How your plastic bottle fuels climate change - and what the UN plans to do about it
international legally binding instrument
(ILBI) to curb
plastic pollution
. This instrument, born out of UNEA's Resolution 5/14 in 2022, is expected to regulate the entire life cycle of plastic—from production of raw materials (monomers and polymers) to disposal.
A recent briefing note and press release by the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis (
IEEFA
), warns that without enforceable
trade measures
covering plastic raw materials, the global treaty risks being ineffective.
What the data shows: Plastics are a global trade problem
According to the IEEFA report, a staggering 436.66 million tonnes of polymers and plastics, including feedstocks, were traded globally in 2022. In the same year, final plastic products worth 111 million tonnes were also traded. The sector is highly globalised, with countries like South Korea, the US, and Saudi Arabia leading the trade in raw plastic materials such as ethylene, propylene, and styrene.
IEEFA researchers point out that trade in polymers and monomers—especially those that produce
single-use plastics
(SUPs)—must be regulated at the international level. They argue that focusing solely on final plastic products and ignoring the trade of their raw materials will lead to emissions leakage and allow countries to bypass treaty obligations.
Why trade rules matter: Upstream emissions and global carbon budget
The production of plastics is heavily
fossil fuel
dependent. As much as 99 per cent of plastics are derived from fossil fuels. Plastic production generates 2.24 gigatonnes of CO₂ equivalent emissions annually—four times more than global aviation, according to estimates cited by IEEFA.
The carbon embedded in exported low-density and high-density polyethylene from the top five producer countries alone accounts for more than 100 million tonnes of CO₂ equivalent annually. The US leads with over 35 million tonnes, followed by Saudi Arabia at around 37 million tonnes.
IEEFA warns that if trade in these polymers is left unregulated, countries may continue exporting plastic raw materials without accounting for the emissions, undermining their Paris Agreement goals.
What the experts say
'Our research shows that petrostates lead trade in ethylene polymers—one of the largest categories of polymers contributing to the production of single-use plastics,' said Swathi Seshadri,
petrochemicals
specialist at IEEFA and co-author of the briefing note.
'A global regulation of plastic pollution without trade measures will only end up circumventing the problem without addressing it,' she added.
Abhishek Sinha, IEEFA's energy finance analyst and co-author, said: 'An assessment of the existing laws to regulate plastic pollution demonstrates an inadequate legal framework to phase out primary plastic polymers.'
Connor Chung, another co-author, emphasised: 'If parties manage to secure rigorous trade enforcement provisions, they will drive decarbonization in the process.'
India, Iran, Russia oppose trade provisions
A small group of countries—including India, Iran, and Russia—opposed the inclusion of trade measures in the treaty draft released in December 2024, citing concerns over conflicts with World Trade Organization (WTO) rules and economic dependence on polymer trade.
IEEFA counters that WTO provisions do not restrict member states from adopting environmental policies, provided they are not discriminatory or protectionist. In fact, WTO's own Dialogue on Plastic Pollution (DOPP) has recommended measures to reduce harmful and unnecessary plastics.
Why polymer trade is the core of the problem
Single-use plastics, often made from ethylene, propylene and their derivatives, are at the heart of the plastic pollution crisis. These include packaging materials, plastic bottles, textiles and disposable consumer goods. In Asia, packaging accounts for 60 per cent of polyethylene (PE) consumption and 48 per cent of polypropylene (PP) demand in 2024.
China and other Asian nations accounted for 52 per cent of global plastics production in 2023. The US and Saudi Arabia remain dominant exporters due to abundant fossil fuel reserves. Countries like Belgium, Germany and Singapore act as re-processing or trans-shipment hubs.
Call for action: Treaty must include trade measures
IEEFA recommends that the proposed treaty must establish global and national targets for both production and consumption of primary plastic polymers. It also calls for including trade measures to prevent treaty circumvention and emissions leakage.
'The inclusion of trade provisions makes sense on economic grounds alone, given the interconnected nature of globalized trade,' the report states. 'But a climate rationale also exists, for the simple reason that the plastic supply chain is a major contributor to global
greenhouse gas emissions
.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
6 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
Strengthening preparedness through sustained climate leadership
The climate crisis consistently amplifies weather-related disasters and vulnerability by undermining resilience-building efforts. The World Meteorological Organization projects that by 2100, extreme droughts could affect twice as many people, especially in the Global South, while shrinking water storage threatens rural livelihoods and drives migration. Sea level rise may endanger assets worth 20% of global GDP, with coastal flooding intensifying in Europe and Asia. Rising temperatures could expose 500 million more people to diseases like malaria by 2050, as biodiversity loss and urbanisation boost disease vectors. Wildfire seasons may extend by three months in vulnerable areas, and the most severe tropical cyclones are projected to occur twice as often under a 2.5°C warming scenario. Climate crisis. (AFP) Developing countries are at a critical juncture, facing both pressing development needs and the climate crisis challenges. Their development priorities include poverty alleviation, infrastructure expansion, health care, and education. As they strive for economic growth, the developing countries are also vulnerable to climate-related risks. This dual challenge demands integrated strategies that align climate resilience with inclusive development. It should be supported by adequate financing, technology transfer, and global cooperation. Countries have several international frameworks, such as the Paris Agreement and the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction, to harmonise climate crisis policies across countries, which will facilitate institutional coordination to implement climate-resilient strategies. The Climate Change Performance Index 2025, prepared by Germanwatch, reveals that no one country is doing enough to meet the goals of the Paris Agreement. It monitors countries' climate actions in four categories: greenhouse gas emissions, renewable energy, energy use, and climate policy. According to Oxfam, the G20 is responsible for approximately 78% of GHG emissions, and these emissions are projected to increase by 10.6% by 2030. It also emphasises that the richest G7 and G20 countries must further strengthen their domestic climate action and significantly increase climate finance commitments. Many governments face significant challenges in advancing climate action due to limited political will, inadequate financial resources, and weak institutional coordination. Several studies have found that adaptation initiatives, such as early warning systems in countries like India and Bangladesh, have shown improvement. However, they lack sufficient integration of structural and social preparedness across policy sectors. Governments have demonstrated leadership by updating their Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), which include phasing out fossil fuel subsidies and scaling up renewable energy sources. NDCs reinforce global commitments, demonstrating that each country is committed to achieving the SDGs. It was supported by institutional leadership provided by UNDP's Climate Promise. For instance, all NDCs supported through it include energy-related goals or policies, while 90% also incorporate the agriculture sector. Achieving these goals not only addresses the climate crisis but also advances sustainable development objectives, such as improving energy access and ensuring food security. The IPCC, WMO, and UNFCCC continue to lead and support efforts by generating scientific consensus, facilitating dialogue, and monitoring global progress. G20 leadership in climate crisis action is crucial to meeting the 1.5 ℃ target. High-income G20 countries provide financial and technological support to lower-income countries in this effort. However, leadership in climate action is not just about formulating target goals and action plans. Most importantly, it is about delivering ambitious emission reduction targets, executing integrated strategies that address climate risk alongside national development, and strengthening international cooperation. Leadership with accountability to deliver promises requires implementing reports from independent climate commissions, regular stocktakes, and carbon pricing tools, among other measures. The OECD 2021 report states that local governments lack the authority and resources to implement adaptation plans at the local level. Local-level leadership in cities, municipalities, regions, and states is where the implementation of climate targets needs to be strengthened. These sub-national governments are at the forefront of addressing climate-related challenges. Local governments play a crucial role in achieving long-term sustainability through measures that promote low-emission and climate-resilient development. It cannot be done without empowering the local governments. Local leaders play a crucial role in translating climate goals into concrete actions, effectively bridging the gap between national commitments and implementation at the community level—through a global network of local governments that connects policy, knowledge sharing, and learning from one another. For example, the Climate Group's Under2Coalition of subnational governments seeks to accelerate policy adoption and enhance implementation by sharing global insights on successful and unsuccessful approaches. Others include America is All In, the UN-Habitat, the C40 global network of mayors, and the Global Covenant of Mayors. Addressing the climate crisis depends majorly on effective climate leadership delivering timely action with a commitment to fairness and concrete implementation. To secure a climate-resilient future, governments must strengthen their leadership, integrate systemic risk into national planning, and scale up comprehensive disaster and climate risk management across sectors. This requires aligning National Adaptation Plans and development strategies with robust risk analytics, inclusive governance, and measurable targets. Investing in resilient, low-carbon infrastructure and nature-based solutions is crucial, as is leveraging innovative, risk-informed financing and engaging the private sector to drive sustainable development. Empowering communities, primarily through gender equality, social protection, and a renewed social contract, is vital to ensure no one is left behind. Finally, public awareness must be driven by science-based communication, impact-based early warnings, and accessible climate information to shift behaviours and reduce vulnerabilities. This article is authored by Mehdi Hussain, former research associate, Indian Council of World Affairs, New Delhi.
The Wire
a day ago
- The Wire
No Surprises: Bonn Deliberations Offer a Glimpse of COP30
Every year, about five to six months before the meeting of the Committee of Parties (COP) under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), a summit is held in Bonn. This year it was held from June 16 to 26. The objective of the Bonn summit is to lay the foundations of what would ultimately be discussed in the following COP meeting. The deliberations at Bonn are held under the aegis of the two permanent subsidiary bodies of the UNFCCC, namely, the Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technical Advice (SBSTA) and the Subsidiary Body for Implementation (SBI).The Bonn summit deliberations are usually not very smooth and in fact, quite acrimonious. The discord has increased over the past few years ever since transfer of funds for climate change from developed to developing countries has taken centrestage. This year too, the summit began on a sour note and the first two days were wasted in deciding as to what should be the agenda for standIndia, backed by the Like Minded Developing Countries (LMDCs) and others, sought inclusion of two points in the agenda. The first is related to Article 9.1 of the Paris Agreement (PA) which speaks of transfer of resources from developed to developing countries to battle climate change. The second was regarding the unilateral trade barriers, meaning the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) of the European Union. The point made by India was that $300 billion per year is too meagre an amount to be transferred and that it should be enhanced to $1.3 trillion per year. The trade barriers, meanwhile, were viewed as discriminatory and inimical to the spirit of the UNFCCC. The developed world was against the inclusion of these two agenda points as stand-alone items but finally conceded to have the finance agenda deliberated through 'substantial informal consultations'. The trade barriers were to be discussed under the 'just transition work programme'.Brazil which is going to host the next meeting of the COP (COP30) has stated that it will make all efforts to raise the transfer of resources to $1.3 trillion. Brazil, incidentally, is no push-over when it comes to climate change as it has been in the thick of it over the past several decades. This is in sharp contrast to the previous two hosts i.e. Azerbaijan in 2024 and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) in 2023. In fact, there has been some criticism from certain quarters regarding the choice of the previous two venues since both Azerbaijan and the UAE are fossil-rich countries and promote their growth. From this angle, even Brazil is under a cloud as it is rich in oil and gas and only recently was a decision taken to auction 172 oil and gas blocks covering about 56,000 square kilometres. Brazil, incidentally, is the eighth largest oil producer financeWhen one speaks of climate change, the conversation inevitably moves towards climate finance. They have become synonymous. There are, however, several other issues which were discussed in Bonn and readers may not be familiar with all of them. The first is on the global goal on adaptation (GGA) which was mentioned in the PA. There has been no progress in the matter since it was very loosely worded. On GGA, the PA speaks of enhancing adaptive capacity, strengthening resilience and reducing vulnerability to climate change (Article 7). Countries actually need to monitor certain parameters and no one really knew what they were. At one point of time, about 9,000 parameters were under discussion but now the list has been pruned to about 490 items. Efforts are on to bring it down further to about 100. The irony is that when one speaks of GGA, the next question is about finance. From where will the resources come? To undertake adaptation measures, the developing countries speak of 'means of implementation' which is clearly uncomfortable to the developed world who would like to address it as 'enablers of implementation'. The developed world would not like to address Article 9.1 of the PA solely but would like a more holistic approach and include funds from the private sector and also other sources, which includes contributions made by some developing other issues discussed at Bonn included a global stock take (GST), gender action plan (GAP), and also the Warsaw international mechanism (WIM). GST is nothing but a measure of climate equity and also an assessment of the measures taken by the world collectively to meet the PA targets. GAP recognises the fact that women are disproportionately affected by climate change and that something needs to be done for them specifically. WIM deals with loss and damage issues arising from climate change especially in vulnerable countries like the small island states. Unfortunately, in none of these issues was a consensus arrived at and they will now be discussed in the next round of COP in November 2025. Late filing of Nationally Determined Contributions was also discussed as only 22 countries (out of 198) have filed their revised NDCs till date. Apart from the discussions on regular agenda items, there was a clamour for reforms in the functioning of the institutions like the UNFCCC, for example, removing outdated agenda points by having a sunset clause, moving to a majority-based decision making process as against a consensus, and so on. The size of delegations was also under scrutiny and views were expressed that there should be an upper limit in order to accommodate delegates within the existing hotel the outcome of the discussions held in Bonn, one is almost sure of what is going to happen in the next round of COP in November 2025 and in all likelihood, there will be nothing to write home about. Somit Dasgupta, PhD, is a senior visiting fellow at ICRIER and former member (economic and commercial), CEA. Views are personal.
Business Standard
a day ago
- Business Standard
BEML rebounds from recent sell-off; snaps two-month rising streak in July
BEML advanced 0.84% to Rs 4,321.50 as some value buying emerged following a recent sell-off. The stock had declined 7.22% in last six sessions to close at Rs 4,285.70 on the BSE yesterday, down from its recent closing high of Rs 4,619 that was recorded on 15 July 2025. On the weekly chart, the stock is on a three-week losing streak. It is down 1.87% so far this week, after declining 0.62% in the week ended 13 July and 2.12% in the week ended 6 July. On the monthly chart, BEML has reversed its upward trend and is currently down 3.09% in July 2025, indicating sustained selling pressure. This marks a sharp contrast to the 5.37% gain in June and the strong 33.69% rally in May. From a technical standpoint, the stocks Relative Strength Index (RSI-14) currently stands at 45.67, suggesting neither overbought nor oversold conditions. (An RSI above 70 signals overbought territory; below 30 indicates oversold.) On the daily chart, the scrip is trading below its 50-day simple moving average (SMA), which is placed at Rs 4327.02. However, it continues to trade above its 20-day and 100-day SMAs, which are positioned at Rs 3,628.97 and Rs 3,697.56, respectively. On 21 July 2025, the board of BEML Limited approved a proposal to subdivide each existing fully paid-up equity share of face value Rs 10 into two equity shares of face value Rs 5 each, subject to shareholder approval. The record date for the purpose of above sub-division of equity shares shall be decided after obtaining shareholder approval for the same. BEML expects to complete the entire stock-split process within 23 month period, from the date of shareholders' approval. Following the split, the companys issued, subscribed, and paid-up share capital of Rs 41.64 crore will comprise 8.32 crore equity shares of Rs 5 each, compared to the current 4.16 crore shares of Rs 10 each. Post trading hours yesterday, BEML informed that it has bagged order from the Ministry of Defence for supply of HMV 6X6 and the contract value of the same is approximately Rs 293.82 crore. BEML is a leading multi-technology 'Schedule A' company under the Ministry of Defence. It operates in three verticals viz. defence & aerospace, mining & construction and rail & metro. As of 30 June 2025, the Government of India held a 53.86% stake in BEML. The companys consolidated net profit jumped 11.97% to Rs 287.55 crore while revenue from operations rose 9.17% to Rs 1,652.53 crore in Q4 March 2025 over Q4 March 2024.
