October 5, 2024<\/p>\n
4 min read<\/p>\n<\/div>\n
Challenging Big Oil\u2019s Big Lie about Plastic Recycling<\/p>\n
California\u2019s lawsuit against Exxon is about ending the lie that most plastic is recyclable<\/p>\n<\/div>\n
By Judith Enck<\/a><\/p>\n BrianAJackson\/Getty Images<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n Among the plastic in your house might be an orange-colored hard laundry detergent bottle and a squeezable clear ketchup bottle. Come recycling day<\/a>, you might put them on the curb in a blue bin or bag, expecting they will become something new.<\/p>\n But here\u2019s the problem: those two plastic bottles cannot be recycled together<\/a> because they are different colors, different plastic types and made from different chemicals. Unlike an old aluminum can that can be recycled into a new aluminum can, plastics are fundamentally not designed to be recycled.<\/p>\n Yet the idea that plastics are just as recyclable as aluminum is a pervasive misconception because the plastics and petrochemical industries have been drilling it<\/a> into our brains for nearly half a century. This long con has allowed these industries to make billions of dollars with zero accountability\u2014until recently, when California attorney general Rob Bonta announced<\/a> that the state of California was suing ExxonMobil<\/a> for environmental damage and recycling lies.<\/p>\n If you’re enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing<\/a>. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.<\/p>\n This is a historic moment in the fight against plastic pollution, a crisis that has been created by companies<\/a> that have known recycling was not possible for most plastics. While others have filed important suits against consumer brand companies for their pollution, like New York attorney general Letitia James\u2019 lawsuit against PepsiCo<\/a>, Bonta\u2019s suit is the first to target a company for lying about plastic recycling\u2019s efficacy.<\/p>\n Exxon, one of the largest<\/u> oil and gas companies in the world, was an obvious company to focus on. Americans typically associate the company with gas stations, but Exxon also makes the polymers\u2014the chains of repeating chemical pieces\u2014that become plastic bottles, cups, utensils, takeout containers and other packaging for U.S. consumer goods. It considers the manufacturing of plastic components a \u201ccore<\/a>\u201d part of its business and, according to Bonta\u2019s lawsuit, sees 80 percent of the company\u2019s growth potential as \u201cdependent on single-use plastics applications.\u201d<\/p>\n Think about that: while you\u2019re stressing about what to put in the recycling bin, companies like Exxon are on a mission to find new ways to pump unnecessary plastic into the world.<\/p>\n The composition of most plastic makes it an inherently unrecyclable material. More than 16,000 chemicals are used<\/a> to make different plastics to give the material qualities like color and flexibility, with different types of plastic using different combinations of these additives. The small amount of plastic that is actually recyclable (primarily No. 1 and No. 2, PET and HDPE) is delivered to a facility where the plastic is shredded and ground. Unlike paper, which can be turned into new paper products several times, recycled plastic typically becomes plastic lumber or clothing\u2014which then can no longer be recycled and does not biodegrade.<\/p>\n That\u2019s why less than 6 percent of plastics are recycled<\/a> in the U.S. and why it\u2019s deceptive that Exxon and others have spent millions over decades on public relations campaigns that falsely promote plastic recycling\u2019s ability to manage all of the mess.<\/p>\n According to the California attorney general, this is illegal. Bonta\u2019s lawsuit extensively outlines the company\u2019s deception and includes a statement from an Exxon employee from 1994 saying, \u201cWe are committed to the activities but not committed to the results,\u201d when discussing plastic recycling projects.<\/p>\n This distraction technique was meant to shift the blame and responsibility for plastic pollution from companies to consumers while companies exponentially increased the amount of plastic being produced. And it worked. Today, there isn\u2019t a place on Earth untouched by plastic. It\u2019s been found in Arctic sea ice<\/a>, the deepest<\/a> part of the ocean, the remotest mountains<\/a>, in much of our food<\/a>, and in our bodies<\/a>. Plastic doesn\u2019t biodegrade; it breaks up<\/a> into smaller pieces. This chokes wildlife<\/a>,<\/u> enters the air<\/a> we breathe and finds its way into the water<\/a> we drink. This toxic material, often used for just a moment, ends up polluting the environment for centuries.<\/p>\n Exxon and others are now reusing the same distraction technique to promote what they call \u201cadvanced recycling,\u201d a process that uses high heat to turn plastic into small amounts of fuel or uses often toxic chemicals to attempt to make new plastics. Like mechanical recycling, it\u2019s been unsuccessful for decades.<\/p>\n Today only nine chemical recycling facilities exist in the U.S., and even if they were operating at full capacity\u2014which they are not\u2014they would handle less<\/a> than 1.2 percent of U.S. plastic waste. These facilities create a new universe of environmental problems, such as toxic contamination and air pollution, and they continue the hoax of plastics recycling. Most of these facilities are located<\/a> in low-income communities and communities of color.<\/p>\n Bonta\u2019s lawsuit will hold Exxon accountable for its disinformation around advanced recycling in addition to traditional recycling\u2014another unprecedented and laudable move. \u201cExxonMobil has known that mechanical recycling, and now \u2018advanced recycling,\u2019 will never be able to process more than a tiny fraction of the waste it produces,\u201d the lawsuit says.<\/p>\n This lawsuit stands on the shoulders of cases brought by state attorneys general against tobacco companies in the 1980s. It has two similar goals as the successful tobacco lawsuits: stop the deception and address the damages. When California wins this case, ExxonMobil and the trade associations it funds will have to stop lying about plastics recycling. Additionally, Exxon will be required to put millions of dollars into an abatement fund that will enable California to address the plague of plastic pollution.<\/p>\n Companies like Exxon have long used their power and money to evade consequences for the devastation fueled by their own greed. It takes leaders like Attorney General Bonta to change that.<\/p>\n This legal action sets a precedent for other state attorneys general to follow. As the litigation piles up<\/a> on big oil for climate liability, smart companies can reduce their legal exposure by telling the truth about plastics and plastics recycling. It\u2019s not only the right thing to do; it\u2019s also what the law requires.<\/p>\n This is an opinion and analysis article, and the views expressed by the author or authors are not necessarily those of <\/i>Scientific American.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n![\"Photograph](\"https:\/\/static.scientificamerican.com\/dam\/m\/33858bcb0f9286c6\/original\/recycling_plastic.jpg?w=600\")
On supporting science journalism<\/h2>\n