As we look to transition from fossil to bio-based materials, fungi are becoming the ultimate biodegradable building blocks for furniture, fashion, housing and beyond.

Mycelium, the silky thread that binds fungus, is being adapted to create everything from shoes to coffins to packaging and robust building materials. Best of all, it literally feeds on trash and agricultural byproducts, detoxifing them along the way.

The biodegradable material that is also grown vertically to save space and uses little water, has emerged as a low emission, circular economy solution in the bid to transition from extractive, carbon-based products.

There are up to five million types of fungus that constitute a “kingdom on their own,” says Maurizio Montalti, a Dutch-based designer and researcher who has been working with mycelium for a decade.

Fungi are the “fundamental agents that enable the transformation of not only nutrition but also information across living systems. We couldn’t live without it,” said Montalti of what has also been called natures’s internet. 

Having experimented with mycelium furniture design, in 2018 Montalti founded Mogu, a company commercializing fungi-based bio-material products — including sound-absorbing tiles created from mycelium grown on corn crop refuse, rice straw, spent coffee grounds, discarded seaweed and even clam shells.

But fungi aren’t changing the world just yet.

“There is a lot of excitement these days when talking about mycelium,” Montalti said, adding that the challenge is in designing a “product that works and can compete in the market.” 

And although shoe and apparel giant Adidas as well as fashion labels Stella McCartney and Gucci have all recently hopped on the fungi bandwagon to try and meet that challenge, mycelium is yet to go mass-scale. 

Here are four products that could herald the start of a revolution.  

1. Mycelium ‘living cocoon’ coffins

“Are you waste or compost?” That is the question according to Netherlands-based mycelium coffin manufacturer, Loop. The company is offering the dead a chance to birth new life via their “living cocoon” coffin, which it claims was the first of its kind.

As bodies decompose within a fully compostable mycelium cocoon, they can become part of the solution to reviving biodiversity that has depleted to the point where more than a million species are at risk of extinction. 

The mycelium coffin that turns corpses into compost

“To be buried, we cut down a tree, work it intensively and try to shut ourselves off as well as possible from microorganisms,” Loop said in a statement in reference to conventional coffins. “And for those that don’t want to be buried, we waste our nutrient-rich body by burning it with cremation, polluting the air and ignoring the potential of our human body. It’s as if we see ourselves as waste, while we can be a valuable part of nature.”

2. Mushroom ‘leather’ shoes

Mycotech, based in Bandung, Indonesia, was growing gourmet mushrooms in 2012 before it shifted its business to use fungi to create a sustainable alternative to leather products, especially shoes.

Founder, Adi Reza Nugroho says it has great environmental advantages over traditional leather. “We consume less water, we don’t have to kill animals, we can do vertical farming so we can save some space,” he said, adding that it also produces fewer emissions and requires none of the chemicals used in plastic-based materials.

Feeding on agricultural waste such as sawdust, it only takes the mycelium a few days to grow to the point where it is ready to be harvested, tanned and further processed. The resulting material is breathable, flexible, robust and can last for years. While Mycotech is still creating limited runs of its fungi shoes, the company has orders up until 2027.

And this relatively small-scale start-up is not alone. While leather continues to dominate Adidas’ sneaker lines, the German company is now also marketing mycelium shoes. Released in April, the Stan Smith Mylo is made using the brand’s “Mylo” mycelium material.

Fungi-based footwear is also being touted by eco-conscious grassroots designers because the shoes can literally biodegrade — as illustrated by these Mycoflex-based slippers designed by Charlotta Aman. 

3. Transforming plastic and toxic waste

Since they feed on trash, mushrooms can also detoxify our waste and transform it into usable materials that are non-extractive, offering a neat solution for closing the loop on unrecylable plastic, for example.

Established in 2018, US-based Mycocycle uses fungi to remove toxins from building materials like asphalt or petrochemical-based waste.

“We are actually using mushrooms to cycle these toxins, make them non-toxic and available for reuse in a closed loop economy,” said company founder, Joanne Rodriguez. 

A response to the fact that 85% of landfill space in the US has already been used up, Mycocycle aims to help in the shift to zero waste by decontaminating toxic building materials like asphalt that previously could not be reused.

Mycocycle claims that its trash-fed mycelium is fire and water-resistant and can be manufactured into a host of new products such as styrofoam, insulation, packaging and building materials. 

“We take trash and make treasure, decarbonizing waste and creating a new value stream in the circular economy,” said Rodriguez.

4. A biodegradable building block

A fully compostable, zero-emissions mushroom tower called the Hy-Fy was constructed with 10,000 mycelium bricks in New York back in 2014. Numerous prototypes have been built since but mushroom-building largely remains in the conceptual stage. 

“Co-create with fungi,” is the mantra for the My-Co Space, a mycelium tiny house currently being exhibited in Frankfurt’s Metzlerpark.

The compostable mushroom My-Co Space is currently on display in Frankfurt. It can also be booked for overnight stays

Designed for two occupants, the facade of the 20-square-meter structure has a plywood frame thatched in honeycomb-shaped mycelium blocks grown with a mushroom straw substrate. The intimate, organic shape plays on the fundamental interrelation between humans and fungi.

“We want to transform dead plant matter, which comes from agriculture or from forestry, and we want to transform this into composite materials. And we do this with fungi,” explains Vera Meyer, a biotechnology professor at the Technical University of Berlin and founder of the MY-CO-X collective that created My-Co Space.

For Meyer, fungi are the “most important microorganisms” that can help make the transition from fossil to bio-based resources.

• 

  Pretty creepy mushrooms

  A foul smell

  Allow us to introduce the octopus stinkhorn, or devil’s fingers (Clathrus archeri). As with all mushrooms, it’s neither animal nor plant. Fungi are an independent group of organisms. This specimen’s superpower: It smells like carrion, or decaying flesh. Its color is reminiscent of rotting meat. That attracts flies and dung beetles, which spread the fungal spores. Very clever!

• 

  Pretty creepy mushrooms

  Not deadly, but not very tasty, either

  The octopus stinkhorn is native to Australia, New Zealand and the Malay Archipelago, but it’s not really that fussy about location: The mushroom is now much more widespread. In Germany, it was first discovered in 1934. It’s not poisonous. After its spore container and a gelatinous layer are removed, it can be eaten — but don’t expect a culinary delight.

• 

  Pretty creepy mushrooms

  Horrid little hand

  Xylaria polymorpha is also known as “dead man’s fingers.” It prefers to grow on dead or dying deciduous trees. The club-shaped body, or stroma, ranges from dark-brown to blackish-brown on the outside, and it’s white and fibrous on the inside. Dead man’s fingers are inedible. In any case, you wouldn’t want to be a cannibal, would you?! 🙂

• 

  Pretty creepy mushrooms

  Young and gory

  Hydnellum peckii excretes a watery red liquid like blood when it is young. That’s why it is also known as “bleeding tooth fungus,” the “red-juice tooth” or the “devil’s tooth.” Spikes or thorns run down the underside of its hat and stem. These are deterrents and a good thing: We’re dealing with a highly inedible mushroom here.

• 

  Pretty creepy mushrooms

  Threatening and threatened

  Devil’s tooth mushrooms are common in Central Europe. There are about 15 species. They are a rarity among mushroom flora that deserves protection. However, Hydnellum peckii likes company. It is not uncommon to find it along with other endangered species, such as the “pig’s ear” mushroom.

• 

  Pretty creepy mushrooms

  Yummy pig’s ear!

  And this is that very mushroom — the pig’s ear (Gomphus clavatus) was the German mushroom of the year in 1998 and often looks like — you guessed it — a pig’s ear. The good news is, even for vegetarians, is that this mushroom is delicious — and can be eaten with a clear conscience to boot! Its flesh is white and tender, and has a mild flavor.

• 

  Pretty creepy mushrooms

  Forgotten bird’s nest

  Cyathus striatus is commonly known as the fluted bird’s nest fungus. The species occurs almost worldwide, but it is only beautiful to look at and not at all good to eat.

• 

  Pretty creepy mushrooms

  Excuse me?!

  This one’s a little embarrassing: The common stinkhorn. The Latin name “phallus impudicus” means “shameless penis,” which did not come about by chance, as you can see. Its tip is covered with a stinking, sticky substance. There’s a good reason for this: That attracts flies, which then transport the spores of the obscene fungus.

• 

  Pretty creepy mushrooms

  The veiled lady

  This one also hails from the family of Phallaceae, or stinkhorns. But it is somewhat less offensive: At least the crinoline stinkhorn or veiled lady (Phallus indusiatus) wears a veil. Although the mushroom is also smelly, it is often used in sophisticated Chinese cuisine. It is rich in proteins, carbohydrates and fiber. Well then, enjoy!

• 

  Pretty creepy mushrooms

  From brain to intestine

  Ascocoryne sarcoides is colloquially known as jelly drops or the purple jellydisc. It loves company. The mushroom is particularly common on dead birch, willow or beech wood. It looks a bit like innards. But it comes in a variety of forms, such as a spinning top, a cushion or a mug, and as a gelatinous mass, flesh-colored, purply-pink or wine-red. It is technically edible, however…

• 

  Pretty creepy mushrooms

  Bad twin

  Ascocoryne sarcoides has a doppelgänger of sorts — Ascocoryne cylichnium. And this one is definitely inedible. To the naked eye it can be virtually indistinguishable from one of the life-cycle stages of Ascocoryne sarcoides. But hands off!

• 

  Pretty creepy mushrooms

  A carnivorous plant?

  Wrong, all wrong! This specimen is neither carnivore nor plant. Cookeina tricholoma belongs to the cup fungi family and is a rather harmless individual. However, it is striking for its shape and splendid hairdo. In parts of Mexico, Cookeina tricholoma is used in cooking. In Cameroon, it is used in medicine to relieve earaches.

• 

  Pretty creepy mushrooms

  What a lion’s mane!

  Hericium erinaceus is another hairy eye-catcher. It’s called lion’s mane or monkey head mushroom. It is edible, unlike most other mushrooms of the tooth fungus group. In Asia, monkey head mushroom is considered a delicacy. It is also popular in traditional Chinese medicine. But it’s on a Red List of endangered fungi and is rarely found in nature. So, if you spot it, look but do not touch!

  Author: Hannah Fuchs

Construction on an enormous $9.4 billion plastics plant proposed in St. James Parish must be delayed so the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers can do a more extensive and lengthy review of the facility’s impacts on the environment and nearby minority communities, a top Army official said Wednesday.

Jaime A. Pinkham, acting assistant secretary of the Army for civil works, said the new review of the Formosa Plastics complex would have a particular focus on any environmental justice concerns. The proposed plant would be located near the largely African American community of Welcome on the parish’s west bank.

In a two-page memo, Pinkham didn’t offer many details for the reasons behind the decision. But the Corps of Engineers already acknowledged to a federal judge late last year that an earlier, less intensive review for the permit had errors in part of its analysis.

At the time, the Corps had suspended that original, flawed permit, which would allow Formosa to fill in wetlands on the more than 2,300-acre site along the Mississippi River. 

Proposed by an affiliate of Formosa Plastics, the Sunshine Project has been praised by Gov. John Bel Edwards and many other government leaders for the thousands of jobs and millions of dollars in economic development it will bring.

But it has become a lightning rod for some other local leaders and environmental and community groups, who have criticized its toxic air emissions, risk of accidental release of plastic pellets, the ramp-up in plastics production it represents, and its proximity to antebellum graves that may hold deceased slaves.

The project, announced in spring 2018, has already hit other slowdowns because of high Mississippi River water and state and federal litigation. 

Since the Corps of Engineers’ suspension of the Formosa permit in November, all sides of the intense debate over the plant have been waiting to see what the agency’s next step would be.

During that time, months of public pressure built on the new Biden administration from environmental groups, political leaders in other states, and a United Nations investigator, all of whom argued that the huge complex would have a disproportionate impact on minority communities located nearby and already breathing poor air. The UN investigator charged it was an example of “environmental racism.”

The decision was announced Wednesday in a Tweet from Pinkham, the Army assistant secretary. 

“As a result of information received to date and my commitment for the Army to be a leader in the federal government’s efforts to ensure through environmental analysis and meaningful community outreach, I conclude an EIS process is warranted to thoroughly review areas of concern, particularly those with environmental justice implications,” Pinkham wrote in a two-page memo dated Aug. 18.

An “EIS” is an “environmental impact statement,” a more in-depth review than what the agency previously did for the Formosa project.

Pinkham added that the review he was ordering the Corps of Engineers to do would “assess the proposed project’s potential impacts on the quality of the human environment in the region and to support its final decision to modify, reinstate, or revoke the permit.”

Pinkham’s memo says that the new review process would “provide opportunities for voices to be heard in an open, transparent, and public way.”

A Corps spokesman in Washington, D.C., didn’t immediately return a call for comment Wednesday.

Today Acting ASA(CW) Jaime Pinkham directed @USACEHQ to proceed with an EIS for the proposed Formosa Sunshine Project permit in St. James Parish, LA. The permit will remain suspended until the EIS has been completed and the record of decision has been issued. pic.twitter.com/gL40vwtrFT

— Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works (@ASACivilWorks) August 18, 2021

Environmental and community groups who have been fighting the complex in court and public meetings and through media campaigns hailed the decision Wednesday. Meanwhile, a spokeswoman for the local Formosa affiliate said the company retained an “unwavering commitment” to the state and parish but was trying to find out more about what the new analysis would entail.

“The tweet and accompanying letter from the Acting Assistant Secretary of the Army posted today online provide little detail on EIS procedure the Corps intends to use in its additional evaluation of the project,” Janile Parks, spokeswoman for FG LA LLC, said Wednesday. “As a result, the company will continue to work with the Corps as we receive more guidance on the additional evaluation and has no further comment at this time.”

Sharon Lavigne, a St. James Parish native who formed Rise St. James and joined with an array of environmental groups to fight the complex, said the Corps of Engineers “has finally heard our pleas and understands our pain” and said she was hopeful Formosa would pull out.

“Nobody took it upon themselves to speak for St. James Parish until we started working to stop Formosa Plastics. Now the world is watching this important victory for environmental justice,” she said in a joint statement.

Rise St. James was one of a handful of local and national groups who challenged the first Corps permit in federal court. That legal action sent the Corps of Engineers on the path of suspending and reviewing its previous decision-making, which was originally reached in September 2019 under former President Donald Trump.

Since then, President Joe Biden has taken office and promised to take environmental justice concerns into more consideration as federal agencies review new industrial proposals.

U.S. Rep. Troy Carter, D-New Orleans, wrote Biden’s EPA administrator late last week urging him to provide third-party monitoring of the river region’s nearly 150 industrial facilities and to take other steps to better understand their impact on minority communities. The request came as Carter, whose river region district includes St. James Parish, criticized self-monitoring of emissions.

On Wednesday, in reaction of the Formosa decision, he said he applauded “our regulatory agencies for doing their job to fully examine and ensure the highest degree of safety possible, while allowing the voices of the community to be heard.”

He also added that “industry and community can coexist.”

The decision to do an EIS doesn’t kill the project from a regulatory perspective. But Pinkham’s memo doesn’t offer any guarantee of an outcome.

The review will likely require that the Corps and FG LA do a far more extensive analysis of the plant’s emissions and impact on African American neighborhoods closest to the facility and whether other sites or a smaller plant would be a better option.

In November, the Corps told a federal judge that its “alternatives analysis” for the original Formosa permit needed reevaluation, so it had been suspended. Five possible plant sites in Ascension Parish, the Corps acknowledged, had been excluded due to an erroneous assumption about air quality limits in that parish. 

Environmental groups had pointed out that same oversight, among others, they claimed, in the federal litigation over the Corps permit.

In the tweet, Pinkham wrote that Formosa’s permit would remained suspended until the new review is finished and the Corps reaches a final decision.

It looks like plastic, it feels like plastic, and it holds your favorite beverage like plastic. But somewhere on the cup you’ve been handed is a label that reads “100 percent compostable”. How is that possible? 

Simply put, this plastic-y material is polylactic acid (PLA), a polymer made from lots of little bits of lactic acid molecules derived from the fermentation of starch like corn, cassava, or potato plants. Single-use cups and take-out containers made from PLA, sometimes called bioplastic or biopolymer, have become increasingly common in recent years, under the assumption that a compostable container is better for the environment than a standard plastic one. In actuality, it depends on where you are and who you ask.

Compostable plastics like PLA do generally compost under the right circumstances. But contrary to what you might think, just because it composts, doesn’t mean a product is automatically “green”.

[Related: How to start composting at home.]

Composting PLA takes more than a backyard bin

In the greenwashed world of food service products, it’s important to understand that not all labels are equal, says Sego Jackson, a waste management strategic advisor and policy liaison for Seattle, Washington, one of the few cities in the country that requires businesses to use recyclable or compostable products. 

You might come across a clear cup labeled simply “biodegradable,” or encounter labels that say things like “made from plants” or “plant-based”. But this doesn’t mean your cup is compostable or made from anything other than standard plastic, Jackson says. These vague terms can mean any number of things, but often just refers to the fact that some plant-produced starch was mixed into the standard plastic, he adds. This type of plastic may be less durable over the long term and break down into smaller pieces more quickly, but small plastic bits are still plastic and will persist in the ecosystem.

However, if a cup or container is labeled compostable, it probably is under very specific conditions. Most of the compostable PLA products out there have been inspected and certified by the Biodegradable Products Institute (BPI), a non-profit organization that runs independent tests of compostable products to verify that they break down. In Washington state, for instance, BPI certification is required by law before a single-use product can be labeled compostable at all.

Still, these very specific composting conditions are tough to come by. Tossing a PLA cup into your home compost pile won’t break it down, says Nora Goldstein, executive editor of BioCycle magazine—a publication covering the organic waste recycling and composting industry. “I put [compostable plastic] cups from NatureWorks in [my home compost] from the early fall of last year, and they’re still there,” she says. The only way to make the cups actually break down, she says, requires a specific set of microorganisms used in industrial composting that need temperatures well above what most backyard heaps reach to thrive. 

The cups and containers have been tested in both the lab and at composting facilities to ensure they break down within an approved timeline, usually six months, to comply with the ASTM International standard, says Craig Coker, owner of Coker Composting and Consulting in Troutville, Virginia and a senior editor at BioCycle.

[Related: Will we ever be able to recycle all our plastic?]

Composting isn’t a cure-all

While composting PLA products is certainly better for the environment than tossing them into the trash, there’s still quite a few issues with today’s composting system. To start, there are very few facilities in the US that are set up to handle PLA products. In a survey of composting facilities across the country, BioCycle found that only 49 out of 4,700 composters nationwide accepted compostable plastic products. Although intentions may be good, a restaurant or venue providing compostable cups doesn’t mean much if the local waste system isn’t set up to process them. 

And, there are a few reasons composters are hesitant to change their ways.

The first, and most prevalent issue, according to Coker and another BioCycle survey is that PLA and standard plastics are difficult to tell apart. People often confuse one for the other, especially given the ambiguity of the labeling process. As a result, regular plastic contamination can easily make it into the compost stream if a compost manufacturer decides to accept PLA cups, says Jackson. And regular plastic truly will not break down, no matter how hot the compost pile. This plastic contamination can reduce compost value, says Coker, as well as contribute to plastic pollution in the soil and waterways. Further, some industrial composters operate on a faster cycle than what’s appropriate for breaking down PLA, says Coker, and aren’t incentivized to adapt. 

Compost made with PLA containers in the US also can’t be certified organic. This can be a big problem for composters who get the bulk of their revenue by selling to organic growers, says Coker.

With so few facilities willing and able to accept PLA, lots of it ends up in the landfill, says Rafael Auras, an associate professor at the Michigan State University School of Packaging. Landfilled PLA doesn’t necessarily break down any faster or better than regular plastic, which can take 100s of years to degrade into small bits that never really go away. And if PLA does happen to end up in hot enough landfill conditions, the microorganism-rich but oxygen deprived environment can cause these “eco-friendly” cups to actually contribute to greenhouse gas emissions by producing methane. While this carbon footprint seems small compared to our food system’s giant methane problem, according to a 2012 study from NatureWorks LLC, landfills remain a less-than-ideal burial ground for compostable PLA. 

PLA can also inadvertently end up in the standard plastics recycling stream, says Auras. There, compostable plastics can cause contamination, necessitating costly sorting interventions for currently unprepared facilities. “The distribution of these products and use and sales outpaces the available infrastructure,” says BioCycle’s Goldstein.

[Related: Scientists are making progress with better plastic-eating bacteria.]

Even when composted, PLAs bring up a lot of questions

When a compostable cup makes it to the right facility and gets cycled into the soil, there’s still debate about the total environmental impact of these products. In 2019, the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) published a review of life cycle assessments (LCAs) of different types of compostable single-use foodware. Their findings suggested that standard plastics were actually better than compostables for the environment when taking into account compostable alternatives’ dependence on an already fraught agricultural system. Monoculture corn, the major source for PLA production in North America, has lots of well established downsides for the planet. 

Not everyone agrees with the Oregon DEQ’s conclusions, however. In one response, BPI states that many of the studies considered were older than five years, a large time gap for quickly-changing compostable manufacturing technology. Rhodes Yepsen, executive director at BPI says negative impacts from the fossil fuels behind traditional petroleum based plastics, were largely excluded from the review. 
Another unaccounted for benefit of compostable foodware is its ability to divert food waste away from landfills—leftover food can be just chucked with its container into a green bin without second thought. Food waste is the third largest human-caused source of methane emissions nationwide, and trashed leftovers produce much less methane in the compost than if landfilled.

Oregon has stuck by it’s report, and a coalition of the state’s composters have refused to accept PLAs. However, other studies have ranked PLAs above single-use standard plastics in terms of greenhouse gas emissions and overall climate change impacts. So far, there’s no real clear answer on what PLAs impact on the planet really is.

[Related: Can this Colorado man put a dent in our trash problem?]

What needs to be done to make foodware truly green?

If you’re given a compostable cup in Seattle or San Francisco—rejoice! Throw it in the correct bin and it will be composted into soil and used to grow future crops. But if you’re anywhere else in the country, it’s fair to be a little skeptical. Some large venues like stadiums have developed their own composting programs, and  likely have partnerships in place to handle the waste. But your home compost heap certainly doesn’t, and your neighborhood café might not either.

The debate about single-use compostables vs. recyclables may rage on, but reusable items will almost always be better for the environment than either, says Jackson. Although compostable cups might be a useful tool in a pinch, an even better option, he says, is a cup you don’t throw away at all.

Most plastic waste in Minneapolis is not recycled, a new report has found, but instead is burned at a downtown incinerator adjacent to low-income communities of color, perpetuating a system in which vulnerable groups are exposed to high levels of pollution.

A mere 11 percent of plastic waste in Minneapolis is ultimately recycled, according to the July report, published by the Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives, an international organization that seeks to shut down garbage-burning-to-energy facilities such as the Hennepin Energy Recovery Center, better known as the HERC. 

The report, “A Tale of Five Cities: Plastic Barriers to Zero Waste,” is a deep dive into plastics recycling in Minneapolis; Baltimore; Detroit; Long Beach, California; and Newark, New Jersey. Minneapolis ranks favorably among these cities. The report’s authors found that its municipal curbside single-sort recycling service ranked best in the group and the city’s recycling contractor, the nonprofit Eureka Recycling, was among the best in the nation. 

Despite the success of Minneapolis’s recycling program, most plastics aren’t finding their way into the system to begin with. “Despite that infrastructure and despite the efforts, it’s still demonstrating that the majority of plastic in the waste stream either isn’t recyclable in the first place or it’s not being recycled and is being burned or landfilled,” said Akira Yano, an organizer with Minnesota Environmental Justice Table, a nonprofit group that advocates for vulnerable communities across the state.

Globally, 91 percent of all plastic produced is not recycled, according to the July report. And while around 35 percent of plastic in municipal waste streams in the United States has the potential to be recycled, just 8.8 percent of it actually is. 

“Most plastic is designed to be dumped and burned,” said report author Denise Patel, U.S. Program Director with the Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives.

What’s recycled

What can be recycled is determined by what substances have a viable resale market, according to Lynn Hoffman, co-president of Minneapolis-based Eureka Recycling, which has contracts for residential recycling with Minneapolis, St. Paul, and several other communities. 

The resale markets for glass, paper, and metals are robust. But for plastics, the viability of the market depends on the base resin used to form the particular plastic. Plastic types #1 (think water or soda bottle), #2 (think milk jug or laundry detergent container), and #5 (think yogurt cups), have resale value and are typically recycled into new products. 

But for less common plastics–such as types #3, #4, #6, and #7, used to make products like cling wrap, takeout containers, and CDs–there’s no real resale market, and the substances will likely be burned or landfilled. Plastic film used to make shopping bags is also largely non-recyclable and is only typically collected for reuse at grocery stores. 

Despite the fact that only certain types of plastic are in demand and can be economically recycled, packaging and products that fall outside the desirable categories are often labeled with the recycling symbol of three arrows. That can be deceiving to consumers who believe the product they are tossing in a bin can be reused. 

“It’s a huge challenge we have in communications,” said Kellie Kish, recycling coordinator for the city of Minneapolis. 

Many recycling haulers attempt to simplify the process by telling people to put all types of plastic in their bins, Hoffman said. But Eureka requires its partner-cities to clearly state which types of plastic can be accepted: types #1, #2, and #5. In Minneapolis, that appears to be working. The Five Cities report found that 88 percent of plastic collected in the city’s single-sort system is recycled. 

For Eureka, the biggest challenge is posed by plastic bags. The company spends countless hours and an estimated $75,000 per year sorting out and disposing of plastic bags, which can get caught in the sorting axles, and even catch fire, at their facility. Black plastics also are non-recyclable, because the laser reader Eureka uses to sort materials can’t determine which type of plastics they are,and they have a lower resale value on the market. 

Packing wrap from companies like Amazon and Hello Fresh might be covered in the three-arrow symbol, but it’s not actually recyclable, Hoffman said. “That is egregious.”

Connecting the dots 

The Minnesota Environmental Justice Table is actively campaigning to shut down all seven garbage incinerators in the state, most prominently the HERC in Minneapolis. In Minnesota, incinerators that burn trash to make steam, which is converted into energy, are considered renewable energy sources, which experts say is misleading.

Incinerators produce toxic air pollutants with demonstrated links to asthma, lung disease, high blood pressure, and heart disease. Environmental justice advocates have organized against the HERC for decades, citing its location on the edge of downtown, near north Minneapolis. 

The HERC emits pollution—including arsenic, chromium, and particulate matter–onto north Minneapolis, a community where the majority of residents are people of color, and an area already exposed to a disproportionate level of air-borne toxins. Some of those toxins come from burning plastic, according to the Five Cities report, since about 88 percent of all plastic in Minneapolis ends up in the trash.

Fossil fuels are refined into ethane and propane and used to create plastics. Because plastic stems from fossil fuels like crude oil and gas, the Minnesota Environmental Justice Table sees the zero waste movement as being directly tied to the resistance against the Line 3 oil pipeline being constructed in Northern Minnesota. Both the construction of the pipeline through Ojibwe land and the burning of plastics near vulnerable communities of color exacerbate existing inequalities in who suffers from pollution, said organizer Yano. 

“The fight against Line 3 and the fight against the HERC are linked, because the construction of Line 3 would reinforce the use of fossil fuels to continue creating unsustainable plastic products,” Yano said.

Move to zero waste 

Clearly, the status quo of plastics recycling is bad for the planet, but experts and advocates believe a zero waste future is possible.

“What we do now with the plastic waste, it’s not sustainable,” said Professor Muhammad Rabnawaz, who studies plastics at the Michigan State University School of Packaging. 

Rabnawaz’s research looks at alternatives to plastic packaging, which is a growing field in the United States. In 2018, China stopped accepting plastic waste from the U. S., forcing the government and scientists to reexamine how to manage excess plastic. Rabnawaz believes the federal government is moving in the right direction on plastic recycling. 

Finding value for types of plastic beyond #1, #2, and #5, is key to improving recycling. Rabnawaz said regulating the number of plastic types that can be used on one product would be an important step, because some items have multiple plastic categories and are impossible to recycle. 

Increased community education is key to reducing plastic waste, Rabnawaz said. He favors an approach that provides tax incentives for using plastic alternatives and requirements that reintroduce recycled plastic into manufacturing. 

“It’s all about engaging all stakeholders to envision and create a new future with plastic designed for recycling and biodegradability and where possible using paper and metal as alternatives,” Rabnawaz, a PhD originally from Pakistan, told Sahan Journal. 

Eureka has advocated for Minnesota lawmakers to institute a statewide plastic bag ban and would like to see national legislation on truth-in-labeling so companies can’t greenwash their packaging with deceptive recycling symbols. Hoffman, the company’s co-president, said she also favors laws like one passed recently in California that require all plastic bottles to be made with at least 40 percent recycled material. 

In Minneapolis, Kish and other city staff are conducting active outreach to educate residents about recycling best practices and the harms of plastic waste. Many city residents are serious about avoiding plastic and putting pressure on companies to use less, which helps. 

In July, Maine signed the nation’s first extended producer responsibility law for packaging, which aims to incentivize companies to use packaging that is easier to recycle and mandates producers make payments to environmental stewardship organizations. Kish said that model is an exciting development in the fight against plastic waste.  

For community advocates like Environmental Justice Table, pressuring Hennepin County to close the HERC is seen as a major step toward getting serious about reducing plastic pollution and moving to zero waste. If the HERC closes, Yano said, further action will follow. 

“There needs to be increased transparency in how our waste is handled in the first place,” he said.

Plastic pollution: we all know it’s a problem. In 2015, we produced almost 450 million tons of plastic, with that number expected to double by 2050.

Think that it’s all managed? Think again: less than 10% is recycled. And every year more than 8 million tons make their way into our oceans.