A Life Cycle Analysis of PP and PS Cutlery

I. Abstract

More than 400 million tonnes of plastic are produced each year, posing significant detriments to the environment. Furthermore, approximately half of this plastic is designed for single use. This paper serves as an assessment of the costs that single-use plastic (SUP) cutlery inflicts on the environment, in contrast with those of biodegradable plastics. Using this framework, countries can implement tax systems that accurately reflect the environmental costs imposed by SUPs, thereby encouraging corporations to produce by directly factoring these costs into their decisions.

II. Introduction

Single-use plastics are prevalent tools in our society, integrated into almost every aspect of our lives. Unfortunately, they also pose significant harm to our environment. The United States still uses SUPs to a significant degree, largely because of their cost-effectiveness. The best model to understand how each unit of cutlery affects the environment is the life cycle assessment (LCA), which tracks the entire lifetime of a unit of plastic, noting the exact effect it has on the environment at each stage. SUP cutlery is generally derived from two plastic sources: polypropylene (PP) or polystyrene (PS).

III. Phase One of the LCA: Determining the Model

For this publication, the factors the model takes into account are raw material extraction, production pollution, and end-of-life costs, as these are the key differences relating to environmental harm between SUPs and biodegradable alternatives.

Polypropylene and polystyrene are both made from natural gas products. While this allows for a large resource of production materials, the extraction of natural gas causes significant harm to the environment, such as methane emissions. Although emissions resulting from transportation of SUPs can pose harm, these emissions will not count as a cost against the environment in this study since biodegradable plastics also require transportation with the same emissions costs.

IV. Phase Two of the LCA

Based on analyses of PP by the American Chemistry Council, the cradle-to-incoming emissions are 1.275 kg CO2 eq per kg of plastic. These same analyses performed on PS plastics demonstrated emissions of 2.722 kg CO2 eq per kg of plastic. PLA cutlery has a carbon emission of around 0.009 kg CO2e per kg production phase. PP emissions stand at 0.273 kg CO2 eq per kg plastic, and PS emissions are 0.184 kg CO2 eq per kg plastic.

SUP cutlery is difficult to recycle because of its design and size, with many recycling plants refusing to accept plastic cutlery because it falls through gaps in the machinery. As a consequence, an overwhelming majority of SUP cutlery ends up in landfills. Based on estimates from the OECD and OSTI reports, around 76 percent of plastic in America goes to landfills, and 15 percent is incinerated. Incineration practices emit 2.9 kg of CO2e for every kg of plastic burned.

V. International Efforts to Eliminate SUPs

Efforts from countries around the world to end the reign of SUPs vary from taking no action to implementing taxes to outright banning certain plastics. Canada has passed more progressive legislation, labeling plastics as a "Schedule 1 toxic substance," which lays the way for bans despite pushback from large oil companies.

Australia's political landscape bears many similarities to the United States. Each state in Australia has bans on some plastics, each with its own plan to reach nationally-agreed upon targets for waste and packaging. Research indicated that these bans have been highly effective in eliminating SUPs. Rwanda banned SUP bottles and bags in 2008, and the capital city, Kigali, is now considered the cleanest city in Africa.

VI. Conclusion

The harm of single-use plastics is evident, and so are the opportunities to shift away from their use. This paper utilizes evidence that clearly demonstrates the threat of SUPs and lays a framework for policies to eliminate them. Specifically, this paper can be utilized by policymakers to convert the outputs listed into monetary costs that SUP cutlery imposes on the environment, creating an excise tax system similar to that of cigarettes.