The fact that plastic waste is the focus of this year's UN World Environment Day is something that university professor Bert Meijer can understand and appreciate. Nevertheless, he argues for a renewed view and approach to the issue. "Not that I want to trivialize the environmental pollution surrounding plastic waste, on the contrary. It's a big deal. But we've been having the wrong discussion about this for years, partly fueled by scientists like me. Because we simply can't live without plastic anymore. Therefore, the solution should not be found in abolition, but in the production, use and especially recycling of plastic."
As a silent witness to Meijer's remarkable vision of plastic, which he recently presented during his J.C. Kapteyn Lecture at the Dutch Koninklijk Natuurwetenschappelijk Genootschap, a crumpled sandwich bag lies on his desk. Somewhat uncomfortable, he throws it in the trash.
"My wife doesn't allow me to be seen with this after my lecture," he smiles. "But actually, this is a perfect example of what I hope to make clear. In principle, such bags are not wrong. Just like disposable cups. In fact, cleaning sandwich boxes or hard cups over and over again with soap and water is worse for the environment."
Cleaning sandwich boxes or hard cups over and over again with soap and water is worse for the environment.
Bert Meijer
Meijer understands very well that such a statement raises eyebrows. "In recent years, a total misconception has arisen among the general public about plastic. It has become The Big Wrongdoer, which we would prefer to get rid of completely. So there is more and more attention for initiatives that link up with this."
Greenwashing, he calls it. And moreover, a non-discussion. "Because a world without plastic is unthinkable. It is now in everything: computers, cars, clothing, teeth, medical supplies, and much more. How would we have gotten through the COVID pandemic without plastic? Polymers are so much more important than just those PET bottles, sandwich bags, and disposable bags. So we must not and cannot ban plastic."
Additives as problem and solution
He blames himself and his fellow scientists for this error. "We haven't included the rest of the world enough in the development of polymers." He is referring to the chemical term for the organic molecules that, chemically linked together, form the basis for plastic. "But the production of usable plastic also requires additives, and that is precisely where both the problem and the solution for plastic waste lie," he says.
"There are countless additives that are also used by countless producers. This makes recycling plastic very diverse, difficult, and therefore expensive. The costs of recycling plastic are simply higher than those of producing new plastic."
Contributing to affordable recycling
In that respect, standardizing plastic production seems to be the egg of Columbus and, according to Meijer, this is also an important task for politicians. "Policymakers, in consultation with industry, must take expert measures to simplify production."
"The industry, in turn, must understand the importance of restricting additives and thus contribute to affordable recycling. And that must be accompanied by the use of the type of plastics that are easiest to recycle."
But Meijer also sees a clear responsibility in his own scientific field: to develop plastic that is easy and, above all, cheap to recycle. "The necessary progress has been made with this. And of course, you can expect us scientists to continue with this. But much more is already possible than is currently being put into practice."
You want something to fall apart easily when desired, but also to remain stable when you want to use it. And then it also has to be affordable.
Bert Meijer
A good example of this is his own research, in collaboration with Takuzo Aida of the University of Tokyo, into a new type of plastic that decomposes in salt water. It is easy to recycle, but if it does end up in the sea, it will immediately fall apart.
Experience with this shows how complicated it is to develop alternatives to our current plastic. "You want something to fall apart easily when desired, but also to remain stable when you want to use it. And then it also has to be affordable."
Balance between covalent and non-covalent bonding
The same principle applies to recyclable plastic, he continues: "It is a constant search for the perfect balance between covalent bonding, or a stable material, and non-covalent bonding, or the possibility of reusing the same material over and over again."
"Take the blades of modern wind turbines as an example. That material must be light, resistant to extreme weather conditions for years, but ultimately also easily recyclable."
That sounds like a paradox, Meijer acknowledges. "In the end, it's all about nuance. From a technological point of view, there are already many opportunities to do relatively well. But that requires expert measures from the government, the industry needs an eye for the importance of recycling, and the consumer must use plastic more responsibly."
Don't wait for a quick fix
Because the latter group also has a responsibility, Meijer wants to add. "The biggest plastic problem is in packaging and textiles. We really need to buy less and especially order less online." Otherwise, it is a losing battle, he says. "We can't wait for a quick fix from science. Unless we are willing to pay a lot, but I think we know the answer to that."
