Thank you so much for inviting me to present to this committee. I'm thrilled to have the opportunity to share my expertise and facilitate the use of scientific evidence in forming policy.
My name is Dr. Chelsea Rochman. I'm a professor in ecology at the University of Toronto. My research program is globally known for work on method development, contamination of microplastics in the environment, exposure to wildlife and humans, and ecological effects. We study plastic debris across the world, including locally in the Great Lakes, at the IISD Experimental Lakes Area, and in the Canadian Arctic.
Currently I am the scientific delegate to Canada for the UNE working group on plastic pollution. I'm also advising ECCC on the addition of plastic as a subindicator of Great Lakes health under the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement. I'm leading an international working group in California to advise on a monitoring method and a threshold for risk in both wildlife and humans relevant to microplastics.
Today I want to speak specifically to plastic waste and single-use plastic items, followed by commenting on the negative consequences of plastic pollution in general.
In a recent study, we estimated that 24 million to 34 million tonnes of plastic waste was emitted into aquatic ecosystems in 2020. If we continue business as usual, that number may triple by 2030. There's no time to waste. Unless growth in plastic production and use is halted, a fundamental transformation of the plastic economy is essential. We need to shift to a circular economy, where end-of-life plastic products are valued rather than turned to waste. Because of this, I support goals under the Canada-wide strategy on zero plastic waste and the proposal to manage plastics under CEPA. I was pleased to see Canada adopt a truly integrated approach with policies relevant to managing single-use plastics, establishing performance standards and ensuring end-of-life responsibility.
Each of these pathways is important, including the reduction in our reliance on unnecessary single-use plastics in order to bend our linear plastic economy toward a more circular one. Reducing single-use plastics that are common environmental pollutants, that are not reusable or recyclable and that have a substitution, is an important part of this transition. I applaud the decision to ban certain single-use plastics as early as this year.
I also agree with each item on the list. This is because these items are commonly found in the environment, are not essential, and do not have a practically sustainable end of life. I also suggest that we think critically about how to define “plastic” under this regulation. If compostable or biodegradable plastics are to be considered for exemption, they need to be truly compostable beyond an industrial compost facility, and/or biodegradable in a relatively short time scale in the environment, meaning less than six months. To the best of my knowledge, there are no products currently on the market that meet these criteria.
I want to spend my last minutes discussing the effects of plastic once it becomes pollution.
My research mainly focuses on the small stuff. The term “microplastic” incorporates a large diversity of plastic types, including degraded bits of larger plastic products, such as single-use items. My research demonstrates that microplastics are ubiquitous in the environment, including in our Arctic and in seafood and drinking water extracted from the Great Lakes.
My research also demonstrates that microplastics can be toxic to fish and invertebrates. There have been many studies testing the effects of microplastics on organisms. Although results are variable, there's irrefutable evidence that microplastics can impact organisms at concentrations that are already present in some places in the environment. Although we do not yet fully understand how they affect human health, we know that we are exposed, and further research is necessary.
When it comes to large plastic debris, we have no doubt there is an impact on wildlife. Studies report contamination via entanglement or ingestion in hundreds of species. This contamination can lead to laceration of tissues, death of an individual, declines in population size and changes in community assemblages. The weight of evidence for how plastics impact wildlife once it becomes debris in the environment suggests that the time to act is now.
As you know, there's no one-size-fits-all solution. Instead, we need a tool box of solutions that include those that help us build a circular economy. One of these is the reduction of unnecessary single-use plastics. In Canada, we have demonstrated leadership in this space, and I thank you. We should continue by building a circular economy, reducing emissions of plastics into our environment, and cleaning up what has become pollution.
I envision diverse policies working in tandem, and these should include those currently on the table, which include expanded and harmonized EPR, or extended producer responsibility; the implementation of standards that increase the use of recycled content in new products; and the elimination of problematic single-use plastics.
I want to thank you again for this opportunity, and I'd be really happy to answer any questions today or in the future.
Thank you.
