According to statistics from the Environmental Protection Department of the Hong Kong SAR Government in 2022, 227 tons of plastic and styrofoam tableware are discarded in Hong Kong every day, which is a huge amount of more than 82,000 tons every year. In order to deal with the environmental crisis caused by disposable plastic products, the SAR government announced that laws related to the control of disposable plastic tableware and other plastic products will be implemented from April 22, 2024, marking the beginning of a new chapter in Hong Kong’s environmental protection actions. However, the road to sustainable alternatives is not easy, and biodegradable materials, while promising, face complex challenges. In this context, we should rationally examine every alternative, avoid the “green trap”, and promote truly environmentally friendly solutions.
On April 22, 2024, Hong Kong ushered in the first stage of implementation of laws related to the control of disposable plastic tableware and other plastic products. This means that it is prohibited to sell and provide 9 types of disposable plastic tableware that are small in size and difficult to recycle (covering expanded polystyrene tableware, straws, stirrers, plastic cups and food containers, etc.), as well as cotton swabs, umbrella covers, hotels, etc. Common products such as disposable toiletries. The purpose of this positive move is to address the environmental harm caused by single-use plastic products, while actively encouraging individuals and businesses to switch to more environmentally friendly and sustainable alternatives.
The scenes along Hong Kong’s coastline sound the alarm for environmental protection. Do we really want to live in such an environment? Why is the earth here? However, what is even more worrying is that Hong Kong’s plastic recycling rate is extremely low! According to 2021 data, only 5.7% of recycled plastics in Hong Kong have been effectively recycled. This shocking number urgently requires us to take immediate action to face the problem of plastic waste and actively promote the transition of society to the use of more environmentally friendly and sustainable alternatives.
So what are sustainable alternatives?
Although various industries are actively exploring biodegradable materials such as polylactic acid (PLA) or bagasse (fibrous material extracted from sugar cane stalks) as a ray of hope to solve the problem of plastic pollution, the problem is The core is to verify whether these alternatives are actually more environmentally friendly. It is true that biodegradable materials will break down and degrade faster, thereby reducing the risk of permanent pollution of the environment from plastic waste. However, what we should not ignore is that the amount of greenhouse gases released during the degradation process of these materials (such as polylactic acid or paper) in Hong Kong’s landfills is much higher than that of traditional plastics.
In 2020, the Life Cycle Initiative completed a meta-analysis. The analysis provides a qualitative summary of life cycle assessment reports on various packaging materials, and the conclusion is disappointing: bio-based plastics (biodegradable plastics) made from natural materials such as cassava and corn have a negative impact on the environment Performance in the impact dimension is not better than fossil-based plastics as we expected
Lunch boxes made of polystyrene, polylactic acid (corn), polylactic acid (tapioca starch)
Bio-based plastics are not necessarily better than fossil-based plastics. Why is this?
One important reason is that the agricultural production phase is expensive: producing bio-based plastics (biodegradable plastics) requires large areas of land, large amounts of water, and chemical inputs such as pesticides and fertilizers, which inevitably Emissions to soil, water and air.
The manufacturing stage and the weight of the product itself are also factors that cannot be ignored. Take lunch boxes made of bagasse as an example. Since bagasse itself is a useless by-product, its impact on the environment during agricultural production is relatively small. However, the subsequent bleaching process of bagasse pulp and the wastewater discharge generated after washing the pulp have had adverse effects in many areas such as climate, human health and ecological toxicity. On the other hand, although the raw material extraction and production of polystyrene foam boxes (PS foam boxes) also involves a large number of chemical and physical processes, since bagasse has a greater weight, it naturally requires more materials, which is very difficult. This may lead to relatively higher total emissions over the entire life cycle. Therefore, we should recognize that although the methods of production and evaluation of different products vary widely, it is difficult to easily conclude which option is the “best choice” for single-use alternatives.
So does this mean we should switch back to plastic?
The answer is no. Based on these current findings, it should also be clear that alternatives to plastic may also come at the expense of the environment. If these single-use alternatives do not provide the sustainable solutions we hope for, then we should re-evaluate the necessity of single-use products and explore possible options to reduce or even avoid their use. The SAR government’s many implementation measures, such as setting up preparation periods, promoting public education and publicity, and establishing an information platform to share alternatives to single-use plastic products, all reflect a key factor that cannot be ignored that affects Hong Kong’s “plastic-free” process, which is whether Hong Kong citizens are willing Embrace these alternatives, such as offering to bring your own water bottle and utensils. Such shifts are critical to promoting environmentally friendly lifestyles.
For those citizens who forget (or are unwilling) to bring their own containers, exploring a borrowing and returning system for reusable containers has become a novel and feasible solution. Through this system, customers can easily borrow reusable containers and return them to designated locations after use. Compared with disposable items, increasing the reuse rate of these containers, adopting efficient cleaning processes, and continuously optimizing the design of the borrowing and returning system can be effective at a medium return rate (80%, ~5 cycles) Reduce greenhouse gas emissions (12-22%), material usage (34-48%), and comprehensively save water consumption by 16% to 40%. In this way, BYO cup and reusable container loan and return systems can become the most sustainable option in takeout and delivery situations.
Hong Kong’s ban on single-use plastic products is undoubtedly an important step in dealing with the crisis of plastic pollution and environmental degradation. Although it is unrealistic to completely get rid of plastic products in our lives, we should realize that simply promoting disposable alternatives is not a fundamental solution and may also cause new environmental problems; on the contrary, we should help the earth get rid of the bondage of “plastic” The key is to raise public awareness: let everyone understand where to completely avoid the use of plastic and packaging, and when to choose reusable products, while striving to minimize the use of single-use products to promote greener , sustainable lifestyle.
Post time: Aug-14-2024