Thank you.
Honourable members of the standing committee, thank you for the opportunity to speak today on the topic of innovation, science and research in recycling plastics.
I'd like to begin by asking a crucial question: Can we really solve the plastics crisis with recycling? Based on the research I’ve come across, the answer is a resounding no.
Today, we produce over 400 million tonnes of plastic each year—much of it single use—and only 9% of it gets recycled. This is not sustainable.
Even worse, the recycling process itself is contributing to the problem. A single recycling plant can produce three million pounds of microplastics annually, and that is with filtration. Researchers have estimated that it would be 6.5 million pounds without filtration. Scale that up to every recycling plant in the country worldwide, and you begin to get a sense of the enormity of the problem. These microplastics don't just disappear; they enter the air, our waterways, food systems and eventually our bodies.
Emerging research reveals troubling findings when it comes to the human health impacts of microplastics. They have been found in human organs, such as the brain and heart and even the placenta. A recent study suggests that microplastic levels in brain tissue may be rising, with significant concerns about their link to neurodegenerative diseases, such as Alzheimer's and dementia. Another study on cardiovascular health linked plastic particles in carotid artery plaques to a nearly fivefold increase in patient heart attacks, strokes and even death.
While more research is needed to understand microplastics' long-term effects, it's already clear that high-burden plastic exposure in occupational settings is detrimental to human health, and workers in those fields have elevated rates of breast, lung, brain and bladder cancers.
Studies have also shown threats to waste pickers and workers in plastic recycling plants. Plastics e-waste workers in Thailand were found to have doses of a highly toxic fire retardant in their blood that was 40 times higher than that of workers in a nearby farm. Another study in Kenya looked at eggs harvested near plastic recycling centres and “found that an adult eating a single egg from [such a site] could be exposed to a dose of toxic chemicals that would exceed the EU daily safety limit for more than 250 days.”
Beyond the health risks, our current recycling systems are also inefficient. In mechanical plastic recycling, up to 30% of the material is lost in the process. The sheer variety of plastics and the chemical additives used also make recycling extremely complex, and because the substances are proprietary and because there is a lack of corporate transparency, we often don't know what those toxic chemical cocktails are made of. When it comes to the misnomer of “advanced recycling”, like pyrolysis, it not only fails to solve the problem but also introduces new ones, including higher greenhouse gas emissions and, a key issue of concern, toxic and hazardous by-products. As you likely saw in the headlines yesterday, the State of California is currently suing Exxon for deceiving the public about the merits of mechanical plastic recycling and advanced recycling as legitimate solutions to the crisis.
Given these challenges, we must rethink our approach to the plastic pollution crisis in Canada. In my written brief, I proposed two key solutions that go beyond recycling.
First, promote innovation in home compostable plastics. We should invest in R and D to create alternatives that biodegrade without leaving behind harmful, toxic microplastics. Some Canadian companies are leading the way in producing home compostable plastics from waste materials, but they currently face competition from conventional plastics manufacturers and at times are conflated with problematic bioplastics manufacturers. Supporting the development of home-compostable, non-petroleum-based plastics with R and D and with subsidies could position Canada as a leader in environmental sustainability.
Second, critically, we must encourage a culture of reuse. Rather than relying on a flawed recycling system, we must build a new system that prioritizes reuse over disposability. Here, Canada Post could play a crucial role. With its extensive national network and logistics network, it could be transformed into a hub for distributing reusable, zero-waste goods. It would be like bringing back the milkman, who used to bring refillable glass bottles right to our doors, except scaled up. This would not only reduce waste but also help revitalize Canada Post, which has been struggling in today's competitive delivery market.
In closing, the plastics crisis is not something we can simply recycle our way out of. As there is no panacea, we must take a multi-pronged approach to change our societal habits. With the right investments in home compostable plastics and a shift toward an infrastructure and network for reuse, Canada can lead the way in solving one of the most pressing environmental challenges of our time.
Thank you.
