Latest news with #U.N.OceanConference
Nahar Net
3 days ago
- Business
- Nahar Net
US at plastics treaty talks in rare international participation under Trump
by Naharnet Newsdesk 08 August 2025, 17:32 Under President Donald Trump's leadership, the United States has withdrawn from international negotiations and commitments, particularly around climate. But the U.S. is very much involved in treaty talks for a global accord to end plastic pollution. Nations kicked off a meeting Tuesday in Geneva to try to complete a landmark treaty over 10 days to end the spiraling plastic pollution crisis. The biggest issue is whether the treaty should impose caps on producing new plastic, or focus instead on things like better design, recycling and reuse. About 3,700 people are taking part in the talks, representing 184 countries and more than 600 organizations. Here is a look the U.S. position: Why is the US participating in the negotiations? Hours after he was sworn in to a second term, Trump pulled the U.S. out of the landmark Paris agreement to combat global warming. The United States didn't participate in a vote in April at the International Maritime Organization that created a fee for greenhouse gases emitted by ships, or send anyone to the U.N. Ocean Conference in June. Some wondered whether the United States would even go to Geneva. The State Department told The Associated Press that engaging in the negotiations is critical to protect U.S. interests and businesses, and an agreement could advance U.S. security by protecting natural resources from plastic pollution, promote prosperity and enhance safety. The industry contributes more than $500 billion to the economy annually and employs about 1 million people in the U.S., according to the Plastics Industry Association. "This is an historic opportunity to set a global approach for reducing plastic pollution through cost-effective and common-sense solutions and fostering innovation from the private sector, not unilaterally stopping the use of plastic," the department said in an email. What does the US want in the treaty? The State Department supports provisions to improve waste collection and management, improve product design and drive recycling, reuse and other efforts to cut the plastic dumped into the environment. The international Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development estimates that 22 million tons of plastic waste will leak into the environment this year. That could increase to 30 million tons annually by 2040 if nothing changes. The OECD said if the treaty focuses only on improving waste management and does nothing on production and demand, an estimated 13.5 million tons of plastic waste would still leak into the environment each year. What does the US not want in the treaty? The United States and other powerful oil and gas nations oppose cutting plastic production. Most plastic is made from fossil fuels. Even if production grows only slightly, greenhouse gas emissions emitted from the process would more than double by 2050, according to research from the federal Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. The U.S. does not support global production caps since plastics play a critical role throughout every sector of every economy, nor does it support bans on certain plastic products or chemical additives to them because there is not a universal approach to reducing plastic pollution, the State Department said. That's similar to the views of the plastics industry, which says that a production cap could have unintended consequences, such as raising the cost of plastics, and that chemicals are best regulated elsewhere. What has the US done in Geneva so far? On the first day of the negotiations, the United States proposed striking language in the objective of the agreement about addressing the full life cycle of plastics. That idea was part of the original mandate for a treaty. Getting rid of it could effectively end any effort to control plastic supply or production. Under former President Joe Biden's administration, the U.S. supported the treaty addressing supply and production. What are people saying about the US position? Industry leaders praised it and environmentalists panned it. Chris Jahn, president and CEO of the American Chemistry Council, said the Trump administration is trying to get an agreement that protects each nation's rights while advancing effective and practical solutions to end plastic waste in the environment. He said his group supports that approach. Graham Forbes, head of the Greenpeace delegation in Geneva, said the United States wants a weak agreement and is undermining the idea that the world needs strong international regulations to address a global problem. Does the US think the world can agree on a treaty that will end plastic pollution? The United States aims to finalize text for a global agreement on plastic pollution that all countries, including major producers of plastics and plastic products, and consumers, will support, the State Department said in its statement.
San Francisco Chronicle
3 days ago
- Business
- San Francisco Chronicle
US at plastics treaty talks is rare international participation under Trump. What's the goal?
Under President Donald Trump's leadership, the United States has withdrawn from international negotiations and commitments, particularly around climate. But the U.S. is very much involved in treaty talks for a global accord to end plastic pollution. Nations kicked off a meeting Tuesday in Geneva to try to complete a landmark treaty over 10 days to end the spiraling plastic pollution crisis. The biggest issue is whether the treaty should impose caps on producing new plastic, or focus instead on things like better design, recycling and reuse. About 3,700 people are taking part in the talks, representing 184 countries and more than 600 organizations. Why is the US participating in the negotiations? Hours after he was sworn in to a second term, Trump pulled the U.S. out of the landmark Paris agreement to combat global warming. The United States didn't participate in a vote in April at the International Maritime Organization that created a fee for greenhouse gases emitted by ships, or send anyone to the U.N. Ocean Conference in June. Some wondered whether the United States would even go to Geneva. The State Department told The Associated Press that engaging in the negotiations is critical to protect U.S. interests and businesses, and an agreement could advance U.S. security by protecting natural resources from plastic pollution, promote prosperity and enhance safety. The industry contributes more than $500 billion to the economy annually and employs about 1 million people in the U.S., according to the Plastics Industry Association. 'This is an historic opportunity to set a global approach for reducing plastic pollution through cost-effective and common-sense solutions and fostering innovation from the private sector, not unilaterally stopping the use of plastic,' the department said in an email. What does the US want in the treaty? The State Department supports provisions to improve waste collection and management, improve product design and drive recycling, reuse and other efforts to cut the plastic dumped into the environment. The international Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development estimates that 22 million tons of plastic waste will leak into the environment this year. That could increase to 30 million tons annually by 2040 if nothing changes. The OECD said if the treaty focuses only on improving waste management and does nothing on production and demand, an estimated 13.5 million tons of plastic waste would still leak into the environment each year. What does the US not want in the treaty? The United States and other powerful oil and gas nations oppose cutting plastic production. Most plastic is made from fossil fuels. Even if production grows only slightly, greenhouse gas emissions emitted from the process would more than double by 2050, according to research from the federal Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. The U.S. does not support global production caps since plastics play a critical role throughout every sector of every economy, nor does it support bans on certain plastic products or chemical additives to them because there is not a universal approach to reducing plastic pollution, the State Department said. That's similar to the views of the plastics industry, which says that a production cap could have unintended consequences, such as raising the cost of plastics, and that chemicals are best regulated elsewhere. What has the US done in Geneva so far? On the first day of the negotiations, the United States proposed striking language in the objective of the agreement about addressing the full life cycle of plastics. That idea was part of the original mandate for a treaty. Getting rid of it could effectively end any effort to control plastic supply or production. Under former President Joe Biden's administration, the U.S. supported the treaty addressing supply and production. What are people saying about the US position? Industry leaders praised it and environmentalists panned it. Chris Jahn, president and CEO of the American Chemistry Council, said the Trump administration is trying to get an agreement that protects each nation's rights while advancing effective and practical solutions to end plastic waste in the environment. He said his group supports that approach. Graham Forbes, head of the Greenpeace delegation in Geneva, said the United States wants a weak agreement and is undermining the idea that the world needs strong international regulations to address a global problem. Does the US think the world can agree on a treaty that will end plastic pollution? The United States aims to finalize text for a global agreement on plastic pollution that all countries, including major producers of plastics and plastic products, and consumers, will support, the State Department said in its statement. ___
3 days ago
- Business
US at plastics treaty talks is rare international participation under Trump. What's the goal?
Under President Donald Trump's leadership, the United States has withdrawn from international negotiations and commitments, particularly around climate. But the U.S. is very much involved in treaty talks for a global accord to end plastic pollution. Nations kicked off a meeting Tuesday in Geneva to try to complete a landmark treaty over 10 days to end the spiraling plastic pollution crisis. The biggest issue is whether the treaty should impose caps on producing new plastic, or focus instead on things like better design, recycling and reuse. About 3,700 people are taking part in the talks, representing 184 countries and more than 600 organizations. Here is a look the U.S. position: Hours after he was sworn in to a second term, Trump pulled the U.S. out of the landmark Paris agreement to combat global warming. The United States didn't participate in a vote in April at the International Maritime Organization that created a fee for greenhouse gases emitted by ships, or send anyone to the U.N. Ocean Conference in June. Some wondered whether the United States would even go to Geneva. The State Department told The Associated Press that engaging in the negotiations is critical to protect U.S. interests and businesses, and an agreement could advance U.S. security by protecting natural resources from plastic pollution, promote prosperity and enhance safety. The industry contributes more than $500 billion to the economy annually and employs about 1 million people in the U.S., according to the Plastics Industry Association. 'This is an historic opportunity to set a global approach for reducing plastic pollution through cost-effective and common-sense solutions and fostering innovation from the private sector, not unilaterally stopping the use of plastic,' the department said in an email. The State Department supports provisions to improve waste collection and management, improve product design and drive recycling, reuse and other efforts to cut the plastic dumped into the environment. The international Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development estimates that 22 million tons of plastic waste will leak into the environment this year. That could increase to 30 million tons annually by 2040 if nothing changes. The OECD said if the treaty focuses only on improving waste management and does nothing on production and demand, an estimated 13.5 million tons of plastic waste would still leak into the environment each year. The United States and other powerful oil and gas nations oppose cutting plastic production. Most plastic is made from fossil fuels. Even if production grows only slightly, greenhouse gas emissions emitted from the process would more than double by 2050, according to research from the federal Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. The U.S. does not support global production caps since plastics play a critical role throughout every sector of every economy, nor does it support bans on certain plastic products or chemical additives to them because there is not a universal approach to reducing plastic pollution, the State Department said. That's similar to the views of the plastics industry, which says that a production cap could have unintended consequences, such as raising the cost of plastics, and that chemicals are best regulated elsewhere. On the first day of the negotiations, the United States proposed striking language in the objective of the agreement about addressing the full life cycle of plastics. That idea was part of the original mandate for a treaty. Getting rid of it could effectively end any effort to control plastic supply or production. Under former President Joe Biden's administration, the U.S. supported the treaty addressing supply and production. Industry leaders praised it and environmentalists panned it. Chris Jahn, president and CEO of the American Chemistry Council, said the Trump administration is trying to get an agreement that protects each nation's rights while advancing effective and practical solutions to end plastic waste in the environment. He said his group supports that approach. Graham Forbes, head of the Greenpeace delegation in Geneva, said the United States wants a weak agreement and is undermining the idea that the world needs strong international regulations to address a global problem. The United States aims to finalize text for a global agreement on plastic pollution that all countries, including major producers of plastics and plastic products, and consumers, will support, the State Department said in its statement. ___
Winnipeg Free Press
4 days ago
- Business
- Winnipeg Free Press
US at plastics treaty talks is rare international participation under Trump. What's the goal?
Under President Donald Trump's leadership, the United States has withdrawn from international negotiations and commitments, particularly around climate. But the U.S. is very much involved in treaty talks for a global accord to end plastic pollution. Nations kicked off a meeting Tuesday in Geneva to try to complete a landmark treaty over 10 days to end the spiraling plastic pollution crisis. The biggest issue is whether the treaty should impose caps on producing new plastic, or focus instead on things like better design, recycling and reuse. About 3,700 people are taking part in the talks, representing 184 countries and more than 600 organizations. Here is a look the U.S. position: Why is the US participating in the negotiations? Hours after he was sworn in to a second term, Trump pulled the U.S. out of the landmark Paris agreement to combat global warming. The United States didn't participate in a vote in April at the International Maritime Organization that created a fee for greenhouse gases emitted by ships, or send anyone to the U.N. Ocean Conference in June. Some wondered whether the United States would even go to Geneva. The State Department told The Associated Press that engaging in the negotiations is critical to protect U.S. interests and businesses, and an agreement could advance U.S. security by protecting natural resources from plastic pollution, promote prosperity and enhance safety. The industry contributes more than $500 billion to the economy annually and employs about 1 million people in the U.S., according to the Plastics Industry Association. 'This is an historic opportunity to set a global approach for reducing plastic pollution through cost-effective and common-sense solutions and fostering innovation from the private sector, not unilaterally stopping the use of plastic,' the department said in an email. What does the US want in the treaty? The State Department supports provisions to improve waste collection and management, improve product design and drive recycling, reuse and other efforts to cut the plastic dumped into the environment. The international Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development estimates that 22 million tons of plastic waste will leak into the environment this year. That could increase to 30 million tons annually by 2040 if nothing changes. The OECD said if the treaty focuses only on improving waste management and does nothing on production and demand, an estimated 13.5 million tons of plastic waste would still leak into the environment each year. What does the US not want in the treaty? The United States and other powerful oil and gas nations oppose cutting plastic production. Most plastic is made from fossil fuels. Even if production grows only slightly, greenhouse gas emissions emitted from the process would more than double by 2050, according to research from the federal Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. The U.S. does not support global production caps since plastics play a critical role throughout every sector of every economy, nor does it support bans on certain plastic products or chemical additives to them because there is not a universal approach to reducing plastic pollution, the State Department said. That's similar to the views of the plastics industry, which says that a production cap could have unintended consequences, such as raising the cost of plastics, and that chemicals are best regulated elsewhere. What has the US done in Geneva so far? On the first day of the negotiations, the United States proposed striking language in the objective of the agreement about addressing the full life cycle of plastics. That idea was part of the original mandate for a treaty. Getting rid of it could effectively end any effort to control plastic supply or production. Under former President Joe Biden's administration, the U.S. supported the treaty addressing supply and production. What are people saying about the US position? Industry leaders praised it and environmentalists panned it. Chris Jahn, president and CEO of the American Chemistry Council, said the Trump administration is trying to get an agreement that protects each nation's rights while advancing effective and practical solutions to end plastic waste in the environment. He said his group supports that approach. Wednesdays What's next in arts, life and pop culture. Graham Forbes, head of the Greenpeace delegation in Geneva, said the United States wants a weak agreement and is undermining the idea that the world needs strong international regulations to address a global problem. Does the US think the world can agree on a treaty that will end plastic pollution? The United States aims to finalize text for a global agreement on plastic pollution that all countries, including major producers of plastics and plastic products, and consumers, will support, the State Department said in its statement. ___ 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
National Observer
26-06-2025
- Politics
- National Observer
Progress and frustration mark the UN's third Ocean Conference
This story was originally published by Grist and appears here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration Delegates from around the world convened in Nice, France, last week to discuss a range of ocean priorities, including the implementation of a recently finalized ' high seas treaty ' to protect the two-thirds of the oceans that lie outside countries' control. It was the third United Nations Ocean Conference, a high-level forum meant to advance the U.N.'s sustainable development goal to ' conserve and sustainably use the oceans.' This year's co-hosts, France and Costa Rica, urged other countries to step up marine conservation efforts in light of overlapping ocean crises, from plastic pollution and ocean acidification to rising sea levels that are jeopardizing small island nations. António Guterres, the U.N.'s secretary-general, said in his opening remarks that oceans are ' the ultimate shared resource ' and that they should foster multilateral cooperation. Whether the conference was a success depends on whom you ask. The most prominent outcome of the meeting was a flurry of voluntary and rhetorical commitments made by countries to conserve marine resources. Some of these, like France's pledge to limit a destructive kind of fishing called bottom trawling, were criticized as insufficient. France had also promoted the conference as a sort of deadline for reaching 60 ratifications of the high seas treaty — a threshold needed for it to enter into force — but this didn't happen, leading to disappointment among ocean advocates On the other hand, experts said there were real signs of progress. Germany and the European Union pledged hundreds of millions of dollars toward marine conservation, for example, and 11 governments signed a new pledge to safeguard coral reefs. Nearly 20 countries ratified the high seas treaty over just a few days, bringing the total up to 50. Angelique Pouponneau, the lead ocean negotiator for the Alliance of Small Island States, a negotiating bloc of 39 countries, said in a statement that the conference had been 'a moment of both progress and reflection.' Former U.S. secretary of state John Kerry, who also served as special envoy on climate under the Biden administration, noted 'critical momentum to safeguard our planet.' The biggest focus of the U.N. Ocean Conference was the high seas treaty, also known as the agreement on biodiversity beyond national jurisdictions. Adopted by U.N. member states in 2023 after more than 20 years of negotiations, the treaty aims to solve a longstanding problem in marine protection: how to safeguard parts of the ocean that lie outside countries' ' exclusive economic zones,' swaths of water that stretch about 200 nautical miles beyond their coastlines. As of now, countries can unilaterally create marine protected areas within their economic zones. They usually restrict resource extraction and industrial fishing in these areas, often with exceptions for small-scale fishers. Many countries have established such zones, but they need the high seas treaty to create a legal framework for doing the same thing in more distant waters. France had made it a priority to reach 60 ratifications of the high seas treaty either before or during the third Ocean Conference; doing so would kick off a 120-day countdown for the agreement to enter into force. Not enough countries signed on, though the conference did seem to accelerate the ratification process: At a special event on the conference's first day, 18 countries announced their ratification, including several small coastal states like Ivory Coast and Vanuatu, bringing the total to 50 (including the European Union, which has ratified it as a bloc). Each country has its own laws and processes for ratifying treaties; upon ratification, it formally lets the U.N. know and agrees to be bound by the terms of the relevant treaty. France's special envoy to the talks, Olivier Poivre d'Arvor, wrote on LinkedIn that he expects the remaining ratifications by the next U.N. General Assembly meeting this September. That would still be pretty fast, compared to other multilateral environmental agreements. The U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea, for example — the world's main legal framework for regulating maritime activities like shipping and fishing, and for establishing countries' exclusive economic zones —— took eight years to reach 60 ratifications. Only a few agreements, like the Paris Agreement to address global warming, were ratified faster. Rebecca Hubbard, director of a coalition of environmental nonprofits advocating for the high seas treaty called High Seas Alliance, said in a statement that the world was ' within striking distance ' of the 60th ratification. 'The treaty's entry into force could be triggered in a matter of weeks,' she said. Several experts Grist spoke with said marine protected areas are essential for advancing the U.N. target to protect 30 percent of Earth's land and water by 2030. Robert Blasiak, an associate professor of sustainable ocean stewardship at Stockholm University's Stockholm Resilience Center, estimated that without a high seas treaty, countries would have to designate some 90 percent of their waters as marine protected areas — an unlikely scenario. French Polynesia, however, made a splash at the Ocean Conference by declaring the entirety of its exclusive economic zone — all 1.9 million square miles of it — a marine protected area, making it the largest in the world. Other declarations and pledges from the U.N. Ocean Conference linked oceans to climate change, plastic pollution, economic inequality, and the erosion of public trust in science. During daily plenaries, many delegates delivered statements about a healthy ocean's role in mitigating global warming — it absorbs 90 percent of the excess heat generated by the burning of fossil fuels — and some called for nations to 'emphasize the essential role of ocean-based solutions' in their climate targets under the Paris Agreement, for example by protecting ocean ecosystems like mangroves and coral reefs. Angelika Lātūfuipeka Tukuʻaho, the princess of Tonga, called for whales to be recognized as legal persons — part of a broader movement to establish inherent rights for natural entities. Leaders from many countries also reiterated calls for a moratorium on deep-sea mining, including French president Emmanuel Macron, who called it ' madness ' to proceed with mineral extraction from the largely unexplored seafloor. Separately, nearly 100 national representatives released a statement reaffirming their commitment to crafting an 'ambitious' U.N. plastics treaty during negotiations that are set to resume this August. And a letter signed by more than 100 scientists, Indigenous leaders, and environmental advocates called for the adoption of an 'ocean protection principle' that prioritizes conservation over the 'irresponsible and unrestrained pursuit of profit.' One pledge that was not well received was French president Emmanuel Macron's promise to 'limit' bottom trawling, a type of commercial fishing that involves dragging a heavy net across the bottom of the ocean, kicking up debris and releasing carbon dioxide in the process. Environmental groups lambasted the plan for applying to only 4 percent of French waters — mostly in places where bottom trawling does not occur, according to the international nonprofit Oceana. 'These announcements are more symbolic than impactful,' the group's campaign director, Nicolas Fournier, said in a statement. Other groups said the conference hadn't placed enough emphasis on issues such as offshore oil and gas extraction and the rights of fishers. They noted with caution the nonbinding nature of many countries' pledges and urged world leaders to 'turn promises into action.' 'Ultimately, this summit produced a mere drop in the bucket of what we desperately need to protect the ocean — the lungs of our planet,' Enric Sala, a marine ecologist and National Geographic explorer, said in a statement.
