The Busan summit was billed as the culmination of two years of talks, with U.N. countries having previously agreed to “forge an internationally binding agreement by 2024.” Greenpeace called it “the most important multilateral treaty” since the 2015 Paris climate agreement.
But in the end, differences proved irreconcilable between those countries wanting a comprehensive deal tackling the root cause of the plastic pollution crisis — production — and those countries whose economies are tied to continued demand for the ubiquitous fossil fuel-based material.
The stakes are high. Plastic waste is flowing into the world’s oceans at a rate of around 10 million tons a year and rising, threatening marine biodiversity. Global emissions from plastic production could triple and account for one-fifth of the earth’s remaining carbon budget by 2050, according to one study. Microplastics, meanwhile, are infiltrating everything from brain tissue to breast milk. On current trajectories, plastic production could nearly triple by 2050.
“While it is encouraging that portions of the text have been agreed upon, we must also recognize that a few critical issues still prevent us from reaching a comprehensive agreement,” said the chair presiding over the negotiations — Ecuadorian diplomat Luis Vayas — who proposed suspending the troubled talks until a later date.
The blame game
The EU, alongside more than 100 other countries that included the U.K., had on Thursday backed a new proposal spearheaded by Panama pushing for a global target to reduce plastic production to “sustainable levels,” drawing a clear battle line for the talks.
But three negotiators from countries in the High Ambition Coalition to End Plastic Pollution — granted anonymity to discuss closed-door talks — told POLITICO that Saudi Arabia had coordinated a push from oil-rich and plastic-producing countries to block any proposals for the treaty that threatened to reduce plastic production. The vast majority of plastic is made from oil or natural gas.
