plastic pollution
Newsletter
Credit: Louis Vest/flickr
Petrochemical plants send millions of pounds of pollutants into waterways each year: Report
“This is not normal.”
Nearly 70 petrochemical companies across the nation, including 30 in Texas, are sending millions of pounds of pollutants into waterways each year due to weak or nonexistent regulations, according to a report published by the watchdog group Environmental Integrity Project.
The report analyzed wastewater discharges from petrochemical companies that produce plastics across the U.S., finding that a majority of the facilities had violated Clean Water Act permits and few were punished. In addition, only a few states are regulating some of the hazardous chemicals or substances of concern, and there are currently no limits set from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for these contaminants in effluent water guidelines for the plastics industry.
In the past 30 years, plastic production at petrochemical facilities has skyrocketed. The EPA estimates that plastic production in 1990 was at 17,130 tons, and by 2018 it had doubled, reaching 35,680 tons. Producing these plastics results in industrial wastewater discharges, some of which contain pollutants unregulated by federal wastewater guidelines. If the pollutant does have limits, they have been set by individual states.
The report found the following pollutants:
- Dioxins, recognized as one of the most toxic classes of compounds by the World Health Organization, can be a byproduct of producing plastics like poly-vinyl chloride, or PVC. Out of the 17 facilities that produce PVC, only three have site limits set by states.
- 1,4 dioxane, classified as a potential carcinogen, only had limits set at two facilities.
- An estimated 9.9 million pounds of nitrogen and 1.9 million pounds of phosphorus (known as nutrient pollution when combined) enter waterways from these plants annually, and can cause toxic algal blooms and fish-killing low-oxygen zones. Only one facility had limits for phosphorus pollution and none had total nitrogen limits.
- Plastic pellets, known as nurdles, are entering waterways in 27 states.
- Polyfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS, are not currently considered in wastewater samples for petrochemical plant permit applications.
A majority of the facilities have poor compliance records. Out of the 70 facilities, 83% had violated the Clean Water Act at least once in the last three years (58 facilities violated permits, yet only 8 were penalized). Nearly 40% of the facilities were operating on water pollution control permits that are outdated, “but have been administratively continued by state agencies,” according to the report.
Outdated Clean Water Act regulations
The Clean Water Act, issued by the EPA in 1972, has historically been enforced through effluent water guidelines. The petrochemical facilities in the report are regulated under a category of guidelines for organic chemicals, plastics and synthetic fibers.
“The (plastics) industry has experienced significant, rapid growth in recent decades and is continuing to grow,” lead author of the report and research director at the Environmental Integrity Project, Kira Dunham, told EHN. “But…wastewater discharges are being regulated by standards from over 30 years ago.”
This category of guidelines Dunham mentions has not been updated by the EPA since 1993, despite requirements for the agency to “periodically” update guidelines in accordance with technological updates for pollution control.Texas petrochemical pollution
With 17 of the 30 facilities in Texas, the Houston area — known as the petrochemical capital of the U.S. — is the number one exporter of petrochemicals in the nation.
Nearly one-third of these Texas facilities discharge wastewater into the Houston Ship Channel. Earlier this year, EHN investigated community member concerns about wastewater contamination potentially entering dredge material removed from the channel. Independent analysis from Healthy Port Communities, a collaborative of Houston-based environmental groups, noted high levels of dioxins in the soil surrounding dredge material.
“Some of the places touched on in the (Environmental Integrity Project’s) report might have one major facility that has this… pattern of discharging pollutants into waterways,” Kristen Schlemmer, senior legal director of Houston- based water justice group Bayou City Waterkeeper, told EHN. “I don't want to discount that … but it at least makes it clear who you can focus on to address the problem. Whereas in Houston, we have so many different facilities that are polluting into our waterways, that it often just makes it seem like that's normal, and that's just the way things are going to be.”
Schlemmer added that these concerns for pollution related to wastewater discharges are heightened by disasters, like this year’s derecho storm and Hurricane Beryl, in which water grows contaminated across large portions of the region. Beyond climate disasters, the Houston region is prone to chemical disasters and the state averages about one chemical release a week based on 2023 data.
“I'm hoping through this work to show that this is not normal, and (to) raise the bar in terms of what our expectations are for the facilities that live in our backyards,” Schlemmer said. “If they're not going to comply with the law …I want them to … know that they're going to be facing legal action, either from us or for government regulators.”
Earlier this year, the Environmental Integrity Project sued the EPA along with Bayou City Water Keeper, the Center for Biological Diversity and nearly 300 water justice groups in the Waterkeeper Alliance. In the original intent to sue, the group states that the EPA “has failed to perform its mandatory duty under (the Clean Water Act) ... to biennially submit state water quality reports and an analysis thereof … to Congress.”
Just last week, the EPA released its biannual preliminary plan for effluent limitations guidelines and the announcement states that the EPA plans to conduct new studies that will clarify the impact of discharges from certain industries on waterways. The plan is open for public comment here.
Keep reading...Show less
International summits fall short as nations struggle to address environmental crises
Global efforts to combat climate change, plastic pollution and biodiversity loss stalled in 2024 due to ineffective U.N. negotiations, entrenched interests and geopolitical divides.
Seth Borenstein and Sibi Arasu report for The Associated Press.
In short:
- Recent U.N. summits on climate, plastic pollution, biodiversity and desertification failed to yield significant progress.
- The consensus-based system allows a few nations, often influenced by fossil fuel interests, to delay global agreements.
- Experts are exploring alternative solutions, including legal actions and smaller "climate clubs" of committed nations.
Key quote:
"Multilateralism isn’t dead, but it is being held hostage by a very small number of countries trying to prevent progress. There’s no greater example of this than the way that the fossil fuel industry has hijacked policymaking at all levels."
— Al Gore, former U.S. vice president
Why this matters:
Global cooperation is essential for addressing widespread environmental threats. When multilateral talks fail, vulnerable nations suffer the most, and delays increase the risks of catastrophic climate impacts. Alternative strategies may provide a path forward, but time is running out.
Related: Leading experts push for reform in UN climate summits
Keep reading...Show less
Credit: m.malinika.art/BigStock Photo ID:398593694
Microplastics: a threat we can't ignore
Microplastics are invading our bodies, from the air we breathe to the food we eat, sparking growing concerns about their potential health risks.
In short:
- Microplastics, tiny plastic particles from everyday products, have been found in organs, blood and even the placenta, raising alarm over their health effects.
- These particles carry harmful chemicals like phthalates and PFAS, which disrupt hormones and may contribute to diseases such as heart conditions, cognitive deficits and cancer.
- Simple lifestyle changes, like avoiding microwaving plastic containers and choosing stainless steel or glass, can significantly reduce exposure.
Key quote:
“It’s so pervasive because there’s so many ways we don’t think something’s plastic, but we realize it actually is.”
— Dr. Leonardo Trasande, Director of Environmental Pediatrics, NYU School of Medicine
Why this matters:
The health implications are staggering, but the solutions often feel out of reach. Avoid plastic altogether? Good luck in a world practically built on it. But experts like Dr. Leonardo Trasande are pointing to small, practical changes as ways to limit the damage. Meanwhile, the bigger battle looms: curbing plastic production before these particles saturate every inch of the planet—and our bodies. Read more: Microplastics in farm soils: A growing concern.
Keep reading...Show less
Newsletter
Credit: Ralf Vetterle/Pixabay
Shell’s Pennsylvania plastics plant: Pollution and broken promises
Residents near Shell's ethane cracker plant in Pennsylvania say pollution and economic letdowns have overshadowed the promised benefits of the facility.
In short:
- The Shell plastics plant, which processes fracked gas into plastic, has faced 33 violations for air and water pollution since 2017.
- Locals report respiratory issues, foul odors and water concerns while promised economic benefits have fallen short, with the plant employing only 500 full-time workers.
- Critics accuse Shell of overstating benefits and using community donations to downplay the plant's environmental impact.
Key quote:
“I have to live in a cocoon year-round.”
— Nadine Luci, local resident
Why this matters:
The facility's emissions threaten both public health and the Ohio River watershed, affecting millions. Despite promises of economic growth, the project delivers limited jobs and raises concerns about pollution’s long-term effects on local communities.
Related EHN coverage:
Keep reading...Show less
Top Story
Credit: UNEP
Environmental justice advocates criticize lack of inclusion in plastic treaty negotiations
“We had to fight for every second we had on the floor.”
Environmental justice and Indigenous groups say they were largely excluded from key plastic treaty talks last week in Busan, South Korea, which took place over seven days and ended without a final text.
As oil and gas producing nations opposed reducing plastic production, the fifth round of talks in a series of UN Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee meetings ended without clear consensus on how to curb global plastic pollution. The group will reconvene next year with hopes of finalizing a treaty.
During previous plastic treaty talks, environmental justice and Indigenous delegations were permitted to listen and speak during negotiations between member states. That changed at this meeting, as the last several days of the talks consisted of private conversations.
“I was really disappointed with the process this time,” Sarah Martik, director of the Center for Coalfield Justice, an environmental justice advocacy group based in western Pennsylvania, told EHN. “There were two and a half days of informal meetings with delegates from member states held in private rooms, which completely cut out civil society. We have no notes and no records from those meetings … and we had very few opportunities to speak. We had to fight for every second we had on the floor.”
“I was really disappointed with the process this time.” Sarah Martik, Center for Coalfield Justice
Other U.S.-based environmental justice advocacy groups including the The Descendants Project in Louisiana’s Cancer Alley; the Port Arthur Community Action Network in Texas; and Breathe Free Detroit expressed similar frustrations, as did numerous Indigenous groups.
“[Holding negotiations during private meetings] is a blatant attempt to stifle dissent and pave the way for the influence of the petrochemical industry,” Frankie Orona, executive director of Society of Native Nations, said in a statement. “Despite our tireless advocacy and the support of numerous member states, the [latest treaty draft] fails to recognize our inherent rights and traditional knowledge, effectively silencing our voices in the fight against plastic pollution.”
The groups also said that oil and gas-producing countries “weaponized” the consensus-based decision-making process by intentionally stalling progress during the negotiations and effectively vetoing measures favored by a majority of other countries, like plastic production caps.
“Despite our tireless advocacy and the support of numerous member states, the [latest treaty draft] fails to recognize our inherent rights and traditional knowledge." - Frankie Orona, Society of Native Nations
China, the United States, India, South Korea and Saudi Arabia were the top five primary plastic-producing nations in 2023, according to data provider Eunomia. Some of these countries, like Saudi Arabia, Russia and India, oppose production caps. More than 100 of the approximately 170 countries attending the talks supported caps on plastic production. The U.S. and China were absent from the talks when countries pressed for production limits.
“Saudi Arabia and Russia kept taking the floor to be obstructionist, basically saying a whole lot of nothing, and we didn’t get an opportunity to speak on the floor until about two in the morning, when a lot of member states were already leaving,” Martik said.
“The elephant in the room is how the U.S. presidential election is going to impact all of this,” Martik added. “Delaying the final treaty until after Trump takes office could change how the U.S. is showing up at these negotiations.”
Disagreement over plastic production caps
Most plastic is made from fossil fuels, and as the world decarbonizes to tackle the climate crisis, oil and gas companies are increasingly turning to plastic production to stay profitable. More than 400 million tons of new plastic are created annually across the globe, and plastic production is expected to increase by an additional 70% by 2040 without policy changes.
“When I first engaged in [plastic treaty talks], I was standing in line at lunch and a delegate read my nametag and asked what I was doing there,” said Martik, who attended the talks as a member of Break Free From Plastic, a global advocacy organization. “I had to explain the connection between fracked gas being drilled in southwestern Pennsylvania and the global production of plastic.”
The plastic industry and oil-producing countries have fought against production caps, instead pushing the idea of a “circular economy.” But less than 10% of the world’s plastic is currently recycled, and attempts to improve recycling technology have so far largely proven unprofitable and inefficient.
“Delaying the final treaty until after Trump takes office could change how the U.S. is showing up at these negotiations.” - Sarah Martik, Center for Coalfield Justice
While plastic pollution chokes waterways and shorelines and microplastics turn up in every part of the human body, concerns about human health effects from every stage of plastic’s lifecycle have increased. In the U.S., health care costs attributable to chemicals in plastics are an estimated $250 billion every year.
“I think a worst-case scenario would have been that we walked away with a treaty that was ineffective and catered to the lowest-common denominator,” Martik said. “But we saw clearly that there are far more countries wanting to step up to the plate and be really ambitious about this than there are countries fighting a meaningful treaty.”
Keep reading...Show less
UN
Credit: Ministry of Environment - Rwanda/Flickr
A plastics treaty could reshape global pollution but faces major hurdles
Negotiations for a global plastics treaty are progressing slowly, with countries divided over production limits, waste regulation, and scientific access, yet the commitment to further discussions remains a hopeful sign.
In short:
- Negotiators in Busan, South Korea, failed to finalize a treaty to curb plastics pollution but agreed to continue talks within the year.
- The treaty is expected to address the full life cycle of plastics, but key points like production limits face opposition from major fossil-fuel-producing nations.
- Limited access for scientists in negotiations raises transparency concerns, as the treaty’s success hinges on independent research and evidence-based definitions.
Key quote:
“Although delegates’ frustrations are justified, the commitment to continuing the discussions and the ambition of most participating countries to secure a strong agreement are positive.”
— Samuel Winton, researcher at the Global Plastics Policy Centre
Why this matters:
The push for a global plastics treaty is shaping up to be one of the defining environmental battles of our time—and it’s no quick fix. Plastic particles are linked to health issues from cancer to infertility. If we get this treaty wrong, the consequences could ripple through ecosystems and generations. Read more: Every stage of plastic production and use is harming human health.
Keep reading...Show less
Newsletter
Credit: Getty Images/Unsplash+
How the plastic industry undermines democracy by blocking bans
Companies that profit from plastics are pushing forward laws to keep Americans hooked on disposable plastic products
On a cool, sunny day in March 2020, Ted Harris towed a large net from a boat in Clinton Lake in Kansas and retrieved a sample of microscopic debris in the water.
Harris, an associate research professor at the University of Kansas, was participating in a global study, published in 2023, that looked for microplastics in lakes all over the world.
Tiny plastic particles with a diameter less than 5 millimeters (nanoplastics are much smaller, ranging from 1 to 1,000 nanometers), these particles are harmful to tiny organisms in lakes like zooplankton, that mistake them for food. Larger animals like fish eat the zooplankton, causing the plastic particles to accumulate up the food chain. People can be exposed by eating fish from these lakes. Once in our bodies, they cannot be digested or broken down. “They either get passed through us or they get stuck somewhere inside,” Harris said.
Scientists found microplastics in every lake tested, including Clinton Lake, which is near Lawrence, Kansas and is a popular spot for party boats, swimming and fishing.
Keep reading...Show less
ORIGINAL REPORTING
MOST POPULAR
CLIMATE
