[Senate Hearing 118-761]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 118-761
EVALUATING MATERIAL ALTERNATIVES FOR
SINGLE-USE PLASTICS
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON CHEMICAL SAFETY,
WASTE MANAGEMENT, ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE,
AND REGULATORY OVERSIGHT
of the
COMMITTEE ON
ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
OCTOBER 26, 2023
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Environment and Public Works
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
62-493 WASHINGTON : 2026
COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS
ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware, Chairman
SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia, Ranking Member
BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland KEVIN CRAMER, North Dakota
BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont CYNTHIA M. LUMMIS, Wyoming
SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, Rhode Island MARKWAYNE MULLIN, Oklahoma
JEFF MERKLEY, Oregon PETE RICKETTS, Nebraska
EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas
DEBBIE STABENOW, Michigan ROGER WICKER, Mississippi
MARK KELLY, Arizona DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska
ALEX PADILLA, California LINDSEY O. GRAHAM, South Carolina
JOHN FETTERMAN, Pennsylvania
Courtney Taylor, Democratic Staff Director
Adam Tomlinson, Republican Staff Director
----------
Subcommittee on Chemical Safety, Waste Management, Environmental
Justice, and Regulatory Oversight
JEFF MERKLEY, Oregon, Chairman
MARKWAYNE MULLIN, Oklahoma, Ranking Member
BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas
SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, Rhode Island ROGER WICKER, Mississippi
EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska
JOHN FETTERMAN, Pennsylvania SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West
THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware (ex Virginia (ex officio)
officio)
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
OCTOBER 26, 2023
OPENING STATEMENTS
Merkley, Hon. Jeff, U.S. Senator from the State of Oregon........ 1
Mullin, Hon. Markwayne, U.S. Senator from the State of Oklahoma.. 2
WITNESSES
Eriksen, Marcus, Ph.D., Co-Founder, Executive Director, the 5
Gyres Institute, Leap Lab...................................... 418
Prepared statement........................................... 420
Responses to additional questions from Senator Sullivan...... 425
Simon, Erin, Vice President, Plastic Waste + Business, World
Wildlife Fund.................................................. 427
Prepared statement........................................... 429
Responses to additional questions from Senator Sullivan...... 438
Kravetz, Humberto, Founder and CEO, GSF Upcycling................ 441
Prepared statement........................................... 443
ADDITIONAL MATERIAL
Articles:
GSF: The Upcycling Leap!..................................... 4
National Academies Science Engineering Medicine: Recycled
Plastics in Infrastructure: Current Practices,
Understanding, and Opportunities (2023).................... 24
ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering: Ulises R. Gracida-
Alvarez, et. al, Circular Economy Sustainability Analysis
Framework for Plastics: Application for Poly(ethylene
Terephthalate) (PET)....................................... 463
5 Gyres Science to Solutions: Better Alternatives 3.0........ 474
NRDC Recycling Lies: Chemical Recycling of Plastic is Just
Greenwashing Incineration.................................. 506
Letter to Senator Carper, Senator Capito, Senator Merkley and
Senator Mullin from Hoover Circular Solutions.................. 517
Statement for the Record from the Plastics Industry Association
(PLASTICS): Hearing on Evaluating Material Alternatives for
Single Use Plastics............................................ 520
EVALUATING MATERIAL ALTERNATIVES FOR
SINGLE-USE PLASTICS
----------
THURSDAY, OCTOBER 26, 2023
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Environment and Public Works,
Subcommittee on Chemical Safety, Waste Management,
Environmental Justice, and Regulatory Oversight,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10 a.m. in
room 406, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Jeff Merkley
(chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.
Present: Senators Merkley, Mullin, Carper, Whitehouse,
Capito.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JEFF MERKLEY,
U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF OREGON
Senator Merkley. Good morning. Welcome. The Environment and
Public Works Subcommittee on Chemical Safety, Waste Management,
Environmental Justice and Regulatory Oversight hearing on
evaluating alternative materials for single-use plastics will
come to order.
There is a saying that waste is a design flaw. Today we
have an enormous volume of single-use plastics, from utensils
to bottles, and an even larger amount of plastic packaging.
Single-use plastics and plastic packaging are often not
recyclable or biodegradable. They often end up, as the phrase
goes, burned, buried or borne out to sea. All that waste does
represent a pretty large design flaw.
Ideally, we would love for all of our products to be sold
in 100 percent reusable containers or biodegradable packaging,
so we do not have this challenge. The damage done by plastic
pollution has inspired many companies to develop alternatives
to fossil plastic, often marked as green or natural. Some of
those alternatives are referred to as bioplastics.
That sounds like a win for everyone. Companies get the
benefits of continuing to use single-use items and packaging
that is lighter and more durable than glass or aluminum. In the
most successful implementation of this vision, consumers will
get the peace of mind knowing that the packaging or single-use
item that is discarded is being re-used or composted.
The world is more complicated than that. It is exciting to
see how many small companies are working to develop
alternatives on the front-end that can be recycled or can be
re-used. Hopefully out of those many research efforts and
investor-funded laboratories, we will have more alternatives.
The goal is to understand now, where do we sit at this
moment? What alternatives exist on the front-end? What is truly
recyclable? What is truly compostable? Does it require special
laboratories or special facilities to be compostable, as
opposed to a compost bin in one's yard? That leaves consumers
very confused about how they are participating in our consumer
economy in the best, most responsible way.
Today we have witnesses who bring expertise to bear on this
topic. According to the World Wildlife Fund, which is
represented here today, 450 million tons of plastic are
produced each year, a number that is expected to triple between
now and 2050. Plastics are made from climate chaos-causing
fossil fuels. They generally do not biodegrade.
They do break down into microplastics. We have had
testimony in this committee about the challenges of
microplastics. The average adult in America consumes some 800
particles of microplastics per day, or estimated to be a credit
card's worth of plastic per week that ends up in our blood, in
our lungs, even in the breast milk that we feed to our babies.
Also in these plastics are toxins that expose us to a
number of endocrine disrupting chemicals. That is certainly a
challenge as we think about our various daily activities, our
hot coffee cup that we get from Starbucks, what is it actually
lined with, and what is the result of those particles ending up
in our body. We also have the production of plastics often
occurring in front-line communities where it creates toxic
pollution that endangers the health of the people who live
there.
There are many aspects to this complicated world. We look
forward to learning more today from our panel of experts. We
have Dr. Marcus Eriksen, a marine scientists and co-founder of
5 Gyres Institute, which seeks to understand the extent of
plastic pollution in our oceans and what we can do about it. He
and his colleagues published the discovery of the microbeads in
the Great Lakes in 2013. That is an example where there was a
very definable product, a very definable reaction. We can live
without these microbeads in our cosmetics or skin care lotions.
Now they are not there. That is good.
Also joining us is Erin Simon, Vice President for Plastic
Waste and Business at the World Wildlife Fund, helping
companies to reduce plastic pollution. She spent 10 years
working as a packaging engineer, so she knows a lot about the
packaging side.
We are joined by Humberto Kravetz, Founder and CEO of GSF
Upcycling, which breaks down used plastics to make them into
new products.
Thank you for the time and for sharing your expertise with
the committee. I will turn it over to Ranking Member Mullin,
Senator Mullin, for his remarks.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MARKWAYNE MULLIN,
U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA
Senator Mullin. Thank you, Chair Merkley. I appreciate it.
I thank you for allowing this. Mr. Merkley has a long history
of studying plastics. While we may not agree on the solution,
we definitely are in search of a solution to the problem. We
may be speaking on it from different angles, so I appreciate
your having this hearing.
I would like to start by thanking our witnesses for
attending this hearing. We appreciate you for taking the time
to be with us. It is a challenge, and it is sometimes
thankless. You are not getting paid, so we appreciate your
time. Time is valuable, and you do not ever receive that back.
I do appreciate each one of you guys for being here.
As everyone knows, plastics exist in almost every aspect of
our day-to-day life, from consumer goods to automobile parts,
to even building materials. While improperly managed, single-
use plastics can contribute to our plastic waste issues,
certain types of single-use plastics are essentially invaluable
uses for us, which needs to be considered in discussing
alternatives. Notably a few examples of these single uses
include blood bags, syringes, to help modern health care remain
affordable, and insulate food packages to maintain hygienic
standards while reducing food waste.
These uses play a vital role in our society and if
restricted, would have detrimental impact on our daily lives.
This series of hearings has made it abundantly clear that
banning plastic production is not a real solution. Rather than
wasting our time talking about banning plastics or mandating
alternatives that consumers do not want, we should be
discussing real market-driven solutions.
This includes state-of-the-art developments and advanced
recycling. Anyone serious about addressing plastic waste should
support advanced recycling. This promising technology can
address plastics that cannot be recycled by traditional
methods.
It has the potential to turn the whole concept of single
use on its head by converting previously unrecyclable plastics
into valuable new commodities. Let's be clear: improving our
recycling system is not only the solution, but it is without
question a legitimate solution that warrants all of our
attention.
You should not just be taking my word for it, Mr. Chairman.
I would like to ask for unanimous consent to enter into the
record two studies, one from the Department of Energy and one
from the National Academies of Science.
Senator Merkley. Without objection, so ordered.
[The referenced information follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Mullin. Both reports demonstrate the potential
value of commercializing scaled chemical recycling. That is why
I am very thankful to be joined today by Mr. Kravetz, of GSF
Upscaling, who traveled all the way from Spain to be here with
us today. That is a long flight, sir. I get upset having to
travel back and forth from Oklahoma, so I appreciate that.
GSF is an innovative chemical recycling company that can
accept the most difficult to recycle plastics. GSF's facilities
can accept plastic ranging from single use to sun-scarred
fishing nets. Sir, you are exactly the type of person we need
here today, because listening to you, we can really start
getting serious about addressing plastic waste. I appreciate
it, once again.
Innovation, not misguided regulation, is the correct way to
move forward. I look forward to hearing from all of our
witnesses today on ways we can facilitate this, and look more
serious about chemical recycling and commercial skills.
With that, I yield back.
Senator Merkley. Thank you very much.
Mr. Eriksen?
STATEMENT OF MARCUS ERIKSEN, PH.D., CO-FOUNDER, EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR, THE 5 GYRES INSTITUTE, LEAP LAB
Mr. Ericksen. Good morning, Subcommittee Chair Senator
Merkley, Ranking Member Senator Mullin, and all committee
members. My name is Dr. Marcus Eriksen, co-founder and
researcher at The 5 Gyres Institute.
Our team at 5 Gyres Institute has sailed around the world
to study ocean plastic pollution, leading 20 expeditions across
all oceans. We have collected thousands of samples, like the
one that is right here. What you can see is that it is mostly
microplastics.
We just recently published, about 6 months ago, a study
looking at a 40-year trend from the late 1970's until the
present of microplastic abundance in the world's ocean. I will
show you a graph, really quickly, from our published paper. In
the first 25 years, from 1980 until 2005, this quarter-century,
the amount of trash in the world's oceans increases slowly.
Since 2005, there has been this exponential increase, to the
point that today, we estimate 170 trillion particles of
microplastic in the global ocean. The point is that we need
urgent action.
Why does this matter? Let me tell you a quick story. A few
years ago, I went back to Kuwait. I had been there 30 years ago
as a Marine infantryman back in the Persian Gulf War, if you
remember those times, 1991. I returned there recently as a
marine scientist. Our team surveyed the Gulf of Arabia.
We also went deep into the desert, and we found a few camel
skeletons. I will show you what I dug out of one skeleton. We
estimate about 2,000 plastic bags are in this mass, in one
camel's gut. This adds to the thousands of organisms worldwide
that are impacted by our trash.
The point I want to make here is that I have been across
oceans, our team, The 5 Gyres Institute, across oceans, across
deserts, in mountains, roadsides, municipalities around the
world. We are not talking about cell phones or car bumpers or
blood bags. When we think of harm, we are talking about single-
use, throwaway plastics. They are ubiquitous across the globe.
Solutions are clear. First of all, we are not going to
recycle our way out of this problem. The private sector is
rising to the challenge. Refill and re-use, entrepreneurs in
the re-use and refill economy are succeeding. They are
successfully delivering products to consumers without packaging
waste. Thousands of entrepreneurs are proving successful re-use
and refill business models.
At the same time, biomaterials are a promising innovation.
Our team at The 5 Gyres Institute has researched what happens
when bioplastic, biodegradable plastic products, are lost in
real environmental settings. We wanted to understand, these
biomaterials, how do they perform if they get lost in different
environments.
We took 22 different kinds of products. We are talking
about biodegradable bioplastic straws and cutlery and thin film
from bags. We put them in six environment. We put them in the
ocean in California, the ocean in Florida, the ocean in Maine,
a forest in Maine, the Everglades, a desert in California. Six
environments over 18 months, a year and a half.
Our findings are fascinating. I will show you this, this is
our study. We took five kinds of straws. Here you see the
different kinds of biodegradable materials, PHA, PLA, PHB, and
in 16 weeks we found them, they function as a straw when they
are used. If they are lost, the degrade within 16 weeks. Even
this PHB straw matched the rated degradation of a paper straw.
Look at film; we had several kind of biodegradable plastic
films. We found over 16 weeks the same thing, the biomaterial
films are disappearing. They are degrading over time. This PHA
piece of film in 16 weeks is practically gone.
The utensils, same thing. Four different kinds of utensils,
the biodegradable materials, PHA and PLA, they are practically
gone, even faster than the bamboo, the wooden utensil. If you
look here, the polystyrene fork, the polyethylene piece of
film, the polyethylene straw, they are as new as the day we got
them.
In closing, I would like to say that the problem is getting
worse, based on our work in the world's oceans and lands around
the world. We urgently need smart policies. Businesses that
refill and re-use are thriving and biomaterials are functional
alternatives to some kinds of packaging.
I would be happy to answer any questions you might have.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Eriksen follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Merkley. Thank you very much, Dr. Eriksen. That is
a fascinating display you brought. Much appreciated.
Ms. Simon?
STATEMENT OF ERIN SIMON, VICE PRESIDENT, PLASTIC WASTE +
BUSINESS, WORLD WILDLIFE FUND
Ms. Simon. Good morning, Mr. Chairman and Mr. Ranking
Member and members of the committee.
My name is Erin Simon. I am the Vice President and head of
Plastic Waste and Business here at World Wildlife Fund. I want
to thank you for the opportunity to testify today on such an
important topic, one that has quickly become the top
environmental concern for many Americans, and that is growing
plastic pollution.
Plastic can be found in nearly every corner of the planet,
from our city sidewalks to the top of Mount Everest. It is
estimated, as you mentioned, that there is an enormous amount
of plastic pollution, 11 million metric tons, entering our
oceans every year. That is about a dump truck a minute of
plastic pollution.
Plastic pollution negatively impacts more than 2,000
species of wildlife in places significant to local economies,
public health, and vulnerable communities. It also harms some
of the world's most important ecosystems, like coral reefs and
mangroves.
Unless we act now, as you mentioned, the trajectory of this
will just worsen. We will double the amount of plastic we
produce and triple the amount of it entering our oceans by
2040.
It is undeniable that plastic is a versatile material that
keeps our food fresh and our medications safe. However, we
currently rely on plastic as a single-use resources in a linear
system where products and packaging are created, used, and
thrown away. The plastic pollution crisis has taught us that it
is no longer economically, socially, or environmentally
sustainable to prioritize the production of single-use
products, no matter where they are made and what they are made
of. All natural resources are finite, and we are taking these
materials faster than the earth can sustain.
As we look to the future of innovation, we need to amend
that broken system, no matter what the material is. This means
getting rid of those things we do not need, substantially
increasing the re-use, recycling and composing of plastic,
shifting to sustainable inputs and alternative business models,
such as re-use, refill systems, and moving to alternative
materials when appropriate.
Alternative materials to replace plastic could include
paper, metal, glass, or bio-based materials. However, no matter
the material, we must always be thoughtful and thorough when
considering the use of alternatives so we avoid those negative
tradeoffs. All materials have environmental and social impacts.
It is critical that we take necessary steps to source and use
alternatives that have stronger environmental and social
benefits when compared to the conventional plastic. It is
important to note, for example, that both virgin glass and
metal have intensive extraction processes. Their overall
sustainability performance is largely tied to our ability to
recapture these materials through re-use and recycling.
Of course, even as we look for solutions to reduce and
replace, we might still need some virgin plastic. It does not
need to come from fossil fuels. Plastics can be made from
alternative sources such as seaweed, sugar cane, and other
plants. Bio-based plastics offer an opportunity to decouple
from fossil resources, achieve greenhouse gas emission savings,
and contribute to a resilient local economy when produced in
accordance with best practices.
To realize this potential, we have to follow a no-one-size-
fits-all solution for bio-based plastics. We have to also
follow a shared set of principles that can guide design choices
around how they are grown and effectively recycled or
composted.
It is critical that we pay attention to food security,
labor practices, deforestation and land conversion, and impacts
on water quality and impacts on water quality as well as the
necessary recycling or composting infrastructure for the
recovery of these.
Policy conversations around all material circularity
continue to be essential, independent of any alternative
material solutions. We need supporting infrastructure and
policy to tackle the broken system. That includes the systems
to collect, re-use, recycle and compost anything that is
produced.
In the United States, leading businesses are already
setting ambitious around reduction, re-use and recycling. I
will be on a panel later today in this room with WWF, Coca-
Cola, Wal-Mart, and Mars, talking about the ambition we are
seeing from many of the private sector including calls for
enabling government policies like extended producer
responsibility. The United States has the opportunity to be a
global leader in this.
In the end, we need everybody to do their part. WWF hopes
that today's conversation will pave the way for further
development and implementation of robust policies in this
space, policies that call attention to the considerations and
advantages of reduction, re-use, and other plastic
alternatives, as we seek to address the problem of plastic
pollution.
A circular economy is only sustainable if we have a way
forward when we are working together. It begins by reevaluating
our use and disposal of plastic and moving toward a circular
system that prioritizes environmental health and environmental
justice. This reality may seem ambitious, but there are
policies and changes and technologies we can use to move
forward today and create that more efficient system for a
healthy planet for future generations.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Simon follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Merkley. Thank you very much, Ms. Simon.
We are going to turn to Humberto Kravetz. Welcome.
STATEMENT OF HUMBERTO KRAVETZ, FOUNDER AND CEO, GSF UPCYCLING
Mr. Kravetz. Good morning, Chairman Merkley, Ranking Member
Mullin, and members of the subcommittee.
My name is Humberto Kravetz, Founder and CEO of GSF
Upcycling. I appreciate the opportunity to appear before the
subcommittee today.
I will discuss three aspects of my company's innovations
that enable true circularity in plastics. First, we can upcycle
all types of used plastics back into feedstock. Second, we
deliver substantial improvements in energy and environmental
performance of the plastic recycling process. Third, we create
a strong economic incentive for communities to keep used
plastic out of the waste streams and the environment.
Our first breakthrough takes advantage of our proprietary
graphene-based nanomaterials, commonly known as carbon-
nanotubes. By adding our nanomaterial to tons of used plastics
in a pyrolysis process, any municipal or industrial entity will
now be able to upcycle the 80 percent-plus of used plastics,
including mixed, dirty, and contaminated plastics that are
currently too hard to recycle and otherwise end up in
landfills, incinerators, or lost to the environment.
Examples of this include packaging material for about 45
percent of the global problem, as well as medical devices,
automobile parts, circuit boards, and even degraded plastics
such as marine debris. We recently validated this in our
demonstration plant, using fishing nets collected from local
fishermen.
Our nanomaterials enable the process to occur at roughly
half the temperature, 450 degrees Fahrenheit instead of 800
degrees Fahrenheit, and with a 30 to 60 percent improvement in
plant performance, thus significantly reducing energy costs and
associated greenhouse gases per unit of output.
Just as consequential, our process also captures 60 to 99
percent of halogens, such as bromine, fluorine, and chlorine,
as well as other contaminants of major health and environmental
concern. These contaminants can then be segregated for
responsible disposition.
Our second breakthrough takes advantage of our proprietary
mix of biological enzymes. By placing these enzymes in direct
contact with used plastics, we can depolymerize the plastic
back into its original building blocks. Unlike any other
enzymatic method, our process takes place at room temperature,
without the added heat or energy consumption, and without
chemical-based solvent pre-treatment that other enzymatic
processes require.
We have proven that our enzymatic process cannot only
handle plastics such as soda bottles, PET, but also plastics
that are otherwise expensively and/or incompletely mechanically
recycled, for example, Styrofoam packaging materials or
electronic plastic waste. We are currently developing similar
enzymatic treatments for polypropylene and polyethylene
packaging materials.
The output of both of our innovations is a high-quality
feedstock that can economically compete with new feedstock from
fossil fuels. In other words, plastic back into plastic. Our
mid-term objective is to decouple plastic production from
fossil-based sources.
Just as important, it means that upcycling of used plastic
can occur at a profit, creating an economic incentive for local
communities to construct affordable upcycling facilities to
collect and convert all of their plastics into valuable
feedstock at a net savings to their budgets, rather than at a
cost.
In summary, our upcycling technology innovations are able
to process all types of used plastics, including degraded
plastics like marine debris, and produce a high-quality
feedstock that can ready be converted into new plastic. We can
perform bio-enzymatic upcycling at room temperature and can
significantly reduce the head needed for pyrolysis, driving
substantial reductions in energy consumption and associated air
pollution and greenhouse gases. We can capture and segregate
chemical contaminants in used plastics. For example, this is
where PFAS would fall into place.
By making used plastic too valuable to burn or throw away,
we can help make plastic circularity a global reality.
I want to thank you for your time and consideration of this
testimony. I look forward to y our questions and comments.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Kravetz follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Merkley. Thank you to all of our witnesses. Much
appreciated.
I want to start out, Dr. Eriksen, when I was a kid, we
always referred to wax paper cups. Paper cups today are mostly
not coated in wax, they are coated in plastic. Is there a
particular reason that, at least for cold drinks, we could not
return to wax paper cups?
Mr. Eriksen. I see no reason why we could not return to
some of those materials we grew up with. Same here, a wax
coating on paper does function as a moisture barrier. Yes, we
could. Actually they still exist today. If you look at the
packaging for lettuces and cabbages in the agricultural sector,
you see wax-coated cardboard utilized frequently as a water
barrier.
Senator Merkley. Now I want to turn to your powerful
display of what you found in the gut of a single camel, or from
inside the skeleton of a single camel. I have seen similar
displays from many marine species. Is it fair to say that if we
are looking at the gut of, well, I have seen them for dolphins
and sharks and so forth, that we often see a huge accumulation
in marine birds as well, in the oceans affecting our wildlife?
Mr. Eriksen. We do see similar impacts. I have seen used
plastics in other marine life, especially. Many colleagues,
whenever a whale washes ashore on the west coast of the United
States, they do look in the gut. They frequently find plastic
film, other objects, fishing gear sometimes.
I got my start on Midway Atoll. I went there actually
surveying the history of the bases that were there. I stumbled
upon hundreds of albatross skeletons, and just pulling out of
them bottle caps, cigarette lighters, all kinds of random
fragments of plastic, a lot of this stuff. Yes, the impacts are
not just camels in the desert, but here closer to home we see
tremendous impacts.
Senator Merkley. If these, it looks like mostly bags, I
think you said, and you pointed out in your chart for better
alternatives a variety of alternatives to plastic that
biodegrade better. You set those into different types of
ecosystems to see in real life, I think you said forests,
deserts, and Everglades.
Mr. Eriksen. Three ocean settings.
Senator Merkley. Had those bags that you found in that
camel gut, if they had been made out of these other materials,
would they have biodegraded and not accumulated in the stomach
in the same fashion?
Mr. Eriksen. I am confident if these were made from some of
these new polymers out there, the biodegradable polymers, that
I would not have this here today, that it wouldn't exist.
Senator Merkley. Isn't it the case that some bioplastics,
although they start from materials that are not fossil fuels,
produce results that are very similar in the final product, as
with the fossil plastics?
Mr. Eriksen. Bioplastics is a very big umbrella. There are
biobased; you can actually take sugar cane and other materials
and make polyethylene, polypropylene, PET. There is a whole
group of biodegradable polymers, very different. It is a big
umbrella; it casts a wide net of materials.
Biodegradable materials are the ones that we studied here
that cannot persist in these six different environments that we
tested.
Senator Merkley. Ms. Simon, so we have this big umbrella of
alternative products, some of which biodegrade better than
others. Has Word Wildlife investigated and found that there are
kinds of advice for policymakers about what types of products
might be a good substitute on the front end for single-use
plastics?
Ms. Simon. Yes, absolutely, thank you. I would begin with,
you have to look at a couple of things when thinking about
biobased and biodegradable materials. In regard to biobased, we
are sourcing it from something that grows, agricultural
products. You have to assess a different set of environmental
and social risks, and economic risks associated with that
around land use, water.
There are absolutely ways to assess that and mitigate that
risk. It is just about understanding and addressing those up
front.
Now, if that feedstock or source of renewable resource is
going into that bioplastic, and it is designed to be
biodegradable, it is our recommendation that it ends up in
industrial composting, in formal infrastructure. While these
can often break down, it is concerning that it will just result
in more plastic ending up in nature, because people believe it
will just break down.
It requires a lot of different criteria for something to
break down. It has to have microorganisms, it has to have UV
light, a certain level of humidity. Temperature is really
important. You want to make sure that you are designing
materials for the infrastructure we have, so we can get that
material back.
Circularity of materials is about driving toward another
resource. If you go into an industrial composting facility, you
would be able to get back resources like humus, nutrient rich
soil from that composting process, versus just allowing them to
be littered into nature.
Senator Merkley. We have already gone through my 5 minutes.
It passes very quickly. We are going to turn to Vice Chair
Mullin.
Senator Mullin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I have a series of questions, but I want to circle back.
Did you say most of that is single-use plastics, sir?
Mr. Eriksen. Yes, that is my cut-in-half research paper
that we published, is that it is all plastic bags, mostly
plastic bags, not large sheets of film.
Senator Mullin. Bags are not recyclable?
Mr. Eriksen. I am sorry, what is recyclable?
Senator Mullin. Bags are recyclable, right?
Mr. Eriksen. Technically so.
Senator Mullin. That is what I thought, because we put them
in recycle bins all the time. I am just saying, we take
recyclable stuff all the time.
Ms. Simon, you are shaking your head no. That is not one of
the things that D.C. says do not put in recyclables.
Ms. Simon. Yes, they are technically recyclable, but they
are not recycled. We do not have access. Most people cannot
recycle plastic bags. It is problematic.
Senator Mullin. It is not designated as single use, though.
Single use is some of your health care products, your stuff
that you are not allowed to use. I am not getting into the
weeds here, I am just saying that I find that interesting,
because I didn't know that. I thought we were recycling our
bags when we put them in the blue bins all over Washington, DC.
Ms. Simon. They are highly problematic. They get gummed up
in the system.
Senator Mullin. I have no idea how you traveled back with
that. I am assuming you must have not been flying commercial
air, because that would be a heck of a thing to have to check.
A while ago when the Chairman was asking about the stomach
and the other products that would break down faster in marine
life, or in the camel's gut, Ms. Simon, you were shaking your
head like, hmm, in fact, you bit your lip. If I am reading body
language right, which I used to have to do all the time, I
would say that you probably disagree with that a little bit.
Ms. Simon. Kind of talking about what I was highlighting
before, materials breaking down is a very specific process. It
requires a certain set of temperature, relative humidity,
microorganisms, oxygen. This is why biodegradable material will
not break down in a landfill.
That is the same issue in a gut, the type of bacteria----
Senator Mullin. What I am saying is, you are not certain
that the alternatives would actually break down?
Ms. Simon. That is why we recommend infrastructure versus
hoping it will work out.
Senator Mullin. This brings me back to my point about
alternative recycling. I remember when we had paper bags, and
people were like, this is bad for us, we do not want to be
doing that, we need to get rid of paper bags and go to plastic.
Plastic was the clean alternative. I think we all remember
that.
What I do not want to do here is have another solution that
we think is the new solution, and we actually do not know if it
is accurate or not. I think we need to know, because obviously
we have two people that disagree on if it will break down or if
it does not break down. One thing that we can agree with is we
can find an alternative to how to have single-use plastics
become recyclable. I think that is where we need to go back
into, which Mr. Kravetz, which is kind of what your company is
trying to do, right?
Mr. Kravetz. Yes. We can actually upcycle all types of
plastics, including degraded plastics. The technology basically
enables us to add what is missing to the mix, so we are not
doing the pyrolysis, we are enabling the pyrolysis by guiding
the carbon-carbon links within that scope. In the somatic, we
are breaking it down regardless, without energy or solvent
treatments.
Senator Mullin. It is my understanding you are launching
your first fully commercially developed GSF's carbon nanotube
technology, is that right?
Mr. Kravetz. Yes.
Senator Mullin. It is coming out this month?
Mr. Kravetz. We are working with Europe's largest advanced
recycling facility, one of the best ones out there, actually.
What we are doing is enabling that process to have an optimized
plant design that can be implemented at scale globally. Here in
the States, we could bring that plant to sign and up to local
communities on their plastic needs, create value for their
plastic before it reaches the environment.
Senator Mullin. What milestones are you hitting to keep
this technology from coming to the United States?
Mr. Kravetz. We could start having conversations of
bringing the technology to the States probably by the middle of
next year. I like to be performance and data driven. Once we
have that industrial scale plant up and running, then we can
say, Okay, what are the needs and the types of plastics we want
to launch here in the States, start having those conversations.
We could talk about a licensing package for local communities
where they say, Okay, we have this amount, this volume, these
types of plastics that we want to process, and do that at scale
with a plant design that is already optimized at a 30 to 40----
Senator Mullin. All right.
Mr. Kravetz [continuing]. volume.
Senator Mullin. I think this committee would be interested
in knowing when that starts happening what barriers you are
facing, so maybe we could work together.
One last thing. When I was growing up, WWF meant World
Wrestling Federation. It has totally changed my concept of what
that meaning is now.
Thank you all for being here. I appreciate it. I yield
back.
Senator Merkley. Thank you, Senator Mullin.
Chair Carper?
Senator Carper. Thank you. As it turns out, we have been
wrestling with this for a while.
[Laughter.]
Senator Carper. I am going to ask a question in a minute of
Ms. Simon on infrastructure for material. First, a question. I
always look for where we agree. It is easy to find disagreement
around this place. Just very briefly, each of you, what is one
major point for where the three of you agree? Go ahead, Mr.
Eriksen, just very briefly. Major point of agreement.
I know you are probably stunned. I am looking for a point
where you three agree on something. It is important.
Mr. Eriksen. Where we both agree on something?
Senator Carper. The three of you.
Mr. Eriksen. Oh, the three of us. Well, we agree that there
is a need for urgent, urgent action to solve this problem. I
think we are also in agreement that the private sector is
stepping up to the challenge.
I think where we might disagree----
Senator Carper. No. I am asking where you agree. You have
answered my question. Go ahead, Ms. Simon. Where do you agree?
Ms. Simon. I think we all agree we need to start with
reduction.
Senator Carper. Did you say reduction?
Ms. Simon. Yes.
Senator Carper. All right, Mr. Kravetz?
Mr. Kravetz. I agree we have to face the challenge. I think
companies like mine are stepping up and developing solutions
that can be scalable.
Senator Carper. Good, thanks. Ms. Simon, here is a question
for you, but I am going to lead into it. For the past couple of
years, this committee has become, as you know, deeply engaged
on a variety of issues. One of those is material circularity.
This includes improving our re-use and our recycling systems to
ensure that valuable materials that could be turned into new
products are not just being lost to our landfills, or to
pollution and incineration.
Yesterday, along with Senator Boozman, a Republican from
Arkansas, I co-hosted a textile recycling roundtable, right
here where you are sitting. We talked a lot about where we
agreed as folks from different backgrounds. Ms. Simon, in your
testimony, you mentioned a similar situation, where some
biobased plastics are compatible with existing recycling
streams and others are not. What supporting infrastructure is
needed for recycling streams so that all materials are
compatible, and what should the Federal Government's role be in
establishing and scaling this infrastructure?
Ms. Simon. I think what is really important is that we have
criteria around what go into our infrastructure. Whether it is
coming from biobased sources or other alternatives, that we
have clear design criteria, so that when that material ends up
in the facility, no matter what the technology is, it can be
cleanly reprocessed in a way that can produce high value
secondary materials.
For biobased, that could be something coming from sugar
cane and then going into a PET bottle, like mentioned, and then
going into the recycling facility, or it could be a PAJ going
into a compost facility. All designed for that infrastructure
that it is going into.
It is design guidelines, and then following that. We need
policies that set those guidelines and create a funding
mechanism to make sure that there is financial sustainability
for those facilities to continue recycling and composting that
material.
Senator Carper. All right, thank you. Question again for
the entire panel, we will start off with you, Mr. Kravetz, and
go to your right. Earlier this year, our committee met right
here in this room, the Environment and Public Works Committee,
unanimously advanced two pieces of bipartisan recycling
legislation. One of those bills, I think it is called the
Recycling and Composting Accountability Act, would require the
Environmental Protection Agency to collect and to make publicly
available data on recycling and composting waste across the
Country.
Question, starting with you, Mr. Kravetz. Would you please
share the importance of increased data collection on addressing
the plastics crisis and considering material alternatives?
Mr. Kravetz. Collection is key, of course, to avoid
plastics from reaching the environment and the oceans. Then you
need to set up all the infrastructure to move plastic and get
this all set up to go to advanced recycling facilities that can
handle every type of plastic, not just single waste streams.
That is important to understand.
The ability to tackle all the plastics solves the problem
of having to sort everything upstream.
Senator Carper. Same question, Ms. Simon, please.
Ms. Simon. We are proud to have supported the Recycling and
Composting Accountability Act. We look forward to working with
the committee further on that.
We believe that transparency is key to drive change.
Whether you are transparent in what you are making and how you
can manage it, or in delivering on strategies. We started up a
program called Resource Plastic to have companies build some
transparency into what they are making, what format it is in,
where it goes in the world and what happens to it. That way
they can really develop the right strategies to address their
plastic waste footprint.
It means we can actually directly drive improvement on the
impacts by having that transparency. It will be the first key
step in creating a plan for the U.S.
Senator Carper. Same question, Mr. Eriksen. Very briefly,
if you will.
Mr. Eriksen. I would also agree that our recycling is
essential on the front-end, designing for recyclability and
compostability is essential.
Senator Carper. Good. Thanks so much. Thank you all.
Senator Merkley. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Now, Senator Capito, welcome.
Senator Capito. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you all for being here today. We very much appreciate
this.
I would like to ask Mr. Kravetz a question about, I
understand what you are doing would be under the term advanced
recycling. Are you taking single-use plastics and making them
more advanced plastic materials? How is that process, without
getting too technical?
Mr. Kravetz. Thank you for the question. Advanced recycling
is basically three families of technologies that take different
types of plastics and bring them back to feedstock to reduce
the plastic. What my company does is in the pyrolysis space
enable the pyrolysis to operate economically and efficiently by
adding what we think is missing in the mix, which is carbon
nanotubes. That is one technology.
A second technology is the ability to depolymerize or break
down any type of plastic into its building blocks so we can
make new plastic again.
Senator Capito. Can we do that now?
Mr. Kravetz. Technically, it is possible, yes.
Senator Capito. Is it affordable?
Mr. Kravetz. Yes.
Senator Capito. I guess my big question on all of these
issues, because we have two recycling bills that we are hoping
to get all the way through. They are sort of, they are pretty
easy. I live in rural America, and we do not have the
opportunity for recyclability through our municipalities too
much. It is not widespread.
How do we get this topic down to the everyday user of
plastic? I know the big industrial users are probably the ones
that we are looking at here. How do you relate this very sort
of technical issue to everyday people, whether they are an ag
community or a rural community?
I will start with you, Dr. Eriksen.
Mr. Eriksen. How we communicate this problem, the
challenges to rural America?
Senator Capito. Simply, yes.
Mr. Eriksen. I think you can explain to people some of the
human health concerns, and the research is coming out very
quickly showing the impacts of micro nanoplastics. I think
telling people about the impacts on wildlife and the impact on
our pocketbook, what the true costs are to try to capture some
of these plastics and bring them back to the waste stream.
I think when you talk about human health, the wildlife
impacts, but also the bottom line, what it costs them and their
communities.
Senator Capito. Ms. Simon?
Ms. Simon. Yes, just building on that, in that
communication we help to educate them, we empower them with
easy actions. Today it requires some sort of decoder ring to
figure out what goes in your recycling bin. It needs to be
easier for them to be able to do it. We need to design in more
standardization to make it so that it is not up to the consumer
to figure out to recycle or compost their materials.
Senator Capito. If we are looking at landfills, for
instance, which have all kinds of different wastes going in, is
there a movement now, and I will get to you again, Mr. Kravetz,
on that first question, is there availability working with the
landfill owners to be able to successfully separate out and
make that an economic model as well?
Ms. Simon. Coming from landfills?
Senator Capito. Yes.
Ms. Simon. I have not done that research to understand what
would happen if we recaptured material from landfills. I will
say there is probably a lot of high value material in our
landfills today considering how resource-constrained we are. It
would probably be interesting to research that. I do not have
that data for you, I am sorry.
Senator Capito. Okay. Mr. Kravetz, I will give you that
question, that one I just asked, and then the one before. How
do you translate this down to the regular consumer in terms of
the importance of this?
Mr. Kravetz. I do agree with what has been said before, in
educating the consumers. I do think, and the premise of my
company is that plastic is valuable and recycling companies,
advanced recycling companies will have to pay for plastic.
Making plastic reusable material avoids or changes the concept
of being waste. If you consider plastic waste, Okay, so we are
throwing it away. If it has some value and it is reusable, then
the mindset might change, that we can actually start recycling.
Then of course, you need to build the infrastructure and
start recycling, prove it at scale.
Senator Capito. Right.
Mr. Kravetz. The shift in thinking of this as waste or used
recyclable plastic I think is key.
Senator Capito. If we look at what we have done with paper,
paper is looked at as recyclable, I think. When you see
newspapers, or any kind of paper, it used to be, when that
started in the 1970's, you would see a little print on the
bottom of your stationery, this paper is recyclable. That was
unusual.
Now, I do not think we assume everything has been recycled,
but a lot of it has been. Do you envision a time when plastic,
with advanced recycling, could get to that point?
Mr. Kravetz. Yes, for sure. That is what is going on. I
have been in this for a few years now, have been going to
different events throughout the world. Now the whole value
chain is talking. This is massive collaboration between plastic
manufacturers, transformers, brands, and the advanced recycling
companies.
I think we are getting there. Now the technologies have to
scale, companies like mine that have developed disruptive
technologies and taking charge of all the plastics that can be
recycled, not just single stream. I think we will make a
difference.
Senator Capito. Thank you. Thank you all.
Senator Merkley. Senator Whitehouse?
Senator Whitehouse. Thanks, Chairman. Just for the record,
I do not think plastic bags are recyclable in D.C. They are not
in Rhode Island. Plus, the recycling rate completely stinks.
There are some plastics that go into the bin that are zero
percent recycled. There are others, I think the top is 20
percent, and the average is single digit, like 8 or 9 percent
of what you actually put in the bin to recycle getting
recycled.
It is very, very much a failed system, almost to the point
where we put consumers into the role of being unwitting actors
in a play in which recycling takes place except at the end of
the day it is faux recycling, it does not actually take place.
When you look at the other side of the market, if you look
at single-use plastics, we are lucky to hit 2 percent recycled
content in how single-use plastics, disposable plastics, are
manufactured. Clearly, both on the manufacturing side at 2
percent and on the alleged recycling side at 8 or 9 percent,
these are catastrophic failures, when you consider all the
effort that is put into maintaining, I will put air quotes
around it, recycling.
I think if it is going to change, the economic signals have
to change. At the moment it is cheaper to buy brand new virgin
plastic and make your plastic bags and make your spoons and
make your containers than it is to use recycling, hence 2
percent. If that economic signal shifts, then suddenly
recycling works, because if there is one rule of capitalism, it
is that profit is imperative. It is really uphill sledding for
a company to make economic decisions that are against its best
interest.
I think we need to, frankly, put a recycling fee on virgin
plastic that is destined for single use. That will balance the
market and that will also provide a good price signal to help
companies like yours, Mr. Kravetz, to be able to have a better
business model. Now people are really looking.
If you do not send that price signal, then public pressure
becomes really important. Thank you, Chairman Merkley, for
holding this hearing. Thank you, Chairman Carper, for your
leadership in this space. Public pressure matters.
I would single out Unilever, the enormous European-based
company, for what I think at this point is the best corporate
pledge so far that kicking in in 2025, they are going to take a
kilo of plastic waste out of the environment for every kilo of
plastic they put into the environment through their business.
That does obviously give them a big incentive to reduce the
amount of plastic they put out into the system, and to look for
alternatives. It also creates a market on the other side,
because they are going to have to buy plastic back. They are
not going to send Unilever employees around the world to scoop
up plastic themselves. They are going to create supply chains
to get waste plastic off of the shores of countries where
plastic is shin-deep in the wrack line of the coast, because of
so much coming ashore from the ocean.
I remember landing in Bamako, Mali with John McCain. We
were driving from the airport into downtown Bamako, and we went
by a big field. I turned to John and said, I have never seen so
many crows in my life in a field. Do you think those are crows
or ravens or what are they? There were thousands and thousands
of things flapping out in the field.
It wasn't birds at all, it was plastic bags. Mali's
standard means for carrying things around is a black plastic
bag. This field was just filled with them, to the point where I
thought an enormous flock of crows or ravens in the thousands
had come in.
When Unilever's pledge goes live, it suddenly makes sense
for somebody to go out there and pick up all that plastic and
take it into Unilever's supply chain. I think it is really
important that we add to this technical conversation an
economic conversation about aligning the economic incentives.
Otherwise, charity is not going to help. Incentives make the
difference.
Let me ask Ms. Simon to comment briefly on that. Then I
will yield back.
Ms. Simon. I agree, we need to create financial incentives
in the system that will not only drive, level the playing field
for companies that are already out there trying to redesign and
rethink the materials they are using, reducing, starting with
reduction, to be able to do that and move into re-use systems
and into monomaterials that are easy to recycle and formats
that are easier to recycle.
That incentive will also, when they are paying for that
through whatever policy mechanism, whether that is DRS or EPR,
it allows, it pays for the infrastructure and the technology in
the infrastructure to return secondary materials that are high
quality. That becomes the new supply chain for them. They can
then pull that material and put it into their products and
recycled content instead of having to go back and buy more
virgin.
Senator Whitehouse. Thank you, Chairman.
Senator Merkley. Thank you very much.
Senator Mullin wanted to ask a followup question on that.
Senator Mullin. Not really a followup question, but this
whole debate about plastic bags being recyclable or not,
according to ZeroWaste.DC.gov, plastics are recyclable. In
fact, they tell you exactly where to drop them off. They tell
you, their website says, ``Have you ever been unsure about
which items can be recycled or which items are considered too
hazardous to put in the trash bin? With new where it goes
tools, we can help take the guesswork out. Specifically, drop
off plastic bags, wrap and film, drop off these items for
recyclable, all bags, wraps, film, should be clean and empty.
To find the nearest drop-off location near you, please visit
plastic film recycling website.''
My point is, on all this is they are recyclable. It is
ridiculous that we do not know what is actually recyclable and
what is first use and what is not first use. Yet we have all
these solutions. Maybe we should start with what is recyclable
and what is not, start at that point and then we can take a lot
of the guessing out of it.
Like I said before, plastic was supposed to be the new
green when we got rid of paper bags. Let's not be too knee-jerk
reaction here and do more damage instead of actually finding
out a solution that is good for all of us moving forward.
Senator Whitehouse. I should have been clearer. I meant
through the bin, the blue bin at the end of the driveway.
Senator Merkley. We are going to continue some exploration
of these issues. No one here has mentioned some of the
exploration of using products made from, for example, those
folks working with mushrooms to be able to reduce products,
people working with seaweed.
Dr. Eriksen and Ms. Simon, are either of you familiar with
those alternatives for single-use plastics? Is there promise
there?
Mr. Eriksen. Yes, there is tremendous promise. Something
Senator Whitehouse said about capturing some of the negative
externalities on the back end, some plastics just get lost to
the environment. I call them, the bags, the escape artists.
They get out and they have true costs. While they are typically
recyclable, there is such a cost to collecting them, sorting
them, transporting them, landfilling them, trying to recycle
them, there are many that get lost to the environment and cause
harm.
There are so many solutions on the front end that are
mitigating those problems, capturing those negative
externalities, like some of these biomaterials that we did
study.
We did study these because we wanted to see what happens if
they really get lost in different environments, in ocean
environments and land-based environments. Some of them really
perform very well. Some, like the PHAs and PHBs, degrade as
fast as wood and paper. During their utility, they have the
functionality as plastics, the water vapor barrier and
packaging products.
There is promise in some of the new biomaterials. Again, I
should say that bioplastics, the large umbrella, you have the
biobased, there are biodegradable ones, the new materials very
promising.
Senator Merkley. Ms. Simon?
Ms. Simon. I think seaweed is especially interesting,
because it has some net environmental benefits to it. There has
been a lot of exploration into sourcing seaweed for feed fuel
and materials. Today there are converters of it, but there is
nothing at scale that matches products. It is something that is
being explored.
Mushrooms, too, there has been a lot of transport packaging
from Steelcase, even explored in electronics companies because
of its cushioning properties, where they can use that and match
expanded polystyrene. I think for any of these sources you are
looking at, can you sustainably source it in a way that is
beneficial to the environment and communities, and there are
methods to assess that.
Then you are looking at, are they technically viable to
meet the performance criteria of the different products. Not
every feedstock, not every crop can make every single plastic.
You are looking at a variety of different agricultural needs
there. Then again, you want to make sure that any of those
materials can be recovered in a system, so we can get them back
and use them again, whether that is through re-use, recycling
or compost.
Senator Merkley. Ms. Simon, you mentioned metal as an
alternative. One of the things that came up recently that
surprised me was that often aluminum cans are coated on the
inside with a layer of plastic. Is that accurate, so when you
buy beer and soda or even water in aluminum bottles, is it
coated on the inside on the inside with plastic?
Ms. Simon. It depends on what is being packaged in it, and
if it is highly acidic and corrosive. Sometimes they have to
line it if it a highly acidic or corrosive liquid or product.
Senator Merkley. Water is not?
Ms. Simon. Water should not have a lining.
Senator Merkley. How about beer?
Ms. Simon. I am not quite sure on that, but I do not
believe beer has a coating in it.
Senator Merkley. Can you get us more information about what
aluminum is coated, and which isn't?
Ms. Simon. I can. I do not have it with me, but I can, yes.
Senator Merkley. Great. Also, then what happens to that
plastic when the aluminum is recycled that is coated?
Ms. Simon. It is just melting in the process.
Senator Merkley. It basically becomes vapors that basically
get exhausted and affected the local community?
Ms. Simon. It can be if there is not good air and quality
management coming out of those recycling facilities.
Senator Merkley. I want to turn back to the bioplastics.
When you talked about them breaking down, in my head, when I
see something made out of bamboo or some other wood product, I
am kind of like, Okay, well, nature has been dealing with wood
for a billion years, so I am pretty comfortable it is not going
to break down into stuff that has various chemicals in it that
will affect the environment.
I am concerned about whether the bioplastics that break
down in these different experiments, they may become very tiny,
but do they become kind of microplastics that might still
affect the ecology differently than if they were made from
cellulose?
Mr. Eriksen. Good question. That very much depends on the
additives, it depends on the properties you want. Often, they
will do laminates. Right here you will see some where they were
laminating different biomaterials to increase the water vapor
barrier. With those, as those begin to degrade, if the
biomaterial degrades, if there is a metal layer or a
polyethylene layer, that is going to degrade also and produce
microplastics. If there are additives that are UV inhibitors,
for example, or other chemicals, those toxins may also leach
off as the biomaterial degrades.
It really depends on what kinds of additives you are
putting into it. In some cases, though, there are no additives.
For example, this one straw that is here, and this bit of film,
you can use the pure material in some packaging applications.
When they degrade, there are no toxic legacy materials left
behind.
Senator Merkley. Which should be our goal.
Mr. Eriksen. Yes.
Senator Merkley. Mr. Chairman, Senator Carper.
Senator Carper. Thanks again for just a terrific hearing,
and to all of you for joining us. This is timely and important.
Erin Simon, I am going to pick on you again, with no malice
intended. If you probably ask most of my colleagues here in the
Senate about Green Guides, they wouldn't know what to say. Our
staff on this committee, they would know. I think most of my
colleagues, including me at one time, would not have any idea
what they were talking about.
As you know, about every 10 years the Federal Trade
Commission updates its Guides for the Use of Environmental
Marketing Claims. It is also known as Green Guides. Green
Guides provide guidance for producers to label their products,
they can label them as recyclable, they can label them as
compostable, or they can label them as environmentally
friendly.
Unfortunately, the Green Guides have not been updated, I am
told, since 2012. That is like 11 years. A lot has changed in
11 years. The market for new packaging alternatives is rapidly
evolving as well. This has led to manufacturers making claims
that are sometimes misleading about whether an alternative
package is recyclable, or whether it is compostable, or
neither.
This is why earlier this year some of my colleagues and I,
colleagues on this committee, actually, wrote to the Federal
Trade Commission, and we encouraged them to update these Green
Guides. It has been long enough, in fact, it has been too long.
Ms. Simon, how can updating the Green Guides help reduce
consumer confusion on what types of products are recyclable,
what are compostable and what are more sustainable?
Ms. Simon. We too were happy to see that the Green Guides
were being updated and WWF was a part of that process. Much of
my testimony echoes what we wrote in the Green Guides. We need
to evaluate where materials are coming from and have
verification and accountability for where they end up.
The Green Guides can really start by ensuring that
materials that are claimed to be recyclable, compostable, or
more sustainable actually are. This means allowing only
specific formats of materials which a majority of the Country
has access to recycling can be called recyclable, not just
technically recyclable, but access to.
With compostable, we need a definition that ensures
consumers know where to put those compostable items and that
compost rooms are either industrial, where someone picks them
up from your house, or home compostable, where according to
ASTM standards, where those products will break down in
anyone's back yard.
Senator Carper. Thank you. Thank you for that.
I like to quote Winston Churchill. Winston Churchill was a
great hero during World War II, he carried the British people
on his back to victory over the Germans, with our help. Gosh,
less than a year after he was, he was just a hero, the voters
of Great Britain threw him out. They put somebody else in as
Prime Minister. Winston Churchill was leaving 10 Downing
Street, moving out, and the press was there, and one of them
asked, ``For you, Mr. Churchill, is this the end?'' Famously,
he said, ``It is not the end, it is not the beginning of the
end.'' He said, ``This is the end of the beginning.''
Lenny Kravitz, probably a relative of yours, quite a well-
known entertainer in his own right, once paraphrased Churchill.
I do not know if he was a one-hit wonder or not, I think he had
a couple, but one of his more popular songs is the lyric that
it ain't over until it is over. This debate and conversation on
this topic is going to be going on for a while. I am delighted
that we are doing it, and delighted that you are doing it with
us.
That leads me into my question on Federal legislative
action. I think I speak for my colleagues and me, we have
enjoyed hearing about each of your respective efforts to
consider materials' hardness to plastic within your respective
fields and industries. While we know that there is a whole
suite of policy options available to us, will each of you share
the top legislative action that you believe Congress should
take within the next year to help our Country address the
plastics crisis? We will turn to a relative descendant of Lenny
Kravitz to respond first to that question.
Mr. Kravetz. Thank you for the question. I think the
criteria, first and foremost, has to be performance based. Not
looking at specific technology on its own merits, but comparing
it to other types of technologies. That is when innovative
companies like mine can actually rise to the challenge of
meeting those standards. That is one thing.
Maybe the second thing is on the materials, where we are
talking about replacing one material with another one, we do
have to look at the total carbon footprint that each material
has. There are materials that are better than plastics, others
that are not. Let's not fall into a blame game, and let's try
to figure out, with performance-based technologies and full
carbon footprint of competitive materials, which ones are best
for what situation.
Senator Carper. All right, thank you.
Ms. Simon, same question. What would be the top legislative
action that you feel Congress should take within the next year
or so to help our Nation address the plastics crisis?
Ms. Simon. I believe that extended producer responsibility
can really connect the creation of these materials, no matter
what they are, to their end of life through transparency,
design standardization and financial models. It can really help
us to reimagine the linear economy, so that everyone can have
access to those recycling systems, and we can make sure that we
are getting those materials back and increasing economic
growth.
In fact, later today I will be in this same room talking
with some corporate partners, and they will be advocating for
extended producer responsibility also.
Senator Carper. Thanks. Dr. Eriksen?
Mr. Eriksen. I wrote something similar, EPR. I think an EPR
bill would allow the companies who are making materials that
become waste participate financially in the recovery and
management of those materials. Also a bottle bill, a national
bill. I think that would go a long way to getting back the
material from the environment.
Senator Carper. All right, good, thank you.
Abraham Lincoln was once asked, what is the role of
government. He replied famously, ``The role of government is to
do for the people what they cannot do for themselves.'' On this
committee, we are oftentimes looking for how do we harness
market forces in order to achieve something good for the people
of this Country, maybe the good of the world.
We talked about incentives and so forth during the course
of this hearing, but I am always looking for ways to harness
market forces. If anybody has a thought, a closing thought on
market forces, I would welcome that. Dr. Eriksen?
Mr. Eriksen. Having been on this issue for about two
decades, I have met so many young entrepreneurs and innovators
that are on the front end or creating businesses in the re-use
and refill economy in biomaterials. I think those market forces
can reduce the amount of waste that is in the waste stream,
especially the harm that we see coming from single-use
plastics. Those two market drivers, those business models, are
powerful.
Senator Carper. Good, thank you.
Ms. Simon?
Ms. Simon. I would agree with that. I would build on that
innovation is not going to just happen in the materials and the
technologies, it is going to be in the systems to manage them.
We have seen the shared economy really grow, low water and
energy cleaning technologies for re-use systems expanding.
I believe there is a lot of desire to solve this with
unique and innovative solutions. I think between new
technologies to recycling, new technologies and systems for re-
use, we have a good opportunity to get there. There is a lot of
science that says that that will happen if we pull all the
levers that we have.
Senator Carper. Okay, thanks.
Ms. Simon. Thank you.
Mr. Kravetz. I think that the concept of changing waste
plastic into usable plastic is key, incentive for consumers to
change this is key. Industry wide, there is a lot more
collaboration going on. Anywhere from design for recycling to
changing the concept that something can be recycled but it is
not recyclable, or something could be recyclable, but it is not
really recycled.
That is going to make a difference. The incentives have to
be on actually giving value to the plastic, so that it does not
end up in the environment in the first place and build on
technologies that can scale and change this paradigm of plastic
waste versus used plastic.
Senator Carper. Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, this has been timely and I think well-
attended. We appreciate very much all the work that you do and
sharing your thoughts with us this morning.
Senator Merkley. Thank you, Chairman Carper. You quoted
Churchill and Lincoln, but what reverberates in my mind is a
quote from that esteemed public leader Senator Carper, which
is, do more of what works and less of what does not. That sums
up kind of a strategy.
I wanted to return for a moment to this conversation about
plastic bags and whether they are single use or not.
Nationally, less than 10 percent of plastic bags are recycled.
Very few places in the Country can you put plastic bags into a
bin. If it does, the wind blows them out. They do not take
them.
What is happening is stores in some places say, you can
bring them back to us, and we will find a way for them to be
sent somewhere where they will be turned into new plastic bags
possibly or possibly plastic lumber, is what I am seeing.
Essentially, at this moment, it is inefficient to recycle
plastic bags. They do not get recycled. they end up going into,
well, into the landfills, or they get blown away and end up in
the ecosystem, as we see from this.
I keep coming back to that display and thinking about all
the other pictures I have seen of plastic building up in the
guts of turtles, seals, dolphins, whales, et cetera. Now you
have added camels, which I hadn't seen before, on land. Have we
ever seen, Dr. Eriksen, a problem where essentially animals are
digesting wood and ending up with the same sort of problem in
their gut?
Mr. Eriksen. These animals forage on wood, they forage on
acacia trees and leaves, and they digest those just fine. Many
hoof stock animals or ruminants are eating plant material and
cellulose and digesting it when they can, or passing it when
they can not.
Those natural materials have been consumed by life for
millions of years. This is a new material that does not work in
that situation.
Senator Merkley. Thank you. To my point, you never see a
picture of a gut cut open and it is full of wood, because
animals have evolved in a world where we have plant-based
material, and they either eat it and digest it or they do not
eat it. It is not an issue.
One of the things that we do know is often, globs of
plastic look like they may possibly be more edible items, for
example, sea turtles that they are jellyfish and so forth. One
of the advantages of trying to find cellulose based products
is, on the front end they are not made from fossil gas. Our
fossil gas systems, our methane gas systems, they have a huge
impact on climate just in the distribution of the gas before
the plastic is ever made in the first place.
Then, under the existing systems of chemical recycling,
they use a tremendous amount of heat. Mr. Kravetz, you may have
a different system. We will get back to you in a couple of
years and see what we have learned about the application of
that technology.
Essentially, the pyrolysis strategy produces another round
of carbon and basically chemical fumes that are highly cancer-
causing. Then they are basically burned, and you have another
round of carbon production and pollution. You have three rounds
of carbon production and pollution in basically utilizing
plastic in the first place, which is why we are holding this
hearing about alternatives to plastic.
I was struck that last week, Britain said its utensils are
now going to be non-plastic utensils. Are either of you
familiar with that, and are they allowing bioplastics, or are
they turning to wood?
Mr. Eriksen. I am not familiar with that.
Senator Merkley. I know on my last trip overseas, visiting
my daughter, the utensils I saw were all wood. I am not sure
how they are actually being implemented. I think that mainland
Europe has already moved in this direction as well.
I did look up what it would cost if we were to utilize wood
here. Right now, a wood utensil costs about 2 cents, is what I
found. Again, this idea on the front end, if we can avoid
fossil gas, if we can produce a product that if it does end up
discarded it does not cause the problems in the ecosystem that
plastic products cause, it is a big advantage.
To this debate between, if you will, a bag made of paper
that is cellulose or one made of plastic, I would always vote
for the bag made of paper, because cellulose does not produce
the problems. Plant material has been part of the world, as you
put it, from the beginning.
Any other insights any of you would like to add on the
upfront strategy of replacing single-use plastics with
alternative materials? Ms. Simon?
Ms. Simon. I would just say that if we are going to move to
an alternative material, like forest-based cellulose, that we
should be doing so in a thoughtful manner, sourcing it either
from recycled content and/or Forest Stewardship Council
certified forests, so we know that those working forests are
managed to be renewable for future generations.
Senator Merkley. One of the products I have seen most
commonly used in this regard is bamboo, because bamboo can grow
very quickly, can be done in kind of a plantation style
production, as opposed to harvesting natural forests for wood.
I think the responsible thinking about that life cycle is what
you are pointing to.
Ms. Simon. Bamboo can be considered a part of the Forest
Stewardship Council, too, you just have to address any land
conversion to the bamboo plantation in the first place. There
are ways to mitigate those risks.
Senator Merkley. Yes. As we know, every strategy has
impacts and the point is to evaluate all of them collectively
in order to understand the broader picture of minimal impact.
We wrestled with this in renewable energy, a solar panel takes
up land space, a wind turbine can kill birds, and it disturbs
the view shed, and it requires electric lines to connect it.
There is nothing that does not have an impact. Our goal is
to find the minimum sustainable strategy, that is the
undertaking.
Mr. Eriksen, is there anything else you would like to add?
Mr. Eriksen. I look through a lens of harm, where is the
harm in the environment and to human health. It always comes
back to single-use plastic materials and some of the chemistry
associated with those, the additives.
That is why I often talk about the upstream, as you have.
On the front end, the reusable materials, the refill, the re-
use, and some of these biobased or biodegradable materials,
just to capture those costs. Yes, it is more expensive on the
front end. I think if you do the total lifecycle assessment,
the true cost of managing all this waste and harm it causes
that is often hard to put a price tag on, it often warrants the
front end mitigations that we have talked about.
Senator Merkley. We have had a lot of testimony in this
committee about plastic breaking down into microplastics, how
it ends up in our bodies and now in every aspect of our bodies,
and it often has endocrine disruptors, chemicals in it that
affect public health. Have we ever heard of cellulose breaking
down into micro-cellulose and affecting human health?
Mr. Eriksen. No.
Senator Merkley. Thank you.
Back to my point that we have a product that is creating
huge human health issues and is creating huge ecological issues
and to the degree we can replace it on the front end with
something that does not create those health issues we are in a
much better place.
I do look forward to more detailed information in this
committee about other alternatives that are being produced on
the front end. I mentioned that we have innovators who are
using different plant materials, such as mushrooms or seaweed.
My colleague, Senator Mullin, has a company in Oklahoma
called Utopia Plastics. It is using a plant material to make
straws that harden when they are in water, so they do not
collapse like a paper straw. If have no idea if it is
biodegradable or not.
The point is many small businesses are experimenting with
approaches. Our goal in public policy is to understand what
approaches, when viewed in their entirety, are having the last
impact and make the most sense. They continue to be a topic of
exploration for the committee.
Thank you very much for bringing your knowledge and
experience to bear.
With that, I think there are some closing comments I need
to make.
In closing, I ask unanimous consent to submit for the
record a variety of materials that include letters from
stakeholders and other materials that relate to today's
hearing. Is there an objection?
Hearing none, those materials will be put into the record.
[The referenced information follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Merkley. Senators will be allowed to submit written
questions for the record through the close of business on
Thursday, November 9th. We will compile those questions and we
will send them to all of you. If you can reply to us by
November 30th, that would be helpful for us to wrap up the
record of the hearing.
With that, the committee is adjourned. Thank you.
[Whereupon, at 11:21 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
[all]