The last time I encountered a cotton bud was when my mother cleaned out my ears when I was about three. That must be around about the last time I used a plastic straw, too. As for a “stirrer” I don’t recall having stirred anything with anything other than a spoon.
I am sure such things exist, and that they are capable of bringing an albatross to its knees, as seen on Sir David Attenborough’s Blue Planet II. It is just that I suspect the ban on these items proposed by Michael Gove [Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs of the United Kingdom] is hardly scratching the surface of the problem of waste plastic in the environment.
It is never a good idea to make up policy on the hoof, or in this case dream it up in reaction to a programme on the telly, even if it did highlight the scale of a problem of which the public was previously only dimly aware. It is almost inevitable that doing so will produce a token gesture which misjudges the problem.
That large quantities of plastic have been getting into the oceans has been clear for a long time. It is one of the reasons why the Scottish government, followed by Defra, carried out investigations over a decade ago into the environmental harm wrought by plastic bags. The conclusion was surprising: that plastic bags, though harmful to the environment in some ways, were less damaging than any of the commonly used alternatives. Compared with a plastic bag, you would need to use a paper bag 150 times or more before it became as environmentally friendly as a plastic bag.
Enzyme to tackle plastic
As for bamboo coffee cups, the fashion accessory for the environmentally concerned middle classes, and shown off by Gove on his walk along Downing Street recently, anyone who thinks they are doing the planet a favour by using one ought first to research the subject of degradation of bamboo woodlands in China. What makes plastic objectionable is its longevity. It will not break down into its constituent chemicals in the way that wood, paper and other materials do — or at least we didn’t think so. Yet earlier last week we learnt that British scientists working in a Japanese waste disposal facility have accidently created an enzyme which does, indeed, break down PET — one of the most commonly used plastics, and widely used in the manufacture of drink bottles.
If we can develop an enzyme to break down one form of plastic, why not others? And if common plastics were to become biodegradable what would then be the objection to their use? Take away the degradation problem and plastics would be a very environmentally friendly option, which uses minimal energy to produce and to use. It may well become possible in the near future not just to deal with plastic waste through biological treatment but also to unleash agents into the oceans that are capable of making fast work of existing plastic waste.
When we do eventually get on top of the problem of plastic waste and pollution I have a strong suspicion that it will be technology that provides the answer — not a token ban on the production of a few everyday items, nor through well-meaning initiatives such as Costa’s coffee-cup return scheme, for which customers quickly lost enthusiasm. Ultimately, the solutions that succeed tend to be those which enable economic growth to continue, not those which rely on spirited self-denial by the population at large.
— The Telegraph Group Limited, London 2018
Ross Clark is a British journalist and author.
