The report was published by the Global Leader of the Natural Capital Value Assessment, which was supported by the American Chemical Council, to study natural factors based on natural capital accounting, using non-traditional financial accounting, including measuring and assessing environmental impacts such as water consumption and And emissions in air, land and water.

The report shows that substituting alternative materials to replace plastic products in consumer goods and packaging will increase environmental costs from $ 139 billion per year to $ 533 billion. This is because solid, lightweight plastic helps us to do more with less material, which provides environmental benefits throughout the life cycle of plastic products and packaging.

The study concludes that while glass, tin, aluminum and paper are viable alternatives to plastics in many consumer products, in most cases they may have lower environmental costs than plastic, but because of the need for additional material To achieve the same purpose with the plastic, so the overall higher. For example, a typical plastic soft drink bottle in the United States contains 30 grams of plastic. However, if the equivalent of the alternative materials used in the market to replace the equivalent capacity of alternative bottles, such as glass, tin and other needs 3-4 times the consumption.

The social cost of consumer plastic products and packaging in 2015 exceeded $ 139 billion, equivalent to nearly 20% of the plastic manufacturing sector revenue, and if the current trend continues, it is expected to grow by $ 209 billion by 2025. This includes social costs due to greenhouse gas emissions: air pollution, land and water pollution, water consumption, ocean impacts and other costs arising from the entire plastic value chain. These external costs reflect the future risks of the profitability of the plastics industry.

This study, as a groundbreaking assessment of plastics, focuses explicitly on how to use plastic, by comparing the relative environmental performance of plastics, making consumer goods more sustainable, and by studying the possible strategic interventions at the key leverage of the plastic value chain to bring the net Environmental benefits.

The authors of the report recommend taking measures to further reduce the overall environmental costs of plastics, such as by increasing the use of low-carbon electricity in plastic production, using low-emission modes of transport, developing more efficient plastic packaging, and increasing recycling and energy conversion plastics, To help contain marine waste and save resources.

In addition, by increasing the regulation of commercial costs (eg, carbon emissions), to promote the mobility of customers and communities associated with plastics, reduce external environmental costs. While strengthening the plastics industry and consumer goods industry's driving force, linkage government, non-governmental organizations and consumers to address the environmental costs of plastics.