New draft of plastic pollution treaty doesn't limit production but calls for a global response
Nations are meeting at the United Nations office in Geneva to try to complete a landmark treaty to end the plastic pollution crisis. The draft, released early Friday, contains new language to say these levels exceed current waste management capacities and are projected to increase further, 'thereby necessitating a coordinated global response to halt and reverse such trends.'
This falls short of the limit that many countries sought, but could pave the way for one in the future. The objective of the treaty was also revamped to state that the accord would be based on a comprehensive approach that addresses the full lifecycle of plastics.
The biggest issue of the talks has been whether the treaty should impose caps on producing new plastic or focus instead on things like better design, recycling and reuse. Powerful oil- and gas-producing nations and the plastics industry oppose production limits. They want a treaty focused on better waste management and reuse.
Thursday was the last scheduled day of negotiations, but work on the revised draft continues into Friday.
Every year, the world makes more than 400 million tons of new plastic, and that could grow by about 70% by 2040 without policy changes. About 100 countries want to limit production. Many have said it's also essential to address toxic chemicals used to make plastics.
While an earlier draft contained no mention of chemicals, this version could lead to the reduction of plastic products containing 'a chemical or chemicals of concern to human health or the environment,' as well as the reduction of single-use or short-lived plastic products. Negotiators are still deciding whether the measures in that article would be voluntary or binding.
If adopted, parties would have to take measures to ensure the better management of plastic waste. They could be required to take steps to improve the design of plastic products to be recycled and reused. They are deciding whether the section on product design would be voluntary or binding.
Delegates will discuss the revised version when they reconvene later Friday. The earlier version was widely panned. Many countries said it was not ambitious enough. Some petrostates said it didn't have the scope they wanted to set the parameters of the treaty or precise definitions.
___
The Associated Press' climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP's standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Rhyl Journal
28 minutes ago
- Rhyl Journal
Plastic pollution treaty talks in Geneva end without an agreement
Nations were meeting for an 11th day at the United Nations office in Geneva to try to complete a landmark treaty to end the plastic pollution crisis. They remain deadlocked over whether the treaty should reduce exponential growth of plastic production and put global, legally binding controls on toxic chemicals used to make plastics. The negotiations at the UN hub were supposed to be the last round and produce the first legally binding treaty on plastic pollution, including in the oceans. But just like at the meeting in South Korea last year, they are leaving without a treaty. Luis Vayas Valdivieso, the chairman of the negotiating committee, wrote and presented two drafts of treaty text in Geneva based on the views expressed by the nations. The representatives from 184 countries did not agree to use either one as the basis for their negotiations. Mr Valdivieso said on Friday morning as the delegates reconvened in the assembly hall that no further action is being proposed at this stage on the latest draft. After a three-hour meeting, he banged a gavel made of recycled plastic bottle tops from a Nairobi landfill. He said the session was adjourned, to be resumed at a later date. Representatives of Norway, Australia, Tuvalu and others nations said they were deeply disappointed to be leaving Geneva without a treaty. European commissioner Jessika Roswall said the European Union and its member states had higher expectations for this meeting and while the draft falls short on their demands, it is a good basis for another negotiating session. 'The Earth is not ours only. We are stewards for those who come after us. Let us fulfil that duty,' she said. Inger Andersen, executive director of the United Nations Environment Programme, said despite challenges, despite the disappointment, 'we have to accept that significant progress was made'. This process will not stop, she said, but it is too soon to say how long it will take to get a treaty now. The Youth Plastic Action Network was the only organisation to speak at the closing meeting on Friday. Comments from observers were cut off at the request of the US and Kuwait after 24 hours of meetings and negotiating. The plastics industry also urged compromise. The Global Partners for Plastics Circularity said in a statement that governments must move past entrenched positions to finalise an agreement reflecting their shared priorities. Saudi Arabia said both drafts lacked balance, and Saudi and Kuwaiti negotiators said the latest proposal takes other states' views more into account and addressed plastic production, which they consider outside the scope of the treaty. That draft, released early on Friday, did not include a limit on plastic production, but recognised that current levels of production and consumption are 'unsustainable' and global action is needed. New language had been added to say these levels exceed current waste management capacities and are projected to increase further, 'thereby necessitating a co-ordinated global response to halt and reverse such trends'. The objective of the treaty was also revamped to state that the accord would be based on a comprehensive approach that addresses the full lifecycle of plastics. The biggest issue of the talks has been whether the treaty should impose caps on producing new plastic or focus instead on things such as better design, recycling and reuse. Powerful oil and gas-producing nations and the plastics industry oppose production limits. They want a treaty focused on better waste management and reuse. Every year, the world makes more than 400 million tons of new plastic, and that could grow by about 70% by 2040 without policy changes. About 100 countries want to limit production. Many have said it is also essential to address toxic chemicals used to make plastics. Thursday was the last scheduled day of negotiations, but work on the revised draft continued into Friday. Science shows what it will take to end pollution and protect human health, said Bethanie Carney Almroth, an ecotoxicology professor at Sweden's University of Gothenburg who coleads the Scientists' Coalition for an Effective Plastics Treaty. The science supports addressing the full lifecycle of plastics, beginning with extraction and production, and restricting some chemicals to ensure plastics are safer and more sustainable, she said. 'The science has not changed,' she said. 'It cannot be down negotiated.' Environmentalists, waste pickers and indigenous leaders and many business executives travelled to the talks to make their voices heard. Some used creative tactics, but are leaving disappointed. Indigenous leaders sought a treaty that recognises their rights and knowledge. For any proposal to make it into the treaty, every nation must agree. India, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Kuwait, Vietnam and others have said that consensus is vital to an effective treaty. Some countries want to change the process so decisions may be made by a vote if necessary. Graham Forbes, head of the Greenpeace delegation in Geneva, urged delegates in that direction. 'We are going in circles. We cannot continue to do the same thing and expect a different result,' he said as Friday's meeting was ending.
Reuters
2 hours ago
- Reuters
UN rights office says Israeli settlement plan breaks international law
Aug 15 (Reuters) - The U.N. human rights office said on Friday an Israeli plan to build to build thousands of new homes between an Israeli settlement in the West Bank and near East Jerusalem was illegal under international law, and would put nearby Palestinians at risk of forced eviction, which it described as a war crime. Israeli far-right Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich on Thursday vowed to press on a long-delayed settlement project, saying the move would "bury" the idea of a Palestinian state. The U.N. rights office spokesperson said the plan would break the West Bank into isolated enclaves and that it was "a war crime for an occupying power to transfer its own civilian population into the territory it occupies". About 700,000 Israeli settlers live among 2.7 million Palestinians in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. Israel annexed East Jerusalem in 1980, a move not recognised by most countries, but has not formally extended sovereignty over the West Bank. Most world powers say settlement expansion erodes the viability of a two-state solution by breaking up territory the Palestinians seek as part of a future independent state. The two-state plan envisages a Palestinian state in East Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza, existing side by side with Israel, which captured all three territories in the 1967 Middle East war. Israel cites historical and biblical ties to the area and says the settlements provide strategic depth and security and that the West Bank is "disputed" not "occupied".
The Independent
3 hours ago
- The Independent
UN plastic pollution talks fail again with negotiators rejecting draft treaties
Negotiators have failed to agree on the world's first treaty to combat plastic pollution in what was meant to be the final round of UN talks. Delegates were seeking to complete a legally binding international agreement during a 10-day conference in Geneva, Switzerland. But the talks ended in overtime on Friday morning without a deal after countries rejected these drafts as the basis for negotiations. Negotiators struggled to break a deadlock over key issues, particularly whether the treaty should curb the exponential growth of plastics production. Over the past few days, Luis Vayas Valdivieso, the chair of the negotiating committee, gathered views from the representatives of 184 countries before writing two drafts of treaty text. But countries ultimately rejected the texts as the basis for negotiations as they failed to bridge major rifts between different groups of countries. The so-called 'high ambition coalition', including the UK, have been calling for binding obligations on reducing production and consumption, sustainable product design, environmentally sound management of plastic waste and clean-up of pollution. But a smaller number of oil-rich nations including Saudi Arabia and Kuwait said the drafts lacked balance as they have argued that plastic production is outside the scope of the treaty. Environment campaigners and a coalition of businesses praised the high ambition countries for holding the line for a strong deal and said no treaty was better than a weak one but warned of the urgency to tackle the growing crisis. Once in the environment, plastic waste can entangle, choke or be eaten by wildlife and livestock, clog up waterways and litter beaches, while bigger items break down into microplastics entering food chains. And producing plastic, primarily from fossil fuel oil, has a climate impact, with the World in Data and OECD saying 3.3% of global emissions is down to the production and management of global plastics. Since talks began in 2022, countries have taken part in several rounds of negotiations to reach consensus on tackling the issue. The Geneva talks were arranged after what was originally meant to be the final round of talks in Busan, South Korea, also ended without an agreement in November. It is understood that another round of negotiations will be organised when the location and money for it is found. The Business Coalition for a Global Plastics Treaty, which represents 200 companies including Nestle, PepsiCo Walmart, Tetra Pak and Unilever, said it was 'disappointed' by the lack of an agreement, but said there is 'cause for optimism'. Rebecca Marmot, chief sustainability and corporate affairs officer at Unilever, said: 'The strong alignment among governments, business and civil society groups calling for a treaty with harmonised regulations across the full lifecycle of plastics is encouraging. 'Harmonised regulations are essential to reduce business complexity and cost, whilst also increasing confidence to invest in solutions.' Jodie Roussell, global public affairs lead for packaging and sustainability at Nestle, said: 'Voluntary efforts are not enough, and the current fragmented regulatory landscape results in increased costs and complexity for business.' Graham Forbes, Greenpeace's head of delegation at the talks, said: 'The inability to reach an agreement in Geneva must be a wake-up call for the world: ending plastic pollution means confronting fossil fuel interests head-on. 'The vast majority of governments want a strong agreement, yet a handful of bad actors were allowed to use process to drive such ambition into the ground. 'We cannot continue to do the same thing and expect a different result. The time for hesitation is over.' Christina Dixon, Ocean Campaign at the Environmental Investigation Agency, said: 'The supposedly final round of negotiations for a new global plastics treaty exposed deep geopolitical divides and a troubling resistance to confronting the real drivers of plastic pollution. 'No deal is better than a toothless treaty that locks us into further inaction, but without urgent course correction, efforts to secure a plastics treaty risks becoming a shield for polluters, not a solution to the plastics crisis.' Sian Sutherland, co-founder of A Plastic Planet at the Plastic Health Council: 'The high ambition coalition and civil society built extraordinary solidarity over these negotiations — a unity that transcended traditional boundaries. 'The fact that this could not overcome a process so fundamentally compromised by the narrow interests of the tiny fraction reaping massive financial rewards reveals the urgent need to reform how we make planetary decisions.'
