
...
We estimate that 2500 Mt of plastics—or 30% of all plastics ever produced—are currently in use. Between 1950 and 2015, cumulative waste generation of primary and secondary (recycled) plastic waste amounted to 6300 Mt. Of this, approximately 800 Mt (12%) of plastics have been incinerated and 600 Mt (9%) have been recycled, only 10% of which have been recycled more than once. Around 4900 Mt—60% of all plastics ever produced—were discarded and are accumulating in landfills or in the natural environment (Fig. 2). Of this, 600 Mt were PP&A fibers. None of the mass-produced plastics biodegrade in any meaningful way; however, sunlight weakens the materials, causing fragmentation into particles known to reach millimeters or micrometers in size (32). Research into the environmental impacts of these “microplastics” in marine and freshwater environments has accelerated in recent years (33), but little is known about the impacts of plastic waste in land-based ecosystems.
So, very clearly when they refer to "packaging" they are predominantly referring to single-use/disposable consumer-oriented items and NOT "long term storage." Or, at least not long-term beyond one year, which is clearly intended as the upper bound.
This is critical as goods involve extensive supply chains across thousands of km, with content needed to be kept intact, clean, safe, and even light to keep transport costs low.
I'm not concerned about a business wanting to keep their profits ridiculously high at the cost of our own survival. Regardless, the solutions can come in a combination of innnovative thinking and how the whole idea of more efficient transport systems and how our "throw away" culture gets transformed (note, that won't mean no plastic packaging at all).
On top of that, in terms of pollution overall much of plastics come from oil and gas
Yep. And much from single-use/throw away.
Just getting rid of single-use plastic won't be enough.
Then it's a damn good thing no one is arguing we just do that and nothing else.
You did not disprove my argument because that's exactly the reason why they are mostly non-biodegradable. Products have to be kept dry and secure, and the weight has to be light or else costs go up, which is why plastic is used. Plastic is not used because of convenience.
Alternatives might include air-tight metal canisters plus wood for frames, but the first involves more fuel needed for mining and manufacturing, and for the second more trees that need to be cut. The additional weight also means more fuel for transport.
Also, much of oil and gas is not used for single-use, throw-away plastic but only around 4 pct for plastics as a whole. The bulk of oil and gas is used for energy and heating, and a significant portion of that in turn is used for manufacturing goods and mechanized agriculture.
We can see this in the four articles that you share. The first struggles with the idea of replacing plastic, considering removing labels, and can only living with minimizing effects of plastic use.
The second does not acknowledge the point that in capitalist systems efficiency is achieved in exchange for MORE production. In short, we make more efficient use of plastics so that we can produce and sell MORE products for MORE profits; otherwise, businesses will have no reason to invest in efficiency.
That point is clearly seen in your third source, which calls for a "New Plastic Economy." Only the incredibly gullible will imagine that plastic use will decrease in such economies which operate among capitalist lines.
At least your fourth source is balanced, but it fails in the same way, as the $8 billion in savings per annum is re-invested for even more production and sales, and with that more plastic needed.
Finally, notice that the topic thread and several points raised by the OP refers to plastics in general and not just single-use, throwaway ones, which is my point: can one live without plastic? I don't think so.
Last edited: