Global push to curb plastic pollution: Can Geneva talks deliver a treaty?
Plastic is responsible for 3.4% of global greenhouse gas emissions, a footprint greater than that of the aviation and shipping industries combined. Oceans are already bearing the brunt of this pollution. A recent study reveals that the upper layers of the North Atlantic alone contain 27 million tonnes of microplastics.These tiny particles are now pervasive, not just in water but also in soil, crops, animals, and even human blood. Their ability to bioaccumulate, gradually build up in living organisms, makes them particularly dangerous, contributing to the triple planetary crisis of climate change, biodiversity loss, and pollution.
Observers noted greater clarity on 'red lines' regarding plastic production limits. (Photo: Getty)
High Stakes in Geneva: Will the World Unite?Dr. Melanie Bergmann of the Alfred Wegener Institute emphasised the significance of the upcoming talks:'Ideally, we will achieve in Geneva that the global community, or at least large parts of it, commit to a strong agreement that is based on scientific facts and recognises how harmful plastic is to humans and nature.'However, during the last round of negotiations in December 2024 in Seoul, efforts to reach a consensus collapsed. While Latin American, African, and several EU countries pushed for strict controls, they faced resistance from oil-producing nations, Canada, the U.S., and India—all of which have economic stakes tied to petroleum, a key raw material in plastic production. Despite the stalemate, observers noted greater clarity on 'red lines' regarding plastic production limits and chemical regulation.Dr. Bergmann added, 'The delegations must use diplomacy to bring their positions closer together, despite geopolitical tensions and differing interests, to create a basis for successful cooperation.'The Path Forward: Cut at the SourceTo effectively address plastic-related emissions, experts say production must be cut by 12–17% each year. Dr. Bergmann stressed the importance of upstream intervention:'Scientific calculations show that effective measures must start at the production level. We should limit production to unavoidable applications, reduce chemical diversity from the design stage, and phase out substances of concern.'A Treaty Within Reach?The road ahead will require science-driven decisions, political will, and global cooperation. If nations can put the planet over profit, a binding agreement may finally emerge, offering hope in the fight against one of the most pressing environmental challenges of our time.- EndsMust Watch
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Print
2 hours ago
- The Print
Talks for treaty on plastic pollution end without agreement
Delegates from around 185 countries worked through the night at the UN's Palais des Nations, trying to bridge differences between a high-ambition group seeking global caps on virgin plastic and controls on hazardous chemicals, and a bloc of oil- and petrochemical-producing states that argued the treaty should focus on recycling, waste management and voluntary commitments. Governments negotiating the treaty were presented on Thursday with a new chair's draft that omitted binding limits on plastic production and did not include a dedicated section on chemicals of concern. The text drew sharp criticism from many nations and civil society groups for relying on voluntary, nationally determined actions. New Delhi, Aug 15 (PTI) Countries on Friday failed to reach an agreement during the resumed fifth round of international talks in Geneva that could have led to the first-ever global treaty to curb plastic pollution, with the UN Environment Programme (UNEP) saying negotiators will reconvene at a later date to be announced. Despite overtime talks, the meeting ended without a deal. The UNEP said the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC-5.2), which ran from August 5 to 15, adjourned with no agreement and would reconvene at a later date to be announced. Earlier, the UNEP had billed this session as an opportunity to 'finalise and approve' text for forwarding to a diplomatic conference, but that prospect has been pushed back. In the resumed talks, the European Union, many African and Pacific states and Latin American countries pressed for binding global measures, including production limits and phase-outs of the most harmful polymers and products. On the other side, major producers, including the United States and several Gulf states, resisted any cap on primary plastic production and opposed strong chemical controls, according to negotiators and observers. Several ministers accused a small group of countries of blocking progress. India reiterated its 'no product phase-out' stance in the treaty, aligning with countries favouring nationally determined approaches focused on waste management, design improvements and extended producer responsibility rather than global bans. Civil society organisations called the collapse 'a wake-up call', arguing that a handful of countries used procedures to drag down ambition. WWF said the chair's draft was 'not a treaty' without global phase-outs, product design rules, a robust finance mechanism and majority voting to strengthen obligations over time. Environmental groups nonetheless welcomed that a weak deal was not rushed through. The resumed fifth round of negotiations on the plastics treaty (INC-5.2) in Geneva was part of a process launched in 2022 to tackle what the UN describes as a 'plastic pollution crisis' threatening oceans, wildlife, human health and the climate. The talks were initially expected to conclude in Busan, South Korea, last December but negotiations there too ended without agreement. The UNEP estimates humanity produces more than 430 million tonnes of plastic a year, much of it is short-lived. Without stronger policies, OECD projects that plastics production and use could rise by about 70 per cent by 2040. Between 19 and 23 million tonnes of plastic waste leak into aquatic ecosystems annually, with around 11 million tonnes entering the oceans each year, according to UN-linked assessments. Business coalitions that back a strong treaty said globally harmonised obligations, such as criteria to phase out problematic products, would cut far more pollution than a patchwork of voluntary national measures. But industry groups tied to the plastics value chain continued to emphasise recycling and waste-management improvements. PTI GVS GVS MNK MNK This report is auto-generated from PTI news service. ThePrint holds no responsibility for its content.
United News of India
4 hours ago
- United News of India
British CDS Admiral Tony Radkin says NATO can handle any Russian military venture
London, Aug 15 (UNI) The UK Chief of Defence Staff, and commander of the Royal UK Navy Tony Radkin, has urged NATO nations to not be afraid of Russia, stating that Moscow was just one while the bloc has 32 nations, and are capable of tackling any possible Russian aggression, reports Pravda. While speaking to PolitNavigator, Radkin said "The Black Sea Fleet was destroyed by a country that barely has a navy. Russia's strategic bombers were destroyed by a country that barely has an air force, and Russia was forced to restructure its economy on a war footing that will be incredibly difficult to get off... We should not be afraid of Putin's rhetoric or his campaign of state sabotage. 'As disgusting as they are, they do not change the situation. In fact, Russia is conducting covert attacks on us precisely because it cannot do so more openly - Putin does not want a war with NATO, he cannot even win a war with Ukraine.' The British Defence Chief's comments come ahead of increased fears by EU nations that Moscow could wage war against Europe if it wins its war in Ukraine, with the bloc agreeing to increasing its defence budget by 5% of its total GDP by 2035. The EU is also opting for increased militarisation, having already increased its total military expenditure by over 30% from 2021-2024, and committing to divert increased civilian funding towards Europe's defence infrastructure to reduce reliance on US munitions. Stating that Russia had grown 'weaker' and thus more 'dangerous', he added 'Putin is not shy about using violence to achieve his goals. And we must clearly understand the threat that the Baltic and Scandinavian countries bordering Russia are particularly acutely aware of.' Urging joint defence cooperation between members, he said 'We need to defend ourselves on the front line. Russia has more reason to fear the union of 32 countries than the other way around.' UNI ANV SSP
Time of India
5 hours ago
- Time of India
Streamer Aria, while supporting child safety goals, opposes the EU Chat Control law, saying 'Mass surveillance… sets dangerous precedent'
(Image via Linux user's 'X' Account) The European Union's controversial Chat Control Law, since proposed, faced fierce backlash. Recently, even the streaming industry weighed in. Popular streamer Aria joined the list of critics, calling the law a suggested mass surveillance approach to be a threat to privacy, despite its support for child safety goals. The legislation that is set for a vote on October 14, 2025, has ignited heated debate, with many echoing the concerns over the overreach of the government. Streamer Aria speaks against the EU Chat Control law Aria, in her made comment, specifically targeted the core privacy concerns of the Chat Control law proposal. While firmly stating her support for protecting the children, Aria warned that this legislation would mandate private messages' mass scanning. Aria on X stated, "while protecting children' is important, private communications' 'mass surveillance' will set 'dangerous precedent." She further added, there is a need for a 'better solution' which would not ' compromise everyone's privacy rights.' With her words, Aria perfectly resonated with the social media's widespread anxiety about this law. While Aria's comment echoed many X users' opinions, there has already been fierce criticism against the law. A user on X, specifically talking about the law and casting doubt on the law's motive, stated, " Just remember that anytime they do something to "protect the children", the last thing they care about is protecting the children." Another user, echoing deeper skepticism about the law, accused the supporters of being "stupid' and 'deluded idiots." by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like 21st Century Skills Start with Confident Communication Planet Spark Learn More Undo The user even questioned the law's true intent. Similarly, a user framed this entire proposal as an inevitable erosion of the citizen's privacy. The comment read, 'You think needing an ID for accessing online services is bad? It's just a matter of time until the EU 🇪🇺 will pass the 'Chat Control' law, which is about scanning all communications, especially encrypted ones, via backdoors.' Another detailed critique called out the proposal to be "horrifying" and unsafe, technically. The user argued that it destroys private communications, under the guise of child protection, while it exempts the politicians. A user even expressed fury by labelling this law "dystopian" and reliant upon public "negligence and disinterest" for passing. The user emphasized that this law would subject 450 million EU citizens to automated scanning, and all of it would happen without their consent. What is the controversial European Union's Chat Control law? The European Union Chat Control Law, at its core, is aimed at combating the spread of Child Sexual Abuse Material (CSAM) online. It's mechanism that is causing such uproar online is the client-side scanning. It will require applications like Telegram, Signal, WhatsApp, etc., to scan all the user content. It would include scanning of texts, images and videos, before the same gets encrypted. Critics argue that this law will fundamentally break the end-to-end encryption system that remains digital privacy and security's bedrock. To create such a scanning mechanism would effectively install a permanent backdoor. Experts are even warning that this will make all communication completely vulnerable, not just for state surveillance but also to potential exploitation by hostile actors and hackers. The law will apply to the citizens indiscriminately, irrespective of suspicion. Some proponents, like the Danish EU's current presidency, have been pushing hard for the adoption of this law by mid-October 2025. It's been insisted that it is necessary for law enforcement to tackle the rising serious crime. However, the opponents are countering this motive. As per them, mass surveillance would violate the fundamental EU rights to data protection and privacy. It would set a dangerous global precedent, and it could expand beyond CSAM in the near future. Currently, 19 EU states are backing the law's proposal. The Netherlands, Austria and Poland are on the opposing end. The pending decision from Germany is being considered to be pivotal for the voting that is to be held on October 14, 2025. How is the world reacting to this law? While streamers have joined people opposing the law, privacy experts and the technology firms have already blasted the proposal as dangerous and unworkable. Signal, as per reports, has already threatened to pull the application from the European Union if the new law passes, as it would cause irreparable harm to the encryption system. Legal analysts, on the other hand, highlight the conflict between the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights and GDPR, which are meant to safeguard private communications. Some campaigns, including Fight Chat Control, are urging citizens to pressure lawmakers. They are warning of the false accusations and the eroded freedom that would come if the law is implemented. With the voting still looming, the debate that is all over social media is child safety vs privacy concerns. It's a clash that can redefine Europe's digital rights. Catch Rani Rampal's inspiring story on Game On, Episode 4. Watch Here!
