EUROPEAN COMMISSION
Janez Potočnik
European Commissioner for Environment
Plastic: let’s keep the Fantastic and get rid of the Drastic
Conference on "The role of plastic waste in a circular economy"
Brussels, 30 September 2013
SPEECH/13/759
Ladies and Gentlemen,
I don't know if any of you ever saw the film "Recipes for Disaster”. It shows a family
trying to live for a year without petrol-based products. I don’t think I’m giving away the
plot by telling you that they find it virtually impossible. it particularly shows just how
much we have come to depend on "fantastic plastic". To the extent that we have used as
much plastic in the last 10 years as we did in the last century, and in Europe
consumption is still increasing at 5 % every year.
Plastic has so many great qualities; it is versatile, durable, cheap and light. But of course
some of those qualities make it “drastic plastic” for our environment and for marine life.
It is often more durable than the products we make with it, and its low cost means we
are using more and more short lived and disposable products.
So it is time to look carefully at how we use plastic, and particularly what we do to in it
when we've finished using it. And that is exactly what we are doing.
7 months ago I launched – with the help of Jeremy Irons – the Green Paper on Plastic
Waste. The response to our call for opinions just shows how important this issue is. We
received more than 270 responses, including from 14 Ministries of Environment and from
some national Parliaments. The European Economic and Social Committee and the
Committee of the Regions have already adopted opinions on the Green Paper, and the
European Parliament's opinion is expected very soon.
Of course it takes a long time to analyse all these responses and structure the results on
such a complex issue, but the evaluation process is moving on and I can already today
give you a preview of stakeholders’ views.
Before I go into detail, let me briefly explain how the Green Paper on Plastic Waste fits
into the wider picture. Into our efforts to make the use of resources more efficient, to
develop a circular economy, and to combat marine pollution.
The Resource Efficiency Roadmap set out clear milestones towards a resource efficient
Europe. We must move towards a circular economy:

In which waste is used as a secondary material and pumped back into the
economy;
 In which we optimise waste management according to the Waste hierarchy, with
the highest possible rates of waste prevention, reuse and recycling;
 In which energy recovery is limited to non-recyclable waste, and landfilling to
residual waste;
 In which products are designed in such a way that they can be reused and easily
recycled from cradle to cradle.
These objectives were confirmed by the European Parliament and Member States in the
7th Environment Action Programme.
If we look at plastic production processes and plastic waste management today, we are
a very long way from these objectives. Even in the best performing Member States,
recycling rates for plastic are fairly low. In 2012 only around 24 % of plastics were
collected for recycling1 in the EU. Around 50 % of plastics still go to landfill and the rest
is incinerated. This has to change!
1
BIOIS, 30 August 2013, Study on an increased mechanical recycling target for plastic.
2
So plastic waste exemplifies the challenges we have in creating a circular economy. The
Green Paper deals specifically with plastic waste as a single horizontal waste stream,
but as part of the resource efficiency and resource conservation story. The central issues
around which the paper asks 26 specific questions are: “how can we do more with less”
and “how can we address resource depletion effectively”.
There are 4 fundamental points made in the Green Paper:

First, product design must focuses on durability, cradle to cradle recycling and
reparability. Toxic material such as endocrine disruptors and heavy metals should
not be found in any plastic.
 Secondly, the real costs of plastic production should be internalised, with
full responsibility for collection of used plastic goods for recycling, and appropriate
consumer information about any relevant environmental aspect of plastics.
 Thirdly, plastic must be used more sustainably and we should not produce so
many items that are thrown away immediately after purchase.
 And finally, we must set out to achieve a 100 % collection rate for plastic and
establish the conditions for recycling to be a profitable business. Diverting all
plastics from landfills is already an important element.
So what were the main results from the Green Paper consultation process?
First who did we hear from?

The largest group of respondents were associations, 60 % from industry and 19 %
NGOs. The second largest group were governments and public administrations,
including 14 Ministries of Environment.
 Most reactions came from countries with higher plastic recycling rates and better
performance in waste management; we also received replies from non-European
countries, USA, Turkey and the Philippines.
And what is the overall message that came across?

Most respondents argued that the EU should stop funding landfilling and
incineration and should start using public money to upgrade recycling
infrastructures in Europe.
And if we look at the answers to the specific questions we can see some clear messages:




Nearly half of all respondents call for improvements to waste sorting and collection
in all Member States, preferably through separate door step collection combined
with "pay as you throw" schemes.
While many respondents support voluntary action, a large majority call for better
implementation and improved legislation, including a landfill ban for plastic.
They also want stricter and additional recycling targets and stricter export
controls, to ensure that European waste is not dumped or recycled in substandard
facilities in third countries.
As regards consumer behaviour, the consultation highlights the need to improve
information to consumers – in particular on recyclability of plastic. This is seen
as very important by more than 160 respondents. Also, a majority favours the
development of "deposit and return" systems or lease systems.
There is also strong support for promoting mono-materials and improved
plastic design in order to increase recyclability.
3

Regarding the chemical content of plastics, many respondents believe that
restrictions in the use of additives are needed and that more information
should be made available – for example, through safety data sheets or through
the development of public database on plastic chemical content. Moreover,
current legislation is felt to not sufficiently address the risks arising from the use of
micro-plastics in products.
 The durability of plastic products has emerged as one of the biggest concerns in
the public consultation. A majority of stakeholders believe that:
 "Planned obsolescence" should be tackled;
 that New rules on eco-design should be a key element for improving
recyclability; and
 that Market based instruments should be introduced to address the
waste burden posed by short-lived and single use plastic products.
 On biodegradable plastics and bio-based plastics, the answers were most
split. A majority of respondents think that biodegradable plastic as well as biobased plastic, should not be promoted generally, but rather on a
case-by-case basis and under properly defined conditions. It was also stressed
that a clear legal distinction will be needed between naturally compostable and
technically biodegradable plastics.
 The consultation shows that there is increasing public concern over marine litter
and plastic waste. Most respondents believe that awareness-raising is
important to reduce marine litter and they see coastal clean-up days as a
necessary response that could be coordinated at EU level. There is also broad
support for the establishment of an EU wide quantitative reduction target for
marine litter.
 Finally, the international dimension has been highlighted by many stakeholders.
In their view, the EU should promote international action on plastic waste and
support best practice worldwide, including on marine litter prevention.
Ladies and gentlemen,
This consultation shows that – in the EU – we have started to move in the right
direction. There is a very high level of convergence between the answers we received
and the more general policy objectives we are already pursuing on European waste
policy.
Concrete preparatory work on diverting plastics from landfill and on increasing plastic
recycling targets is already going on in the upcoming review of waste targets. Other
issues will be addressed as part of the regulatory fitness check of our waste stream
directives, particularly the packaging waste directives. We should also adopt very soon a
specific legislative proposal concerning lightweight plastic bags.
Targets are still a useful driver for investment in better waste management, but the real
driver leading us towards a circular economy is the economic rationale for treating our
waste as a resource. Just implementing existing waste legislation properly would create
400,000 jobs in the EU. The benefits in terms of materials savings and reduction of
greenhouse emissions are also significant.
But the potential of moving towards a truly circular economy – where materials are used
again and again instead of going on a one-way trip – is huge. I believe that with the
Green Paper on plastic waste in the environment this debate has gained momentum and
that it will help us to move another step closer to a circular economy.
Thank you for your contributions to the public consultation and I wish you an interesting
conference. I hope that you can help us to keep the "fantastic", and get rid of the
"drastic" in plastic.
4