idw – Informationsdienst Wissenschaft
Nachrichten, Termine, Experten
Nachrichten, Termine, Experten
The world produces more than 460 million tons of plastic every year. One approach currently being advocated as a way out of the crisis is plastic credits. An international consortium of experts, led by Sangcheol Moon of the University of California Berkeley and including Melanie Bergmann from the Alfred Wegener Institute, shows in the journal One Earth that offsetting schemes such as plastic credits are far from being a solution. They could even exacerbate the crisis.
The essentials in brief:
• Plastic credits risk reproducing familiar pitfalls, such as falling short on additionality, permanence and the 'no-harm' principle.
• A 'ton-for-ton' logic oversimplifies the material, toxicological and contextual complexity of plastic pollution.
• Integrating plastic credits into Extended Producer Responsibility removes regulatory price signals for sustainable product design and introduces scope mismatches that weaken policy effectiveness.
As countries worldwide seek to tackle the social, political and economic impacts of plastic pollution, plastic credits have gained traction as a potential tool. “Plastic credits are typically allocated for every ton of plastic that is retrieved from the environment or waste stream”, explains Dr. Melanie Bergmann from the Alfred Wegener Institute, Helmholtz Centre for Polar and Marine Research (AWI) and co-author. The AWI biologist and other authors are part of the „Scientists Coalition for an Effective Plastics Treaty“. The international network of independent experts supports the United Nations' negotiations for a binding treaty that limits plastic pollution. „During the negotiations, plastic credits are promoted as a new type of financing and control measure,“ says Melanie Bergmann. „However, our peer-reviewed article highlights that plastic credits are not an appropriate approach to reducing plastic pollution or to financing reduction efforts.” Worse, they can create loopholes and even undermine efforts to reduce plastics by facilitating business-as-usual production growth, which is on track to triple by 2060. Greenhouse gas emissions could rise from the current level of 5.3 percent of the annual CO2 emissions to use up 30 percent of the remaining budget by 2030.
“Plastic credits are a false solution that can enable greenwashing while potentially sidestepping transparency and accountability” says Prof. Andrea Bonisoli-Alquati, an Associate Professor of Environmental Toxicology at California State Polytechnic University, Pomona, and co-author. “If we’re serious about ending plastic pollution, we must stop pretending we can offset harm and instead limit production and require companies to internalize the social costs of plastic pollution, by fully applying the polluter-pays principle.”
A ton does not equal a ton
The idea is not new; plastic credits are modeled on carbon credits. „They also share many of the same failings as carbon offset credits“, says Sangcheol Moon, an environmental researcher at the University of California, Berkeley, and lead author of the study. „Projects often credit activities that would have occurred without the credit, and allow disposal pathways with varying degrees of reversal risks. In some cases, plastic credit systems have led to health harms in nearby communities and co-opted informal waste work without meaningful safeguards.“
The calculation of plastic credits is based on the premise that one ton of plastic waste that is removed or recycled equals one ton in the “plastic footprint” – a concept that is not universally agreed upon and can vary significantly across contexts. However, this “one ton equals one ton”- fails to capture the complexity of plastics: „This approach overlooks the enormous diversity in the composition of plastics and the resulting environmental and health impacts“, says Sangcheol Moon. “Unlike greenhouse gas emissions – where a standardized metric like global warming potential, expressed in CO₂-equivalent is scientifically accepted because most greenhouse gases are well-mixed in the atmosphere and their climate impact does not vary significantly by source or location – there is no universal metric for plastic pollution.” Plastics differ widely in toxicity, recyclability, and socioeconomic impacts, thus a ton of clear, highly recyclable PET bottles cannot be equated with a ton of non-recyclable packaging made from multilayer materials and different sets of chemical additives. This flawed equivalence calls into question the logic of offsetting with plastic credits, since equal weight does not imply equal impact in the case of plastics.
About the global negotiations for a binding UN plastics treaty
Since 2022, delegates from all 193 UN member states as well as representatives from science, civil society and business have been meeting to draft a legally binding agreement (UN Plastics Treaty) to reduce plastic pollution. The original negotiation timeline has been extended, with the next round of negotiations taking place in Geneva from August 5 to 14, 2025. https://www.awi.de/en/focus/marine-litter/un-plastics-treaty.html
Joint press release of AWI, University of California Berkeley, California State Polytechnic University, Sorbonne Université.
Melanie Bergmann
Melanie.Bergmann@awi.de
+49 (0) 471 4831-1739
Sangcheol Moon
sangcheol_moon@berkeley.edu
https://ourenvironment.berkeley.edu/users/1652459
Andrea Bonisoli-Alquati
aalquati@cpp.edu
https://experts.cpp.edu/member/andrea-bonisoli-alquati/
doi.org/10.1016/j.oneear.2025.101303.
http://www.awi.de/en/about-us/service/press.html
Even though plastic credits are being promoted as an innovative way of addressing plastic pollution, ...
Sangcheol Moo
Sangcheol Moo
Criteria of this press release:
Journalists, Scientists and scholars, Students, all interested persons
Environment / ecology
transregional, national
Cooperation agreements, Miscellaneous scientific news/publications
English
Even though plastic credits are being promoted as an innovative way of addressing plastic pollution, ...
Sangcheol Moo
Sangcheol Moo
You can combine search terms with and, or and/or not, e.g. Philo not logy.
You can use brackets to separate combinations from each other, e.g. (Philo not logy) or (Psycho and logy).
Coherent groups of words will be located as complete phrases if you put them into quotation marks, e.g. “Federal Republic of Germany”.
You can also use the advanced search without entering search terms. It will then follow the criteria you have selected (e.g. country or subject area).
If you have not selected any criteria in a given category, the entire category will be searched (e.g. all subject areas or all countries).
