Peak plastics:

bending the consumption curve

Only bold and sweeping reforms will bend the plastic consumption curve. Achieving a reduction in plastic pollution will require all stakeholders–from the petrochemical companies to the consumers–to control the crisis. A piecemeal approach won’t work.

Full report

Workbook

Methodology

E
x
e
c
u
t
i
v
e

S
u
m
m
a
r
y

The world will continue to drown in plastic waste unless a bold and comprehensive set of policy changes are agreed by the UN. To bring about peak plastic consumption, these policies would need to be at the most ambitious end of the spectrum being debated by UN treaty negotiators, which include governments, the petrochemical and consumer goods industries, and environmental groups. This is according to research by Back to Blue, an initiative of Economist Impact and the Nippon Foundation, which models the impact of a selection of policies being considered by world leaders as they draft a legally binding treaty to stem plastic pollution.

L
i
f
e
c
y
c
l
e

o
f

w
a
s
t
e

1

Extraction & conversion

The majority (99%) of plastic is derived from oil. The majority of plastic resin is produced in North America and Western Europe. China produces nearly a third.

2

Manufacturing & production

Plastic converters modify or combine virgin or recycled materials to manufacture plastic products ranging from carrier bags to car interiors, toothbrushes to drainpipes.

3

Use

Retailers and consumers use under half (45%) of all manufactured plastic in packaging with building and construction using around 19%.

4

Disposal & end of life

Less than 10% of plastic waste generated has been recycled; 14% incinerated and 76% disposed of in landfills or released into the environment. Large amounts of plastic waste are exported with the majority being sent to countries with limited waste management capacities.

O
u
r

k
e
y

f
i
n
d
i
n
g
s

Bold reforms needed

None of the three interventions we modelled will bring about peak plastic consumption by 2050. An integrated approach combining all three makes a dent—growth of 1.25 times the 2019 figure, compared with the baseline forecast of 1.73 times.

A ban on problematic, unnecessary single-use plastic items yields the heaviest impact.

A globally agreed ban on single-use plastic products will do more to curb plastic consumption growth than a mandatory EPR and a tax on virgin resin. Under the SUPP ban, plastic consumption in 2050 is 1.48 times the 2019 figure.

EPR will have a minimal impact on consumption, but is a vital part of the solution

EPR policies will require industry players that introduce packaging to the market to cover the cost of collecting and processing it after use. By 2050, consumption will grow to 1.66 times the 2019 figure. EPR is nonetheless vital, as it will improve waste collection and increase recycling rates, which will curtail plastic leakage into the environment.

A carbon tax on virgin plastic must be aggressive to be impactful

An environmental tax would raise the cost on the principal input–virgin resin–helping to redress the existing anomaly of plastic prices that do not fully reflect its true cost to society. Our modelling suggests the impact of such a tax on consumption growth will be limited: consumption in 2050 is likely to be 1.57 times the 2019 figure, not much lower than the 1.73-times growth in our baseline forecast.

0M

Tonnes

2000

0M

Tonnes

2019

0M

Tonnes

2040

0M

Tonnes

2060

1

million tonnes

3

empire state buildings

460

million tonnes

1,256

empire state buildings

I
n

t
h
e

a
b
s
e
n
c
e

o
f

c
o
n
c
r
e
t
e

p
o
l
i
c
y

a
c
t
i
o
n
,

t
h
e

O
E
C
D

p
r
e
d
i
c
t
s

t
h
a
t

p
l
a
s
t
i
c

c
o
n
s
u
m
p
t
i
o
n

c
o
u
l
d

r
i
s
e

t
o

a

b
i
l
l
i
o
n

t
o
n
n
e
s

b
y
 
2
0
6
0
.

Source: OECD Global Plastics Outlook Database

P
l
a
s
t
i
c

w
a
s
t
e

G
E
N
E
R
A
T
I
O
N

Between 2000 and 2019, global plastic waste generated rose from 156 million tonnes to 353 million tonnes, a 126% growth rate. Assuming the UN treaty spurs dedicated action among national governments to combat plastic waste generation, this rate of growth is likely to slow down to 74% by 2040.

Source: OECD Global Plastics Outlook Database

2000

156.2million tonnes

To date, efforts to combat plastic pollution have suffered from three major weaknesses:

Narrow (national) focus:

With the notable exception of the EU, attempts to regulate parts of the plastic lifecycle have been left mainly to national or subnational authorities. Country-level initiatives are too fragmented, however, to generate a significant global impact.

Reliance on voluntarism:

Many governments at national, regional and municipal level have put rules in place on the sale or use of plastics that organisations or individuals must comply with. But many potentially impactful programmes are non‑mandatory.

Limited scope:

It was once thought that recycling was the answer to plastic pollution. But as OECD recycling data confirms, current efforts are not making a big enough impact to dent plastic pollution, much less to support plastic circularity.

U
N
E
P

P
R
E
D
I
C
T
S

T
H
E

A
M
O
U
N
T

O
F

P
L
A
S
T
I
C

I
N

T
H
E

O
C
E
A
N

W
I
L
L

N
E
A
R
L
Y

T
R
I
P
L
E

B
Y

2
0
4
0
,

A
D
D
I
N
G

U
P

T
O

3
7

M
I
L
L
I
O
N

T
O
N
N
E
S

M
O
R
E

W
A
S
T
E

E
V
E
R
Y
 
Y
E
A
R
.

2016

14million tonnes

P
E
A
K

P
L
A
S
T
I
C
S

L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
E

By 2050, plastic consumption is expected to almost double without any policy interventions (see baseline series in the chart below). Even with all the selected policy interventions, consumption growth is expected to slow down, but will still be at least 1.25 times the 2019 consumption levels.

Baseline

SCENARIO 1

A phased ban on single-use plastic products (SUPP)

SCENARIO 2

A mandatory EPR scheme imposed on retailers and brands

SCENARIO 3

Plastic tax on virgin resin production

ALL SCENARIOS

SCENARIO 1

A phased ban on single-use plastic products (SUPPs)

A mandatory ban on unnecessary and problematic plastics which have the potential to become litter. Common items banned under this measure include plastic cutlery, tableware, straws and stirrers.

SCENARIO 2

A mandatory EPR scheme imposed on packaging producers and industrial consumers (mainly FMCG companies)

A mandatory EPR policy requires industry players that introduce packaging to the market to cover the cost of collecting and processing it after use.

SCENARIO 3

Plastic tax on virgin resin production

An environmental tax would raise the cost on the principal input–virgin resin–helping to generate funds for scaling plastic waste management solutions and redress the existing anomaly of plastic prices that do not reflect environmental externalities.

INTEGRATED APPROACH

Combining solutions

We also assess the impact of a combined approach of applying all three policy options simultaneously in order to achieve the most decrease in consumption.

S
c
e
n
a
r
i
o

1
:
B
A
N
N
I
N
G

S
I
N
G
L
E
-
U
S
E
P
L
A
S
T
I
C

P
R
O
D
U
C
T
S

Full report

Workbook

Methodology

Scenario 1:
BANNING SINGLE-USE PLASTIC PRODUCTS

Eliminating low-utility, problematic and avoidable plastic through bans is one approach to help reduce leakage into marine and land environments. Currently, national and subnational product bans focus on carrier bags and food service items. In this scenario, we test if, and at what rates, bans on single-use plastic products in the G20 countries can bend the consumption curve to achieve peak plastic.

A
s
s
u
m
p
t
i
o
n
s

Differing ban rates

We use ban rates already in place in some countries. For those that do not have bans, we assume the global plastics treaty will make such bans mandatory, beginning from 2025. We assume that the ban rates will begin between 0.5% – 1% of the existing volume of plastic waste for most countries.

Incremental increases in ban rates

We expect countries to continue widening the scope of their bans to include more products. We quantify this in the model by adding a 10% increment to the previous year’s ban rate every year, across all countries.

S
c
e
n
a
r
i
o

1
:

B
a
n
n
i
n
g

s
i
n
g
l
e
-
u
s
e

p
l
a
s
t
i
c

p
r
o
d
u
c
t
s

To understand the effects of the policy interventions, we compare future plastic consumption levels with consumption levels in the base year of 2019. Under the baseline scenario without any policy interventions, we expect plastic consumption in 2050 to be 451mt, nearly two times higher than in 2019. In the case of a staged ban on single-use plastic products, 2050 consumption will be 14% lower than the baseline, at 385mt. This is a slower rate of growth, but still 1.48 times the 2019 figure in 2050.

To make a significant dent in the growth of plastic consumption, the bans on single-use plastic products imposed by countries must be considerably more aggressive than those considered here. This can be achieved without unduly limiting the production of plastic products that are necessary, such as those used for medical or for food hygiene purposes. But there are unnecessary and plastic items that are not yet being considered as part of country bans, including extremely hazardous ones such as fishing nets.

Decline in plastic consumption under a ban on single-use plastic products

Common items being banned are plastic cups, forks, spoons, plates, straws, stirrers, balloon sticks and cigarette filters.

South Korea was the the first mover in this space, banning single-use plastic items in 2019.

Meanwhile, the US remains a laggard, as only a handful of American states have introduced bans.

STATUS OF BANS ON SINGLE-USE PLASTIC PRODUCTS IN G20 COUNTRIES

2019

2020

2021

2022

South Korea

France

UK

Australia

Germany

China

Canada

India

Japan

Italy

THE FOLLOWING COUNTRIES CURRENTLY DO NOT HAVE A BAN ON SINGLE-USE PLASTIC PRODUCTS

USA

Saudi Arabia

Indonesia

Turkey

Russia

Brazil

South Africa

Mexico

Argentina

*Please note that the above is not an exhaustive list of global SUPP ban status. In this research, we have only covered the 19 countries in the G20 group.

I
t

i
s

i
m
p
o
r
t
a
n
t

t
h
a
t

F
M
C
G

c
o
m
p
a
n
i
e
s

t
r
a
n
s
i
t
i
o
n

f
r
o
m

u
s
i
n
g

p
l
a
s
t
i
c

p
a
c
k
a
g
i
n
g

t
o

e
c
o
-
f
r
i
e
n
d
l
y

a
l
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
v
e
s
.

B
a
n
s

m
u
s
t

t
h
e
r
e
f
o
r
e

b
e

a
c
c
o
m
p
a
n
i
e
d

b
y

m
e
a
s
u
r
e
s

t
h
a
t

e
n
c
o
u
r
a
g
e

t
h
e

d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t

a
n
d

s
c
a
l
i
n
g

u
p

o
f

a
l
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
v
e

t
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
i
e
s

a
n
d

a
l
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
v
e

m
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
s
.
"

Suneel Pandey

Director of the Environment and Waste Management Division at The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI), New Delhi, India

S
c
e
n
a
r
i
o

2
:
M
A
N
D
A
T
O
R
Y

E
x
t
e
n
d
e
d

P
r
o
d
u
c
e
r
R
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
y

s
c
h
e
m
e
s

Full report

Workbook

Methodology

Scenario 2:
Mandatory Extended Producer Responsibility Schemes

Extended producer responsibility schemes enable producers to contribute to the end-of-life costs of products they place on the market. In this scenario, we test the potential of applying mandatory extended producer responsibility schemes to achieve a decline in plastic consumption. This scenario uses the price effect to understand the impact on demand.

A
s
s
u
m
p
t
i
o
n
s

Mandatory EPR policy

All businesses are responsible for collection and sorting of post-consumer discarded packaging that they placed on the market and sending it for recycling.

Strict regulation of EPR implementation

Though ambitious, we still assume that enforcement of EPR regulations will be strictly enforced by governments and regulations to monitor compliance by businesses.

Industrial consumers pass on costs to retail consumers

We assume the costs of collecting, sorting and recycling are going to be passed on to the retail consumers, which will lead to an increase in retail prices of various consumer products.

Price effects

A univariate regression is used to calculate the price elasticity for each country and for each polymer category. Elasticity reflects the sensitivity of demand to price changes. We assume an average 2% increase in polymer prices for retail consumers.

S
c
e
n
a
r
i
o

2
:

M
a
n
d
a
t
o
r
y

e
x
t
e
n
d
e
d

p
r
o
d
u
c
e
r

r
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
y

s
c
h
e
m
e
s

With a global mandate to implement EPR, plastic consumption grows at a slower rate over the forecast period than in the baseline scenario of no policy interventions. The impact is marginal in the initial years of the mandate (we assume its implementation begins in 2025) but grows the longer EPR is in place. By 2050, worldwide plastic consumption under the EPR scenario rises to 434mt, which is 1.66 times the 2019 figure. This compares with baseline forecast growth that is 1.73 times the 2019 figure.

However, the EPR impact on consumption growth will be more limited over the long run than that achieved by either a ban on single-use plastic products or a plastic tax. At the assumed rate of price increase, there will be no plateau in polymer consumption by the middle of this century.

While the result of this scenario is less encouraging than the others, a mandatory EPR policy will make producers, retailers and brands responsible for the end-of-life of the products they put on the market. This should improve recyclability of plastic products by motivating industrial consumers to use packaging that is easy to collect, sort and recycle.

Effective recycling is integral to any effort to reduce plastic pollution and support circularity. Governments and industry groups have been actively supporting recycling since the 1980s yet, less than one-tenth of the plastic that has been produced has been recycled. There are several reasons for this, foremost among which is cost.

Decline in plastic consumption under a mandatory EPR scheme

P
l
a
s
t
i
c

W
a
s
t
e
,

B
y

E
n
d
-
0
f
-
l
i
f
e
-
f
a
t
e
,

2
0
1
9

ONLY 9.3% OF PLASTIC WASTE IS RECYCLED

The rest is either incinerated, mismanaged or littered.

Source: OECD Global Plastics Outlook Database

0.0%

Recycled

0.0%

Incinerated

0.0%

Mismanaged

0.0%

Landfilled

F
o
r

m
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
s

t
h
a
t

h
a
v
e

t
o

e
n
t
e
r

t
h
e

w
a
s
t
e

s
t
r
e
a
m
,

w
e
l
l
-
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
d

E
P
R

o
f
f
e
r
s

t
h
e

b
e
s
t

o
p
p
o
r
t
u
n
i
t
y

f
o
r

h
i
g
h
-
q
u
a
l
i
t
y

r
e
c
y
c
l
i
n
g
.

I
f

s
e
t

u
p

r
i
g
h
t
,

E
P
R

p
r
o
v
i
d
e
s

m
u
c
h

b
e
t
t
e
r

v
i
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
y

o
v
e
r

t
h
e

f
l
o
w

o
f

m
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
s

g
o
i
n
g

t
h
r
o
u
g
h

t
h
e

w
a
s
t
e

m
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t

s
y
s
t
e
m
,

m
a
k
i
n
g

i
t

e
a
s
i
e
r

f
o
r

m
a
n
u
f
a
c
t
u
r
e
r
s

l
i
k
e

U
n
i
l
e
v
e
r

t
o

i
n
c
r
e
a
s
e

i
t
s

l
e
v
e
l
s

o
f

r
e
c
y
c
l
e
d

c
o
n
t
e
n
t
.
"

Ed Shepherd

Senior global sustainability manager – circular economy, Unilever

S
c
e
n
a
r
i
o

3
:
P
r
o
d
u
c
e
r

t
a
x

o
n

v
i
r
g
i
n

r
e
s
i
n

Full report

Workbook

Methodology

Scenario 3:
Producer tax on virgin resin

Plastic products are widely used because they are available at affordable prices. However, the current price of virgin plastic resin used in packaging and other products only incorporates the price of production and not the social and environmental externalities of producing it.

The third scenario we examine seeks to change that by imposing a tax on the production of virgin resin, to be levied on its producers and collected by governments. Our assumption is that a tax that brings the price of plastic production to a level that reflects its true total cost should bring a decline in consumption. This is arguably the most contentious of the main policy measures the treaty negotiators are likely to consider. Virgin polymer producers have been vocal opponents of a plastic tax where they have been proposed in the past.

A
s
s
u
m
p
t
i
o
n
s

Carbon potential

We assume plastics to have a global warming potential of between 1.7kg and 3.5kg of CO2, depending on the type of plastic. For every kilogram of fossil-fuel based plastic produced, anywhere between 1.7 and 3.5 kilograms of carbon dioxide is released.

EFFECTIVE CARBON RATE

The effective carbon rate is a combination of three components: emission permit price, carbon tax and fuel excise tax. The inclusion of each of these components incentivises the use of lower carbon energy alternatives by making it costlier to use energy sources with a high carbon footprint.

Carbon Price Benchmark

A benchmark value in the form of a minimum carbon price for all energy related carbon emissions. Carbon prices may be set at or above this benchmark.

Price effects

The increase in carbon taxes is absorbed by polymer prices, leading to virgin plastic getting costlier over time. We use elasticity to arrive at the final price increase in plastic prices.

S
c
e
n
a
r
i
o

3
:

P
r
o
d
u
c
e
r

t
a
x

o
n

v
i
r
g
i
n

r
e
s
i
n

The application of an effective tax reduces the growth of plastic consumption by mid-century compared with the baseline scenario, but it does not stem or reverse it, similar to the ban on single-use plastic products and mandatory EPR scenarios. By 2050, worldwide plastic consumption with the application of a carbon tax rises to 409mt, which is 1.57 times the 2019 figure, compared with baseline forecast growth of 1.73 times.

Taxes upstream would have more of an impact on plastic consumption growth in the G20 countries than an EPR mandate but less than a ban on single-use plastic products. It is likely that a suite of taxes is needed to drive the response that is needed from producers and consumers.

Decline in plastic consumption under a tax on virgin resin

UK

£200 ($247.42) per tonne on plastic packaging components

Italy

€0.45 ($0.49) per kilogramme of plastic for single-use items

Japan

A mandatory fee of ¥3-5 ($0.03-$0.05) for each plastic bag

Indonesia

Excise tax of Rp450-500 ($0.03) per plastic bag, to be fully implemented

C
o
n
c
l
u
s
i
o
n

Full report

Workbook

Methodology

A
c
h
i
e
v
i
n
g

a

r
e
d
u
c
t
i
o
n

i
n

p
l
a
s
t
i
c

p
o
l
l
u
t
i
o
n

i
s

g
o
i
n
g

t
o

r
e
q
u
i
r
e

a
l
l

t
h
e

s
t
a
k
e
h
o
l
d
e
r
s

t
o

i
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t

a
l
l

t
h
e

k
n
o
w
n

s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
s
.
"

Winnie Lau

Project Director, Preventing Ocean Plastics, The Pew Charitable Trusts

We have examined the potential impact of the three policy measures separately, but the future plastics treaty will ideally call for the implementation of multiple measures.

In our analysis, combining a ban on single-use plastic products with an EPR mandate and a production tax will certainly do more to flatten the consumption growth curve in the G20 countries than any of these measures in isolation.

But the impact of this integrated approach is disappointingly limited: 2050 consumption of 325mt is still 1.25 times higher than in 2019.

P
l
a
s
t
i
c

c
o
n
s
u
m
p
t
i
o
n

(
m
i
l
l
i
o
n

t
o
n
n
e
s
)

Year	Baseline	S1 (SUPPs ban)	S2 (EPR Mandate)	S3 (Tax on production)	Integrated approach
0	0	0	0	0	0
0	0	0	0	0	0
0	0	0	0	0	0
0	0	0	0	0	0

P
l
a
s
t
i
c

c
o
n
s
u
m
p
t
i
o
n

i
n

2
0
5
0

i
s

e
x
p
e
c
t
e
d

t
o

b
e

1.73

1.66

1.57

1.48

1.25

T
h
e
r
e

s
h
o
u
l
d

b
e

n
o

i
l
l
u
s
i
o
n
s

t
h
a
t

t
h
e

t
r
e
a
t
y

n
e
g
o
t
i
a
t
i
o
n
s

w
i
l
l

b
e

a
n
y
t
h
i
n
g

b
u
t

d
i
f
f
i
c
u
l
t

a
n
d

p
o
s
s
i
b
l
y

t
r
e
a
c
h
e
r
o
u
s
.

P
e
a
k

P
l
a
s
t
i
c
s

v
i
s
u
a
l
i
s
a
t
i
o
n

The data visualisation tool allows the user to experiment with differing levers in the above-mentioned scenarios to test if a peak in consumption can be achieved by choosing a more aggressive ban/tax rate. We have modelled the output under three assumptions for each scenario: a minimum rate, an intermediate rate and a maximum rate.

A minimum rate assumes that the treaty is able to enforce the bare minimum level of efforts needed to be implemented by countries. An intermediate rate assumes that countries actively work to choose higher ban rates and tax rates. A maximum rate allows the user to select the most aggressive rates of bans and taxes that are currently feasible.

The user can choose what level of ban/tax rate they would like to see for each scenario. Based on the selection of these scenario levers, the model will generate a new set of results. These results are available to be downloaded into a data workbook.

P
E
A
K

P
L
A
S
T
I
C

D
A
T
A

V
I
S
U
A
L
I
S
A
T
I
O
N

OVERALL

COUNTRY DATA

METHODOLOGY

Baseline

SCENARIO 1

A phased ban on single-use plastic products (SUPP)

SCENARIO 2

A mandatory EPR scheme policy imposed on consumers

SCENARIO 3

Plastic taxes on virgin resin production

ALL SCENARIOS

Select Country

Full report

Workbook

Methodology

In March 2022, the United Nations Environment Assembly in Nairobi adopted resolution 5/14 “End plastic pollution: towards an internationally legally binding instrument.” This resolution endorses the creation of an internationally legally binding agreement by 2024 and focuses on the complete life cycle of plastic, including design, production and disposal. The treaty negotiations began in November 2022 and are expected to stage a debate on the range of policy options that can be adopted to address plastic pollution.

In tandem with the ongoing treaty negotiations, the ‘Peak Plastics’ workstream under the Back to Blue initiative, has been developing an evidence-based approach to form an understanding of the extent to which selected policy measures can bend the plastic consumption curve that will help to reduce plastic pollution.

We adopt a scenario analysis approach testing the effectiveness of three possible policy options to prevent future plastic pollution The selection of the three scenarios under consideration reflects the lifecycle approach to tackling the plastic crisis. The key underlying assumption in all these scenarios is that compliance with these policies is mandatory for all industry participants. The countries in scope are the 19 countries of the G20. This selection was made as these 19 countries account for almost 78% of global GDP.

For the full technical methodology, please download the methodology note.

You can change scenario options in order to see how the peak consumption changes accordingly.

Scenario 1: Ban rate

Minimum

Intermediate

Maximum

Scenario 2: Price change due to EPR

Minimum

Intermediate

Maximum

Scenario 3: Tax rate

Minimum

Intermediate

Maximum

Full report

Workbook

Methodology

Full report

Workbook

Methodology

Back to Blue events

Other Ocean Events

Back to Blue will be participating inthe following events:

Featured

Suggested searches

Search:

100% Peak

Peak plastics:

bending the consumption curve

Executive Summary

Lifecycle of waste

Extraction & conversion

Manufacturing & production

Use

Disposal & end of life

Our key findings

Bold reforms needed

A ban on problematic, unnecessary single-use plastic items yields the heaviest impact.

EPR will have a minimal impact on consumption, but is a vital part of the solution

A carbon tax on virgin plastic must be aggressive to be impactful

In the absence of concrete policy action, the OECD predicts that plastic consumption could rise to a billion tonnes by 2060.

Plastic waste GENERATION

To date, efforts to combat plastic pollution have suffered from three major weaknesses:

Narrow (national) focus:

Reliance on voluntarism:

Limited scope:

UNEP PREDICTS THE AMOUNT OF PLASTIC IN THE OCEAN WILL NEARLY TRIPLE BY 2040, ADDING UP TO 37 MILLION TONNES MORE WASTE EVERY YEAR.

PEAK PLASTICS LANDSCAPE

Scenario 1:BANNING SINGLE-USEPLASTIC PRODUCTS

Scenario 1:BANNING SINGLE-USE PLASTIC PRODUCTS

Assumptions

Differing ban rates

Incremental increases in ban rates

Scenario 1: Banning single-use plastic products

Decline in plastic consumption under a ban on single-use plastic products

Common items being banned are plastic cups, forks, spoons, plates, straws, stirrers, balloon sticks and cigarette filters.

South Korea was the the first mover in this space, banning single-use plastic items in 2019.

Meanwhile, the US remains a laggard, as only a handful of American states have introduced bans.

STATUS OF BANS ON SINGLE-USE PLASTIC PRODUCTS IN G20 COUNTRIES

2019

2020

2021

2022

THE FOLLOWING COUNTRIES CURRENTLY DO NOT HAVE A BAN ON SINGLE-USE PLASTIC PRODUCTS

It is important that FMCG companies transition from using plastic packaging to eco-friendly alternatives. Bans must therefore be accompanied by measures that encourage the development and scaling up of alternative technologies and alternative materials."

Scenario 2:MANDATORY Extended ProducerResponsibility schemes

Scenario 2:Mandatory Extended Producer Responsibility Schemes

Assumptions

Mandatory EPR policy

Strict regulation of EPR implementation

Industrial consumers pass on costs to retail consumers

Price effects

Scenario 2: Mandatory extended producer responsibility schemes

Decline in plastic consumption under a mandatory EPR scheme

Plastic Waste, By End-0f-life-fate, 2019

ONLY 9.3% OF PLASTIC WASTE IS RECYCLED

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

Scenario 3:Producer tax on virgin resin

Scenario 3:Producer tax on virgin resin

Assumptions

Carbon potential

EFFECTIVE CARBON RATE

Carbon Price Benchmark

Price effects

Scenario 3: Producer tax on virgin resin

Decline in plastic consumption under a tax on virgin resin

UK

Italy

Japan

Indonesia

Conclusion

Achieving a reduction in plastic pollution is going to require all the stakeholders to implement all the known solutions."

Plastic consumption (million tonnes)

Plastic consumption in 2050 is expected to be

There should be no illusions that the treaty negotiations will be anything but difficult and possibly treacherous.

Peak Plastics visualisation

PEAK PLASTIC DATA VISUALISATION

Back to Blue will be participating in
the following events:

E
x
e
c
u
t
i
v
e

S
u
m
m
a
r
y

L
i
f
e
c
y
c
l
e

o
f

w
a
s
t
e

O
u
r

k
e
y

f
i
n
d
i
n
g
s

I
n

t
h
e

a
b
s
e
n
c
e

o
f

c
o
n
c
r
e
t
e

p
o
l
i
c
y

a
c
t
i
o
n
,

t
h
e

O
E
C
D

p
r
e
d
i
c
t
s

t
h
a
t

p
l
a
s
t
i
c

c
o
n
s
u
m
p
t
i
o
n

c
o
u
l
d

r
i
s
e

t
o

a

b
i
l
l
i
o
n

t
o
n
n
e
s

b
y
 
2
0
6
0
.

P
l
a
s
t
i
c

w
a
s
t
e

G
E
N
E
R
A
T
I
O
N

U
N
E
P

P
R
E
D
I
C
T
S

T
H
E

A
M
O
U
N
T

O
F

P
L
A
S
T
I
C

I
N

T
H
E

O
C
E
A
N

W
I
L
L

N
E
A
R
L
Y

T
R
I
P
L
E

B
Y

2
0
4
0
,

A
D
D
I
N
G

U
P

T
O

3
7

M
I
L
L
I
O
N

T
O
N
N
E
S

M
O
R
E

W
A
S
T
E

E
V
E
R
Y
 
Y
E
A
R
.

P
E
A
K

P
L
A
S
T
I
C
S

L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
E

S
c
e
n
a
r
i
o

1
:
B
A
N
N
I
N
G

S
I
N
G
L
E
-
U
S
E
P
L
A
S
T
I
C

P
R
O
D
U
C
T
S

Scenario 1:
BANNING SINGLE-USE PLASTIC PRODUCTS

A
s
s
u
m
p
t
i
o
n
s

S
c
e
n
a
r
i
o

1
:

B
a
n
n
i
n
g

s
i
n
g
l
e
-
u
s
e

p
l
a
s
t
i
c

p
r
o
d
u
c
t
s

S
c
e
n
a
r
i
o

2
:
M
A
N
D
A
T
O
R
Y

E
x
t
e
n
d
e
d

P
r
o
d
u
c
e
r
R
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
y

s
c
h
e
m
e
s

Scenario 2:
Mandatory Extended Producer Responsibility Schemes

A
s
s
u
m
p
t
i
o
n
s

S
c
e
n
a
r
i
o

2
:

M
a
n
d
a
t
o
r
y

e
x
t
e
n
d
e
d

p
r
o
d
u
c
e
r

r
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
y

s
c
h
e
m
e
s

P
l
a
s
t
i
c

W
a
s
t
e
,

B
y

E
n
d
-
0
f
-
l
i
f
e
-
f
a
t
e
,

2
0
1
9

S
c
e
n
a
r
i
o

3
:
P
r
o
d
u
c
e
r

t
a
x

o
n

v
i
r
g
i
n

r
e
s
i
n

Scenario 3:
Producer tax on virgin resin

A
s
s
u
m
p
t
i
o
n
s

S
c
e
n
a
r
i
o

3
:

P
r
o
d
u
c
e
r

t
a
x

o
n

v
i
r
g
i
n

r
e
s
i
n

C
o
n
c
l
u
s
i
o
n

A
c
h
i
e
v
i
n
g

a

r
e
d
u
c
t
i
o
n

i
n

p
l
a
s
t
i
c

p
o
l
l
u
t
i
o
n

i
s

g
o
i
n
g

t
o

r
e
q
u
i
r
e

a
l
l

t
h
e

s
t
a
k
e
h
o
l
d
e
r
s

t
o

i
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t

a
l
l

t
h
e

k
n
o
w
n

s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
s
.
"

P
l
a
s
t
i
c

c
o
n
s
u
m
p
t
i
o
n

(
m
i
l
l
i
o
n

t
o
n
n
e
s
)

P
l
a
s
t
i
c

c
o
n
s
u
m
p
t
i
o
n

i
n

2
0
5
0

i
s

e
x
p
e
c
t
e
d

t
o

b
e

T
h
e
r
e

s
h
o
u
l
d

b
e

n
o

i
l
l
u
s
i
o
n
s

t
h
a
t

t
h
e

t
r
e
a
t
y

n
e
g
o
t
i
a
t
i
o
n
s

w
i
l
l

b
e

a
n
y
t
h
i
n
g

b
u
t

d
i
f
f
i
c
u
l
t

a
n
d

p
o
s
s
i
b
l
y

t
r
e
a
c
h
e
r
o
u
s
.

P
e
a
k

P
l
a
s
t
i
c
s

v
i
s
u
a
l
i
s
a
t
i
o
n

P
E
A
K

P
L
A
S
T
I
C

D
A
T
A

V
I
S
U
A
L
I
S
A
T
I
O
N