EU To Crack Down Further on Microplastics After Glitter Ban (theguardian.com) 49
The EU has announced further plans to crack down on microplastics after its ban on glitter came into force. From a report: The proposal, which tackles tiny pellets used in nearly all plastic products, aims to cut plastic pellet pollution by 74% by the end of the decade. Overall, it would lead to a 7% reduction in Europe's microplastic pollution, according to the European Commission. "The most important thing is to cut pollution at the source," said Virginijus Sinkevicius, EU commissioner for the environment, oceans and fisheries, in an interview with the Guardian. "What we are looking to do is basically ensure we drastically cut, at the source, pollution of microplastics."
Tiny, durable pellets of plastic -- also known as nurdles or nibs -- are melted down and reformed into everyday products, from office chairs to water bottles. But they leak into the environment at every stage of the supply chain. Over time, they break down into microplastics that are eaten and drunk by people and animals. The commission estimates between 52,000 and 184,000 tons of plastic pellets are released into the environment in the EU each year.
Tiny, durable pellets of plastic -- also known as nurdles or nibs -- are melted down and reformed into everyday products, from office chairs to water bottles. But they leak into the environment at every stage of the supply chain. Over time, they break down into microplastics that are eaten and drunk by people and animals. The commission estimates between 52,000 and 184,000 tons of plastic pellets are released into the environment in the EU each year.
Glitter ban?!?! (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Those were my thoughts exactly!!!
Won't somebody PLEASE think of the strippers....???
Re: Glitter ban?!?! (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Finger paint night?
Re: (Score:1)
Yeah, unfortunately countries can only tackle one topic at a time.
Maybe we should give them more personnel so they could do more things simultaneously...
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks for the laugh. I needed a pick me up today.
What the comedian is referring to is word that Ukraine absolutely devastated two Russian air bases [bbc.com] today thanks to the delivery ATACMS. 9 helicopters, dozens of personnel, at least one ammunition dump, and other logistics went poof in the blink of an eye.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
There's War in the Middle East and Russia is prepping to launch Nukes after America gave Ukraine long range missiles... but at least the EU is tackling the super important stuff..
I doubt Russia would dare do such a thing as stupid as launch any nuclear weapons. First, there's debate on if their nuclear weapons are even functional. Second, if they do launch a nuclear weapon then that gives NATO permission to get involved. Maybe a tactical nuclear weapon launched into Ukraine isn't enough to get the attention of NATO but once that line is crossed then every fighter jet out of Russia carries the potential destructive power of a flight of heavy bombers.
Russia has been testing NATO re
Re: (Score:2)
Are you suggesting we should have bureaucrats on environmental policy making war decisions? Or are you suggesting everyone should stop work right away until we wait for the people focused on the war to finish what they are doing?
not the problem (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
1) The EU does not have jurisdiction over China. 2) If you first want to convince China (or any foreign country) to do something, you hear people complaining "clean your house first". 3) When we decide to clean the house and ban the little things like plastic straws/cutlery, we hear that it's useless. 3) When we ban the big things like ICE by 2035 we hear it's impossible, won't work because people will work around it, we're ruining ourselves or some global conspiracy is behind it. All of that are excuses fo
Re: (Score:2)
3) When we ban the big things like ICE by 2035 we hear it's impossible, won't work because people will work around it, we're ruining ourselves or some global conspiracy is behind it. All of that are excuses for doing nothing at all.
I'd like to see someone do the math on how a hydrogen fuel cell aircraft would actually work. I have a suspicion on how that would end up.
During WW2 there was a mad dash to improve the performance of aircraft to gain an advantage in the war, and these efforts continued afterward out of a growing demand for commercial travel as well as the fight of a "cold war" that still demanded better and better warplanes. I realize that might be an odd introduction to the problems of hydrogen fuel cells but stick with
Re: (Score:2)
Microplastics are such a crock (Score:3, Funny)
Might as well appoint Gwyneth Paltrow to oversee the EU health department
Re: (Score:1)
i dont think theyre dumping tons at a time lol
I used to pick up nurdles (Score:2)
At the nearby plastics molding factory they had a small train yard. under every port of every car was a little pile of fresh plastic pellets. I assume they fall out of the vacuum nozzle every time it is removed. As a kid, I'd stop by and fill a gallon ziploc bag with nurdles. What did we with do with them? Stuffing for hacky sacks.
earth plus plastic (Score:1)
bad news for the plastic eating bacteria then
Re: (Score:2)
bad news for the plastic eating bacteria then
"Life... finds a way."
Life on Earth has survived earthquakes, super-volcanoes, and at least one asteroid that is miles in diameter slamming into the planet, so it seems to me that life on the planet will be fine in the long term. What our pollution means for human life is another matter, the ecosystem will be fine but humans may have a problem.
Some context (Score:1, Troll)
China and India each have over 1.3 billion people. Combined that's more than 1/3rd of the world population.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
EU has about 1/3rd the population of either nation with a total just north of 400 million.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
The African Union has a population similar to that of China or India with 1.3 billion.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
I should also note that the USA comes in third place on the list of nations by population, and that puts it in the general ballpa
Re: (Score:1)
Are you trying to imply that EU or US should no longer lead or take any initiatives to show how things could/should be done?
I'm pointing out that there's a need to compromise on pollution controls in their own nations because by driving mining, production, lumber, and other commodities to places like China, India, and Africa we end up going backwards on lowering air pollution, water pollution, CO2 emissions, endangering wildlife, and whatever else that is a concern in the global ecosystem. We could drive CO2 emissions to zero in the USA by banning everything everywhere but that would mean starvation and all kinds of industry mo
This is an argument (Score:2)
The idea is to make it seem like since China is unlikely to do anything that it's pointless to even try.
I'm not saying you're doing this on purpose, but what I am saying is that it's no accident that you're making this argument. Someone put it there for you to find and post to here.
As for the argument, this will directly benefit EU citizens. Not all Chinese microplastics make it to the EU. Reducing them
Re: (Score:1, Troll)
popular with climate change deniers and a classic way to prevent any action on global issues.
It is popular because there's plenty of truth to it.
The idea is to make it seem like since China is unlikely to do anything that it's pointless to even try.
Well, it is rather pointless to try after seeing how well things are going so far in places like Germany. I recall news of how entire factories in Germany are being boxed up and shipped to USA, Canada, Mexico, or some other place where natural gas is cheap because they can't stay in business anywhere in Europe, Africa, or much of Asia. Germany can claim they've been successful in lowering CO2 emissions but it has come with the cost of driving out many jo
EU plastic pollution isn't significant (Score:4, Informative)
Fragment from this article:
https://www.scientificamerican... [scientificamerican.com]
Rivers collectively dump anywhere from 0.47 million to 2.75 million metric tons of plastic into the seas every year, depending on the data used in the models. The 10 rivers that carry 93 percent of that trash are the Yangtze, Yellow, Hai, Pearl, Amur, Mekong, Indus and Ganges Delta in Asia, and the Niger and Nile in Africa. The Yangtze alone dumps up to an estimated 1.5 million metric tons of plastic waste into the Yellow Sea.
Ban on plastic straws or glitter is just idiotic in such circumstances.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Idiotic would be doing nothing because you can't control everybody else.
Get your own house in order and then set about "encouraging" others. A great deal of soft influence is available such as import regulations (which are not used enough, especially in the USA which simply out-sources around any limitations on pollution which actually makes the USA the top polluter on earth!)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
"Perfect is the enemy of good" I dunno, if they're protecting Europeans with the regs while everyone else is shitting in their kitchens it isn't really ineffective, just doesn't completely solve the problem. Like if power plants in Africa aren't using air scrubbers, that's bad... but if the one down the road from me is using them then I'm largely protected from the short term problems.
The problem you have with that logic is that it's two fold.
1. A lot of the waste that accumulates in those rivers is due to demand from western countries. Americans love to ignore externalities but it doesn't make them go away. If we stop demanding so much plastic and other waste, they'll stop producing it because there's no money in it.
2. It's got to start somewhere. That somewhere is often the EU or other developed countries who saw the harm in something and started removing the product that was cau
Re: (Score:2)
Biodegradable plastics (Score:2)
Need more biodegradable plastics. Not everything needs to be microbe resistant and even then you could have plastics that require, say, sea water to be broken down. I'd like to see an end to Styrofoam in its current chemical form, that shit gets everywhere when it is broken up and it cannot be recycled.
Sign me up (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Alas, since they're going on about microplastics, rather than the pain and suffering of the janitorial staff, I expect they're probably only banning _plastic_ glitter, which is a relatively recent development anyway. Traditional glitter (made from some combination of paper card, metallic inks, metal foils, and sometimes cut glass) would presumably remain legal. Most of the glitter that you're still picking out of the carpet and upholstery, has probably been embedded since before plastics were even inv
Re: (Score:2)
Craft Herpes (Score:2)
Glitter is the propaganda term!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
By becoming a citizen of any EU member. The EU citizenship will be automatically lost if that particular member leaves the union, though.
Glitter (Score:2)
Glitter: outing husbands' for their night at the strip club since 1967.
Too Far (Score:2)
What are they going ban next, unicorns and rainbows?
Re: (Score:3)
What are they going ban next, unicorns and rainbows?
Of course they won't ban unicorns and rainbows. They expect us to ride unicorns to work and school, and power our lights and computers with rainbows. Don't be so silly.
Are microplastics actually harmful? (Score:2)
They sound scary, but what's the actual harm? If we keep using them, what consequences do we face?
Re: (Score:2)
Since they're inert, they should be no more harmful than sand. And if sand is harmful, we should ban glass containers.