A Peril in Paradise: The Threat and Consequences of Mining in Sibuyan Island, Philippines

The Philippines is renowned as one of the world’s hottest biodiversity hotspots. This indicates that the country is home to an exceptional number of endemic plants and wildlife species, which faces serious threats and exploitation. Among the country’s 7,641 islands, one island has recently captured attention due to the discovery of a long-hidden battle – Sibuyan Island.

Sibuyan Island is a stunning paradise and home to a significant portion of Philippine endemism. It boasts crystal-clear waters, dense rainforests, breathtaking waterfalls, and magnificent mountains teeming with life. Unfortunately, this paradise’s ecosystem is now under the threat of alleged illegal mining operations. Larger mining corporations, supported by power and money are overshadowing the local community and silencing the underrepresented minority. 

This ongoing battle for Sibuyan Island has already resulted in tragedy. In 2007, a former environmentalist from the World Wildlife Fund for Nature-Philippines and a town councilor in Sibuyan, Armin Marin, was shot dead by heavily armed guards after leading a rally against a mining attempt that could destroy Sibuyan’s precious ecosystem. Recently this year, a clash between the authorities and a human barricade attempting to stop another mining operation has left two locals injured, one town councilor arrested, and countless others affected. There are also alleged cases of public teachers on the island being held with their rights to participate in any anti-mining activities, and students being forced to issue public apologies for opposing mining on the island.

Today, as the fight against mining continues, these corporations promise job security, wealth, and development through unsustainable actions. But beneath these enticing promises lies a critical question: What will be the true cost of these actions? What will be the price paid by the environment and the community? And when will people fully grasp the importance of balancing development and environmental preservation?

This article presents an in-depth case study that delves into the environmental and social conditions of Sibuyan Island amidst alleged illegal mining activities. The study highlights the imminent environmental risks, sheds light on marginalized perspectives, and emphasizes the urgent necessity for proactive measures to protect Sibuyan’s delicate ecosystems.

Table of Contents

Sibuyan Island

Aerial shot of Sibuyan Island
Photo: Wikimedia Commons

Geography and Biodiversity

Sibuyan Island is located in Romblon province, Philippines. It covers an area of 445 square kilometers and is often referred to as the “Galapagos of Asia” due to its unique blend of natural features. Towering above the island’s lush greenery is the infamous Mount Guiting-Guiting, a magnificent peak that reaches a height of 2,058 meters, attracting hikers and mountaineers from around the world. Sibuyan Island is home to dense virgin forests that are filled with endemic plants and animals, including the rare and endangered Philippine hanging parrot (Loriculus philippensis bournsi) and the endemic Sibuyan pitcher plant (Nepenthes sibuyanensis). 

One of the most pristine waterfalls in Sibuyan, Busay Waterfalls
Photo: Johnny Flores

There are about 44 waterfalls on the island, connected by clear rivers and streams that flow through its beautiful valleys, including the well-known Cantingas River, considered one of the cleanest rivers in the world. These water bodies supply enough fresh water to the local communities and farm irrigations. Beneath the surface, Sibuyan Island’s marine ecosystem thrives with vibrant coral reefs and a wide range of marine life, making it a paradise for snorkelers and divers, and a food basket for local communities. The table below shows the summary of protected areas and biodiversity of Sibuyan Island. 

Protected Areas
Mt. Guiting-Guiting – (15,260.48 has)Mangrove Swamp Forest Reserve – Under Presidential Proclamation No. 2152Indigenous People’s Ancestral Domains – (8,408 has)Marine Protected Area – (348.96 has)
Flora
700 vascular plant species – 54 of which are endemic to Sibuyan Island144 species of trees recorded – 10 of which are on the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) “Red List” or considered endangered species. 33 of the tree species on the island are endemic to the Philippines. 
Fauna
83 wildlife species found on the island are endemic to the Philippines – 4 of which are endemic to Sibuyan.18 of the recorded wildlife species on the island are on the IUCN “Red List” or considered endangered species. 130 bird species recorded.

Natural Resources and Minerals

Sibuyan Island is well-known for its mineral-rich soil, which holds significant deposits of valuable resources such as nickel, chromite, and copper. These minerals have attracted entrepreneurs and mining corporations due to the potential for profitable ventures. The island also possesses abundant non-metallic minerals, including limestone and silica, essential for various industrial applications.

Moreover, according to some locals, certain island regions are believed to hold gold, emerald, and marble deposits. These precious minerals further contribute to the island’s potential economic value.

Local Communities and Indigenous People

Indigenous Sibuyan Mangyan Tagabukid wearing traditional clothes.
Photo: Angelo the Explorer

Sibuyan Island has only approximately 62,000 people residing in three municipalities, Cajidiocan, Magdiwang, and San Fernando. Among its inhabitants are the Sibuyan Mangyan Tagabukid (SMT) indigenous, whose rich cultural heritage is deeply connected with the island’s natural environment. 

The community’s way of life on Sibuyan Island revolves around their harmonious relationship with nature. They deeply respect the land, forests, and rivers, which they consider sacred. Traditional farming practices, such as sustainable swidden or slash-and-burn agriculture, help the land regenerate over time. Additionally, crafting, such as basket weaving and wood carving, was a significant source of income for the community.

Fishing is another vital aspect of the community’s livelihood due to the island’s abundant marine resources. Fishing methods employed by the locals are often traditional and low-impact, ensuring the preservation of the marine ecosystem and the sustainability of their catch. Moreover, the SMTs preserve their cultural traditions, including music, dance, and craftsmanship. These valuable practices are passed down through generations, reminding them of their unique identity and deep connection to the island’s natural world.

Timeline of Mining on Sibuyan Island

Entrance of ALTAI Philippines Mining Corporation (APMC) mining site in Sibuyan.
Photo: Johnny Flores

The Beginning of Mining in Sibuyan

According to Mr. Alfreo Pascual, one of the founders of the environmental and anti-mining organization Bantay Kalikasan ng Sibuyan (Nature Guardians of Sibuyan), the illegal mining activity in Sibuyan Island traces its roots back to the 1980s when mining companies first set their sights on its mineral-rich land. The discovery of valuable minerals, particularly gold, prompted initial interest in the island’s potential. However, the enthusiasm was short-lived as the quality of the gold found needed to meet the desired market standards, and the quantity fell below the required threshold of at least 500 metric tons per day for a minimum of 10 years of mining to be considered profitable.

Despite this setback, another mining company conducted a comprehensive exploration to assess the mineral deposits on the island. Their findings revealed that Sibuyan Island has a significant quantity of high-grade nickel, making it a new prime target for mining operations. This discovery catalyzed renewed interest in mining activities on the island.

By the year 2000, various mining companies began applying to the government for Mineral Production Sharing Agreement (MPSA). This agreement allows a private mining contractor to mine an area with no title on the contract area.

In 2009, the former environmental secretary of the Philippines, Lito Atienza, awarded the MPSA to ALTAI Philippines Mining Corporation (APMC). However, it is essential to note that at this stage, the company received only a permit for the exploration, extraction, and transportation of nickel ore samples for feasibility studies. Extracting and transporting large quantities of nickel ore for business transactions is subject to other application and evaluation processes, such as the Declaration of Mining Project Feasibility (DMPF) and Environmental Compliance Certificate (ECC). This declaration and certificate will prove that the mining project is both technically and financially viable, as well as socially and environmentally compliant.

The issuance of an exploration permit marked a critical juncture in the timeline of illegal mining on Sibuyan Island. As companies sought to capitalize on the island’s mineral wealth, the stage was set for further developments with significant implications for its environment and inhabitants. Today, there are multiple mining claims in Sibuyan from different mining companies covering almost half of the island, including some of its protected areas. 

The Conflict Between the APMC and Local Communities

Sibuyanons formed a human barricade to stop the transportation of nickel ore.
Photo: Alyansa Tigil Mina

In 2011, APMC’s MPSA was suspended by the Mines and Geosciences Bureau of the Philippines (MGB) through a cease and desist order. This is due to contamination complaints and alteration of inland water bodies. However, after ten years, the suspension was lifted in September 2021, allowing APMC to resume mining activities. According to local anti-mining leaders, APMC had already engaged in transactions with a nickel ore buyer from Hong Kong during this period despite needing more complete certifications and permits for conducting mining operations. During this time, the local government of Sibuyan Island has remained silent on these ongoing activities, providing APMC with an advantage to carry out alleged illegal mining operations.

The continuation of mining activities has caused concern among many residents opposed to mining on their island. Because of this, various anti-mining organizations have emerged, intending to stop further mining activities conducted by APMC. In February 2023, the anti-mining organizations organized a rally to protest against APMC, citing deforestation and the construction of a causeway that could potentially disrupt the natural habitat of marine species.Two days after the rally, a massive vessel docked on the coast of Sibuyan Island prepared to load and transport 50,000 metric tons of extracted nickel ore to Hong Kong with an estimated value of around 2 million USD. This sparked a physical confrontation between the residents and APMC. The residents constructed a human barricade to prevent the trucks carrying nickel ore from leaving the island. It is reported that during this incident, two residents were hurt. 

As news of the incident spread through the national media, calls were made to investigate the situation, temporarily suspending mining activities. In an official report released by the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) on February 6, 2023, they issued a Joint Order to APMC regarding the illegal construction of the causeway and other related activities.

The official statement released by the DENR on February 6, 2023

In a response statement released by APMC, the company said they had secured all the necessary permits and licenses to conduct mining operations on the island, denying all the allegations on their business legalities. APMC also claimed that the 50,000 metric tons of nickel ore will be transported overseas only for bulk testing

Since then, residents and indigenous people, spearheaded by different anti-mining organizations, have consistently organized monthly rallies to raise awareness about the ongoing risk of exploitation from mining companies on their island. Aside from protests, the environmental organization Upholding Life and Nature (ULAN) has filed further legal actions against APMC to stop mining on Sibuyan Island. 

Overpowering the Minorities

In an attempt to reclaim mining authority, there have been reports of alleged activities from the mining company that overpower the anti-mining residents of Sibuyan through various means.

Promising Job Security and Community Development Initiatives

According to some locals, the continuation of mining activities holds the promise of increased job stability through the mining company’s commitment to hiring island residents for various roles. Additionally, the company has pledged to enhance the quality of life for Sibuyanons by constructing vital facilities that will generate additional employment and livelihood opportunities. These facilities include hospitals, bee farms, and fisheries, which are expected to foster economic growth and prosperity within the community.

While these initiatives may potentially have a positive impact on residents, it remains unclear for Sibuyanons whether they will be sufficient to outweigh the environmental damage caused by the mining activities.

Silencing the Oppositions

As anti-mining organizations strive to put an end to mining activities in Sibuyan through community outreach and rallies, there have been allegations of attempts to silence individuals involved in the movement, potentially violating their human rights if proven true. 

According to a statement from the Commission on Human Rights, there are reports of public teachers in Sibuyan being restricted from participating in anti-mining activities, including attending rallies and expressing anti-mining views on social media. Additionally, there are accounts of students being forced to issue public apologies for voicing opposition to mining on the island.

Community Relations

Since the mining operations stopped, APMC has been organizing various community relations programs in different towns of Sibuyan. These programs include basketball tournaments, relief operations, tree planting, Zumba activities, and educational meetings.

While the company may claim good intentions behind these programs, many Sibuyanons perceive them as attempts to persuade the residents. Some believe that these activities are intended to divert their attention from the anti-mining campaign.

The Environmental Impact of Mining on Sibuyan Island

Considering the island’s pristine condition and abundant biodiversity, the environmental impact of mining on Sibuyan Island is expected to be highly significant and detrimental. This section explores the past, present, and potential future state of the environment in Sibuyan if mining activities persist.

Environmental State of Sibuyan in the Early Years

In the early years, Sibuyan Island is recognized as one of the most pristine islands in the Philippines. Its forest area is considered one of the densest forests ever recorded globally, with an estimated 2,180 trees per hectare. The island’s lush forests and untouched mountains have provided a sanctuary for various wildlife species. Moreover, it is known for producing some of the purest freshwater in the world, sourced from its two healthy watersheds, Cantingas and Palangcalan. These watersheds play a crucial role in sustaining the livelihoods of most of the island’s population, residing in the San Fernando, Cajidiocan, and Magdiwang municipalities. The local communities heavily rely on these watersheds for their drinking water, farm irrigation, and eco-tourism.

The municipality of San Fernando during the 1920s
Photo: Field Museum of Natural History

According to some locals, back in the 1960s, the water in Sibuyan was so clean that they could drink directly from the streams and rivers. Preserving this pristine water quality has been a goal for Sibuyanons for many decades. The increasing population and unregulated activities, such as small-scale mining, illegal logging, illegal charcoal making, and conversion of land for agriculture, have posed threats to the habitats of Sibuyan’s wildlife species and the water quality of both watersheds.

One of the cleanest rivers in the world, Cantingas River
Photo: Johnny Flores

Fortunately, the declaration of Mount Guiting-Guiting as a protected area in 1996 was a significant milestone in the island’s conservation efforts. Over the years, this helped the island slow the potential environmental threats and preserve its pristine state. 

Environmental State of Sibuyan After Mining Exploration

After APMC conducted its recent mining exploration activities, the once pristine environment of the island has suffered significant impacts. 

1. To extract 50,000 metric tons of nickel ore, APMC cleared lush vegetation from the mining site, leading to the large-scale cutting of trees without the required permit. This illegal activity has raised serious concerns about its ecological consequences in the area, including: 

  • Loss of wildlife habitat
  • Soil erosions and landslides
  • Loss of indigenous flora and fauna
Aerial shot of the deforested area in San Fernando caused by the mining in Sibuyan
Photo: Rodney Galicha 

2. To transport the extracted nickel ore to the mining vessel, APMC constructed a causeway on the shores of San Fernando without obtaining the necessary permits. Environmental activists fear the construction could damage marine life, particularly seagrass, and coral reefs in the coastal area where the causeway was built.

In response to these concerns and appeals, the Ecosystems Research and Development Bureau (ERDB), in collaboration with Coastal Resources and Ecotourism Research, Development and Extension Center (CRERDEC), investigated the alleged damage of seagrass and coral reefs in the area where the causeway was built. 

Aerial shot of the illegally constructed causeway in San Fernando, Sibuyan 
Photo: DENR-PENRO Romblon

According to the investigation, the causeway development did not directly affect or bury any coral reef due to its proximity to the river mouth, where corals do not thrive. However, the causeway construction can still significantly impact the coastal area.  The analysis suggests that the causeway can alter the flow of water and sediments, affecting the speed and direction of water currents. It may also disrupt the natural patterns of longshore drift, which is the movement of sediments along the coastline, potentially causing changes in the shape and form of the beaches. These effects could lead to more significant issues, such as:

  • Coastal erosion
  • Instability of coastline
  • Coastal flooding
  • Surges
  • Extreme tidal inundations.

Given these potential adverse environmental impacts, the investigation highlights the importance of thorough evaluation before building a causeway. Such an assessment should involve all stakeholders to ensure project implementation considers the ecological and natural resources protection, social benefits, and economic gains. 

Although allowing mining is expected to create more job opportunities for Sibuyanons, there are valid concerns among residents and indigenous communities regarding the current damages and threats resulting from mining exploration activities, according to Engr. Jerome Gacu, a local youth environmental activist and member of the Alliance of Students Against Mining (ASAM), they are concerned that if the current impacts are already substantial, the potential consequences could be far worse if mining persists in the future. Nevertheless, they also worry that due to the pressing need for stable, long-term employment among residents, they might eventually accept mining in the future despite the risk.

Mrs. Veronica Batan, one of the prominent leaders of the environmental and anti-mining organization “Bantay Kalikasan ng Sibuyan” (Nature Guardians of Sibuyan), points out that any promised benefits of mining would be meaningless if the island’s environment and natural resources suffer damage and depletion, exposing the communities to potential health and calamity risks.

Future Environmental State of Sibuyan if Mining Continues

Aerial view of the alleged illegal mining operations in Sibuyan
Photo: Gerardo Ribon

During our observations in the island communities, one significant issue that stood out was the need for education and awareness about the true environmental impact of mining and the potential health and calamity risks associated with it. Mr. Alfreo Pascual pointed out that misinformation is one of the biggest problems in Sibuyan. The spreading of rumors and opinions about the pros and cons of mining without a factual basis has led to confusion within the community.

To gain a better understanding, Mr. Alfreo Pascual and his colleagues consulted Dr. Edward Monjardin, a professor specializing in environmental and climate calamity risks. He explained that the effects of mining on an island like Sibuyan could go far beyond biodiversity loss and common calamities like soil erosion, landslides, and flash floods if the mining continues. According to Dr. Monjardin, the situation and the potential future environmental state of Sibuyan are comparable to his recent research on a neighboring island called Marinduque, which has faced severe environmental consequences due to mining.

The Marinduque Mining Disaster

The environmental disaster in Marinduque due to mining started from 1975 to 1991. During this period, the mining company operating on the island called Marcopper Mining Corporation disposed of approximately 200 million tons of mine tailings, a highly toxic mining waste, into Calancan Bay. This was done by constructing a tunnel that connected the mining site at Mt. Tapian to the Boac River, which then flows directly to the bay. This activity has caused an environmental disaster with immediate adverse effects, including:

  • Contamination of Boac River with toxic mine tailings, resulting in the death of numerous fish species.
  • Around 80 square kilometers at the bottom of Calancan Bay is covered by poisonous mine tailings, effectively burying all marine life forms beneath.
  • Significant impact on the livelihood of fishermen in the area, as they heavily relied on Boac River and Calancan Bay for their catch.

After the natural resources at Mt. Tapian were depleted, Marcopper established another mining site nearby called San Antonio. The tunnel that connected Mt. Tapian to Boac River was sealed and repurposed as the mine tailing pit for the San Antonio site. However, to accommodate more mine tailings, Marcopper built a tailing dam in the Mogpog River in 1992. The construction of the tailing dam has caused further catastrophes for the community, including:

  • Contamination of the Mogpog River with toxic mine tailings resulted in the death of numerous fish species.
  • Accumulation of silt in river beds, generating floods in nearby communities.
  • Flood waters carrying mud and toxic river water reach the town, causing damage to houses and rice fields and leading to the loss of livestock.

In 1996, the Mt. Tapian pit containing 23 million metric tons of toxic mine tailings leaked, releasing up to 10 cubic meters of toxic water per second. This toxic water overflowed to different villages situated near the Boac River. The effect of this incident is one of the most disastrous events in the mining history of the Philippines.

Aerial shot of highly toxic mine tailing spill in Marinduque in 1996
Photo: Newsbreak/Marcopper Mine Post Spill
  • Flash floods buried nearby villages under 6 feet of toxic water.
  • Toxic flood water destroyed agricultural fields and food sources on the island.
  • The community’s primary source of drinking water became contaminated by toxic flood water.
  • The government declared Boac River biologically dead due to the toxic levels that killed fish and other marine species.
  • Months later, the Department of Health found nine residents with zinc levels in their blood exceeding safe limits by over 200%.
  • River water samples showed toxic contamination levels 1,300% higher than the human tolerable level.
  • Residents suffered from skin irritations and respiratory infections due to the toxic water and vapor.

Over the last three decades, the people of Marinduque have faced the consequences of mining activities. Until today, the Mt. Tapian pit remains filled with highly toxic water, which overflows into rivers and communities during heavy rainfall, causing ongoing suffering for the residents. There has been a noticeable increase in residents requiring amputations due to intoxication and infected wounds, and abnormalities in newborn babies in various communities on the island. Researchers have been closely monitoring and studying these health issues to understand their correlation with the toxicity levels on the island.

Potential Relevance of Marinduque Mining Disaster to Sibuyan Mining Situation

While mining in Sibuyan is currently far from causing the same environmental impact as in Marinduque, many environmentalists and anti-mining leaders believe it can reach a similar level of devastation. 

The granted Mineral Production Sharing Agreement (MPSA) to ALTAI covers around 1,580 hectares of mining area on a mountain slope above and near watersheds, coastal areas, communities, irrigation systems, and rice fields. According to Mr. Alfreo Pascual, due to the mining area’s slope and geographical position, the mining activity may pose a significant risk of damaging and contaminating these areas below the mining site, particularly once they release mine tailings or heavy rainfall occurs. 

The image shows the location of the granted mining area to ALTAI
Photo: Romblon News Network

Community Efforts Against Mining in Sibuyan

Mrs. Veronica Batan, from Bantay Kalikasan ng Sibuyan, actively organizing the anti-mining educational rally.
Photo: Louise Loresco

Early Efforts of Sibuyanons

Many Sibuyanons oppose mining on the island. Since the early 2000s, they have put forth tremendous efforts and sacrifices in their fight against mining. Numerous anti-mining organizations were formed, and rallies and legal actions were held. Some individuals even risked their lives to protect the environment.

In October 2007, Armin Marin, a former environmentalist from the World Wildlife Fund for Nature-Philippines and a town councilor in Sibuyan, was tragically shot dead after leading a rally against a mining operation attempted by Sibuyan Nickel Properties Development Corp. This incident served as a wake-up call for Sibuyanons, motivating them to take further action against those trying to exploit their island.

Statue of former councilor Armin Marin
Photo: Johnny Flores

Since the nickel ore transportation attempt by APMC in February, the residents of Sibuyan have set up an outpost in front of the mining site, where the human barricade occurred. This outpost is constantly monitoring the mining site daily to prevent further illegal activities from happening again.

The established outpost “Barikada” or Barricade in front of APMC’s mining site
Photo: Johnny Flores

Small Victories of Sibuyanons

Today, community efforts against mining on the island are still ongoing. The success of the human barricade in February, which exposed illegal mining operations and led to the government stopping the mining activities, has been followed by more victories for the anti-mining residents of Sibuyan. More residents are now displaying “No to Mining” banners in front of their homes, and regular community outreach and rallies are taking place on the island. According to the anti-mining leaders, these actions are crucial to maintain the willingness of Sibuyanons to protect their island’s pristine environment and reputation.

A few weeks ago, anti-mining organizations in Sibuyan received another good news. The “Writ of Kalikasan” (Writ of Nature), which Sibuyanons requested, has been issued by the Supreme Court against the Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Mines and Geosciences Bureau, and APMC. The Writ of Kalikasan is a legal remedy for any individual or organization whose constitutional right to a balanced and healthy environment has been threatened or violated by an unlawful act of any public or private entity. 

The issuance of the Writ of Kalikasan by the Supreme Court is an essential step for Sibuyanons on their way toward protecting Sibuyan Island against any form of environmental exploitation. 

Educational Outreach: Raising Awareness

During our stay on the island, we witnessed another educational rally at the town hall of San Fernando municipality. The rally was organized by various environmental and anti-mining organizations, led by Bantay Kalikasan ng Sibuyan (Nature Guardians of Sibuyan).

Educational seminar on environmental impact and calamity risks caused by mining
Photo: Johnny Flores

The purpose of the educational rally is to raise awareness among more Sibuyanons about the actual environmental impact and calamity risks caused by mining, aiming to address the issue of misinformation within the community. Dr. Edward Monjardin, one of the keynote guest speakers at the event, highlights the potential calamity and health risks of mining in Sibuyan by explaining the situation’s relevance to the Marinduque mining disaster. 

Dr. Edward Monjardin discussing the mining disaster case of Marinduque
Photo: Louise Loresco

Dr. Monjardin also emphasizes the significance of maintaining a balance between development and the environment. Neither one should outweigh the other for communities to truly prosper. During his seminar, he informed the residents and indigenous people that excessive development could harm the environment and lead to calamities. At the same time, too much focus on environmental protection can hinder economic growth and progress for the community. However, he explained that there is a fine line between these two factors, and sustainable development is the key to benefiting the community.

Mrs. Veronica Batan from Bantay Kalikasan ng Sibuyan highlights the immense importance and beauty of Sibuyan’s environmental state and natural landscapes. These areas hold significant potential for eco-tourism rather than unsustainable development like mining. She also expressed her gratitude for the never-ending support and hard work of her colleagues, other environmental organizations, and the approximately 1,000 attendees of the educational event.

Mr. Alfreo Pascual led the question and answer portion for the attendees during the event. He reiterates the importance of continuing the fight for the environment, acknowledging that while they have achieved some small victories, the potential threat of mining in Sibuyan remains.

Mr. Rodney Galicha on the anti-mining educational rally in Sibuyan
Photo: Louise Loresco

Additionally, environmentalist and human rights activist Mr. Rodney Galicha shares the latest news on the progress of their fight against mining on the island. He aims to keep the people informed about the current status of their movement, ensuring that the community stays updated on their efforts to protect their island’s natural heritage.

Furthermore, the event calls on the local government of Sibuyan to take a more proactive role in supporting the Sibuyanons’ efforts to protect the island’s environment.

Protecting The Future of Sibuyan Island: What We Can Do?

As the fight against mining continues, the fate of Sibuyan Island is still uncertain. The key to securing its future lies in striking a delicate balance between development and environmental protection. However, this task cannot be accomplished alone. It requires collaborative efforts and urgent actions from all stakeholders to ensure the protection of Sibuyan Island and the well-being of its people. Here are some strategies Sibuyanons can adopt to achieve this goal:

Promote Environmental Education and Awareness

Education and awareness are vital tools in tackling one of the significant challenges faced by Sibuyanons today against mining. By providing the community with information about the importance of the environment and the real impacts of mining, they can effectively counter misinformation, make informed decisions, and work together to create a shared vision for the island’s future.

Supporting environmental education programs and outreach initiatives can empower local residents to actively engage in preserving their island. Through knowledge and understanding, the community can take meaningful steps towards sustainable practices and protect the natural beauty of Sibuyan for generations to come.

Promote Sustainable Development Alternatives

While mining may offer economic gains, it is important to understand that such gains could be meaningless if the island’s environment and natural resources suffer irreversible damage. To secure a greener and safer future for Sibuyan, people must explore sustainable alternatives that can provide the same economic growth and progress. Here are two key alternatives to consider:

1. Promoting Eco-Tourism: Sibuyan Island is filled with amazing landscapes and underwater havens that tourists around the world are willing to see and experience. Leveraging these natural wonders can be a big opportunity for eco-tourism.

  • Eco-tourism initiatives can be an ideal alternative that fosters both economic growth and environmental protection.
  • Eco-tourism can create job opportunities and generate income for the local economy while also protecting the island’s ecological integrity, ensuring its natural beauty remains for future generations.

2. Expanding Market Opportunities for Sibuyan Seafood Products: Sibuyan Island is abundant with different marine species, making it a food basket and one of the main sources of income for the locals. Increasing market opportunities for seafood products can offer a promising chance to generate more jobs and boost the local economy.

  • Improving and expanding marine protected areas on the island can significantly increase fish biomass and benefit both the marine ecosystem and local fishermen. More marine protected areas mean more fish and more fish means more catch for the fishermen.
  • Opening direct access to national and international seafood markets can result in increased sales and an overall enhancement of the island’s economic status.

Advocate for Stronger Environmental Policies

To protect Sibuyan Island, the people need strong environmental policies in place. Both local and national governments must take responsibility for preserving their natural resources and the ecological balance of Sibuyan Island. Citizens can also make a difference by supporting stricter regulations on mining and advocating for policies that promote sustainable development and conservation.

Effective implementation of these policies requires collaborative efforts of all stakeholders, including government agencies, Non-Government Organizations (NGOs), local communities, and private businesses. Working together, they can develop a well-rounded strategy to tackle the island’s specific environmental challenges while ensuring its long-term sustainability.

90% of Great Lakes water samples have unsafe microplastic levels – report

About 90% of water samples taken over the last 10 years from the Great Lakes contain microplastic levels that are unsafe for wildlife, a new peer-reviewed paper from the University of Toronto finds.

About 20% of those samples are at the highest level of risk, but the study’s authors say the damage can be reversed if the US and Canada quickly act.

“Ninety per cent is a lot,” said Eden Hataley, a University of Toronto researcher and study co-author. “We need to answer some basic questions by monitoring … so we can quantify risks to wildlife and humans.”

The Great Lakes provide drinking water to over 40 million people in the US and Canada, hold about 90% of the US’s freshwater, and are home to 3,500 species of plants and animals.

The authors reviewed data from peer-reviewed studies from the last 10 years, which showed the highest levels are found in tributaries leading to the lakes, or around major cities like Chicago and Toronto. The highest median levels were found in Lake Michigan and Lake Ontario.

Though myriad microplastic sources exist, wastewater treatment plants seem to be a major Great Lakes basin contributor, as they are elsewhere, Hataley said. Pollution from microfibers that come off clothing in washing machines are thought to be another common source, as are preproduction plastic pellets used in manufacturing. She noted concerning levels of microplastics have been found in sport fish consumed by humans and beer brewed with Great Lakes water.

But the consequences for human health are unknown, Hataley said.

“We know we are being exposed, but what that means in terms of harm or what’s a safe level – we have no idea, and that’s going to take more research,” she said.

Getting a handle on the question starts with the US and Canadian governments coordinating the monitoring of microplastic levels, she added, and the nations’ Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement already has in place monitoring programs for other pollutants.

skip past newsletter promotion

Adding microplastics to that list would not be a heavy lift, Hataley added, and would help researchers and regulators understand pollution trends over time, identify hotspots and point to major sources of pollution.

Solutions, like adding filters to washing machines or storm sewers at manufacturing sites, exist and are relatively easy to implement, she said. Though Canadian and US governments have known about microplastic levels for at least 10 years, it can take time for regulators to act, and the new paper highlights the situation’s urgency, Hataley said.

“The timeline is not that shocking, but it makes a lot of sense to do it now,” she said.

Dead flies could be used to make biodegradable plastic, scientists say

Dead flies could be turned into biodegradable plastic, researchers have said.

The finding, presented at the autumn meeting of the American Chemical Society (ACS), could be useful as it is difficult to find sources for biodegradable polymers that do not have other competing uses.

“For 20 years, my group has been developing methods to transform natural products – such as glucose obtained from sugar cane or trees – into degradable, digestible polymers that don’t persist in the environment,” said the principal investigator, Karen Wooley, from Texas A&M University.

“But those natural products are harvested from resources that are also used for food, fuel, construction and transportation.”

A colleague suggested she could use waste products left over from farming black soldier flies. The larvae of the flies contain proteins and other nutritious compounds so are being raised for animal feed, and they break down waste so are being bred for that, too. However, adult flies are less useful and are discarded after their short life span. Wooley’s team has been trying to use these carcasses to make useful materials from a waste product.

The researchers found that chitin, a sugar-based polymer, is a major component of the flies and it strengthens the shell, or exoskeleton, of insects and crustaceans. Shrimp and crab shells are already used for chitin extraction. Researchers said the fly-sourced chitin powder seemed purer than that from crustaceans and obtaining chitin from flies could avoid concerns over some seafood allergies.

From the fly products, the team created a hydrogel that can absorb 47 times its weight in water in just one minute. This product could be used in cropland soil to capture flood water and then slowly release moisture during droughts.

Wooley said: “Here in Texas, we’re constantly either in a flood or drought situation, so I’ve been trying to think of how we can make a superabsorbent hydrogel that could address this.”

The scientists hope they will soon be able to create bioplastics such as polycarbonates or polyurethanes, which are traditionally made from petrochemicals, from the flies. These plastics will not contribute to the plastic pollution problem.

skip past newsletter promotion

Wooley said: “Ultimately, we’d like the insects to eat the waste plastic as their food source, and then we would harvest them again and collect their components to make new plastics. So the insects would not only be the source, but they would also then consume the discarded plastics.”

US scientists turn old plastic into soap after fireside inspiration

Scientists have discovered a method to give new life to old plastic – by converting it into soap.

Plastics are chemically similar to fatty acids, which are one of the main ingredients in soap. For Guoliang Liu, an associate professor of chemistry at Virginia Tech and author of the paper published in the journal Science, this similarity suggested it should be possible to convert polyethylene into fatty acids, and then into soap. The problem was size: molecularly, plastics are very large, about 3,000 carbon atoms long, whereas fatty acids are much smaller.

The solution came to Liu in an unusual way. “It was Christmas. I was watching the fireplace,” he said.

When firewood burns, it gives off smoke, which is made up of smaller particles of the firewood. Liu wondered whether burning plastic would work the same way.

“Firewood is mostly made of polymers such as cellulose. The combustion of firewood breaks these polymers into short chains, and then into small gaseous molecules before full oxidation to carbon dioxide,” he said. “If we similarly break down the synthetic polyethylene molecules but stop the process before they break all the way down to small gaseous molecules, then we should obtain short-chain, polyethylene-like molecules.”

Liu and colleagues built an oven-like reactor that could be used to safely burn plastic. The temperature at the bottom was hot enough to break up the polymer chains, while the top was cooled low enough to stop them breaking down too far.

The scientists collected the residue and found the product they had created was short-chain polyethylene, a type of wax. They then went on to turn the wax into soap.

“It’s the first soap ever made from plastic in the world,” Liu said. “It has a bit of a unique colour. But it works.”

Liu’s method works on polyethylene and polypropylene, which are the two most common types of plastic. Together, they make up about half of all plastic waste: close to 200m tonnes every year. More than 80% of plastic waste goes to landfill, while less than 10% is recycled. One of the benefits of Liu’s method is that it works on “end-of-life” plastics, which cannot be recycled through normal means. The method was also designed to be able to be scaled for use in an industrial setting.

Liu urged caution, though. “Plastic pollution is a global challenge,” he said. “It’s one of the major problems facing our society, and this is one piece of a bigger puzzle. We need a joint effort between the research and industrial communities. And the best way to avoid plastic pollution is to minimise the use of plastics.”

How Plastic Chemicals Come Into Contact with Our Skin

Here are some ways in which plastic chemicals can get onto our skin:

  1. Direct Contact: Handling plastic items, products, or surfaces can result in direct contact between the skin and the plastic material. This is a common way that plastic chemicals can transfer to the skin. For example, touching plastic water bottles, food containers, or plastic-covered surfaces can lead to skin exposure.
  2. Wearing Plastic-Containing Items: Wearing clothing or accessories made from plastic-based materials, such as synthetic fabrics or vinyl, can result in skin contact with plastic chemicals. This is particularly relevant for items like raincoats, synthetic athletic wear, and shoes with plastic components.
  3. Personal Care Products: Some personal care products, such as lotions, creams, and cosmetics, may contain plastic-derived ingredients, including microplastics. These products can be applied directly to the skin, leading to potential exposure to plastic chemicals.
  4. Medical Devices and Bandages: Plastic materials are commonly used in medical devices, bandages, and wound dressings. When these devices or materials come into contact with the skin, there is a possibility of chemical transfer.
  5. Children’s Toys and Items: Plastic toys, pacifiers, teething rings, and other children’s items can expose infants and young children to plastic chemicals through skin contact or mouthing behavior.
  6. Environmental Contamination: In some cases, plastic particles, dust, or microplastics can become airborne and settle on the skin. This type of indirect exposure can occur in areas with plastic pollution or during activities involving plastic materials.

It’s important to note that the degree of exposure and potential risk from plastic chemicals on the skin can vary based on factors such as the type of plastic, the specific chemicals involved, the duration of contact, and individual sensitivity. Some plastic chemicals, such as phthalates and certain additives, are more likely to migrate or transfer to the skin.

To reduce potential exposure to plastic chemicals on the skin:

  • Choose personal care products that are free of plastic-derived ingredients.
  • Select clothing and accessories made from natural fibers or materials that have been tested for safety.
  • Minimize direct skin contact with plastic-containing products, especially for infants and young children.
  • Wash hands thoroughly after handling plastic items or engaging in activities that involve potential plastic exposure.
  • Be cautious when using medical devices or bandages that contain plastic components, especially for individuals with sensitive skin.

How Plastic Chemicals Get Into The Air

Plastic chemicals can get into the air through a process known as “off-gassing” or “volatilization.” Off-gassing refers to the release of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and other chemicals from plastic materials into the surrounding air. This process can occur in various situations and environments, leading to the dispersion of plastic-related chemicals into the atmosphere.

Here are the main ways plastic chemicals can get into the air:

  1. Evaporation: Some plastic chemicals, especially additives like plasticizers, stabilizers, and flame retardants, can evaporate from the surface of plastic materials over time. This process is more likely to occur at elevated temperatures, which can increase the rate of evaporation.
  2. Heat and Sunlight: Exposure to heat and sunlight can accelerate the off-gassing of plastic chemicals. When plastics are exposed to sunlight or high temperatures, the heat energy can cause the chemicals to vaporize and be released into the air.
  3. Degradation: Plastics can degrade over time due to factors like sunlight, temperature fluctuations, and mechanical stress. As plastics break down, they can release small particles and volatile compounds into the air.
  4. Manufacturing and Processing: During the manufacturing and processing of plastic products, volatile chemicals can be released into the air from raw materials, production equipment, and finished products. This is a concern in industries that involve plastic fabrication, molding, and other processing methods.
  5. Indoor Sources: Plastic materials used indoors, such as furniture, flooring, and household items, can emit VOCs and other chemicals into indoor air. This is especially true for newly purchased or newly installed items, as they may off-gas more chemicals when they are first introduced to the environment.
  6. Consumer Products: Some consumer products made from plastics, such as electronics, toys, and packaging, can release chemicals into the air, especially under conditions of use or when exposed to heat.
  7. Waste and Burning: Improper disposal of plastic waste, including burning plastics, can release toxic fumes and particles into the air. Burning plastic releases not only plastic chemicals but also potentially harmful byproducts of combustion.

It’s important to note that the extent and types of plastic chemicals released into the air can vary depending on factors such as the type of plastic, its composition, the temperature, and the specific environmental conditions. Off-gassing from plastics is a concern because certain chemicals released into the air can have adverse effects on air quality and human health. Indoor air quality may also be impacted, particularly in confined spaces with poor ventilation.

To reduce exposure to plastic-related chemicals in the air:

  • Choose products with low emissions or labeled as low-VOC or phthalate-free.
  • Ensure proper ventilation in indoor spaces, especially when introducing new plastic items.
  • Avoid burning plastics or other materials, as it can release harmful pollutants into the air.
  • Minimize the use of plastic products that are prone to off-gassing, especially in areas with limited ventilation.

How Plastics Migrate Into Food

The process of chemicals from plastics moving into our food is known as “migration.” Migration occurs when substances in a plastic material transfer from the plastic into the food or beverage that comes into contact with it.

This transfer of chemicals doesn’t happen in all plastics or under all conditions. It is more likely to happen under certain conditions such as heat, time, and contact surface area. And, the migration of chemicals from plastic into food will vary based on the type of plastic, the temperature, the duration of contact, and the specific chemicals involved.

Here are some key factors that contribute to the migration of chemicals from plastics into food:

  1. Temperature: Higher temperatures can accelerate the migration of chemicals from plastic into food. When plastics are heated, their structure can change, making them more prone to release chemicals. This is why microwaving or reheating food in plastic containers is often discouraged.
  2. Contact Time: The longer the food is in contact with the plastic, the more time there is for chemicals to migrate. Prolonged storage or exposure can increase the potential for migration.
  3. Type of Plastic: Different types of plastics have varying degrees of migration potential. Plastics that are more flexible or have higher levels of additives (such as plasticizers or colorants) are generally more likely to release chemicals into food.
  4. Additives: Many plastics contain additives to enhance their properties, such as plasticizers, stabilizers, colorants, and antioxidants. These additives can potentially migrate into food.
  5. Food Composition: The type of food and its composition can influence the migration of chemicals. Foods with higher fat content, for example, can attract more migration because certain plastic chemicals are more soluble in fats.
  6. Mechanical Stress: Mechanical stress, such as squeezing or pressing on plastic packaging, can also promote the release of chemicals.

Common plastic-related chemicals that may migrate into food include phthalates, bisphenol compounds (such as BPA), and other plastic additives. Regulatory agencies often set limits on the allowable migration levels for these chemicals to ensure that consumer exposure remains within safe levels.

To reduce the potential for chemical migration from plastics into food:

  • Use glass, stainless steel, or other food-safe materials for heating and storing food.
  • Choose plastics that are labeled as BPA-free or phthalate-free for food storage.
  • Avoid microwaving plastic containers, especially those not labeled as microwave-safe.
  • Do not use scratched or damaged plastic containers, as they may be more prone to migration.
how to avoid plastic in food

The Harmful Truth About Plastics: A Guide to EDCs in Plastics and Their Health Effects

This is a summary of the Endocrine Society’s report on plastics and their implications for our health. Download and read the full report here: EDC Guide 2020

The Harmful Truth About Plastics: A Guide to EDCs in Plastics and Their Health Effects

Plastics are all around us – in our homes, our cars, our clothes, our food packaging. But how safe are they really? This report from the Endocrine Society and IPEN reveals the truth about the harmful chemicals in plastics and their impacts on human health. Here’s what you need to know:

What’s the Deal with Plastics?

  • Plastics production has skyrocketed globally, from 50 million tons in the 1970s to over 350 million tons today. It’s projected to double by 2030.
  • Most plastics are made from petrochemicals like ethylene and propylene. Many contain hazardous additives like bisphenols, phthalates, and flame retardants.
  • Almost 80% of plastics become waste, ending up in landfills or the environment. As plastics break down, these additives are released.

The Role of Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals (EDCs)

  • EDCs interfere with our hormones and are linked to major health issues like infertility, cancer, diabetes, and neurological disorders.
  • EDCs can cause multigenerational effects, altering DNA and leading to disease in subsequent generations.
  • Fetuses and infants are especially vulnerable to EDCs since this is when key development occurs.

Major EDCs in Plastics

  • Bisphenols: Used in polycarbonate plastics and food can linings, these mimic estrogen. Effects include reproductive disorders, obesity, and neurobehavioral problems.
  • Phthalates: Added to PVC to make it flexible, these EDCs reduce testosterone and have been linked to reproductive issues in both males and females.
  • Flame retardants: These migrate out of furniture foam and electronics. They disrupt thyroid and reproductive hormones and are linked to reduced IQ in children.
  • UV stabilizers: Absorb UV light to protect plastics from degradation. Benzotriazoles are widespread stabilizers that have estrogenic effects.
  • Toxic metals like lead, cadmium, and tin: Used as plastic colorants, catalysts, or stabilizers. They have multigenerational effects and mimic estrogen.
  • PFAS: Used as stain repellents on textiles and grease resistance in food packaging. These chemicals disrupt estrogen, metabolism and the immune system.

Reducing Your Exposure

The report authors recommend reducing plastic use and exposure wherever possible. Tips include:

  • Choose fresh foods over canned and avoid handling receipts printed on thermal paper
  • Don’t microwave food in plastic containers
  • Use alternatives like paper or glass food storage containers
  • Support bans on single-use plastics

The scientific evidence on EDCs is substantial enough to warrant policies that phase out and restrict their use. This will reduce human exposure and safeguard health, especially for vulnerable populations like children. While individual actions help, addressing this global plastic crisis requires a coordinated international effort between scientists, governments, manufacturers and consumers.

Five Harmful Chemicals To Watch Out For In Plastics (Presentation Summary)

The panel of experts in this presentation summarize what is known about endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs) found in plastics that threaten human health.

What Are EDCs?

Endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs) are substances that interfere with the normal functioning of the endocrine system in humans and animals. The endocrine system is a complex network of glands that produce and release hormones, which are essential for regulating various bodily functions such as metabolism, growth and development, reproductive processes, and the immune system.

EDCs can mimic, block, or alter the natural hormones in the body, leading to hormonal imbalances and disruption of normal physiological processes. These chemicals can bind to hormone receptors, affect hormone synthesis, metabolism, or elimination, and modify hormone signaling pathways. They may also influence the production and release of hormones from endocrine glands.

EDCs can be found in various products and substances, including:

  1. Pesticides and herbicides: Some chemicals used in agriculture to control pests and weeds can act as EDCs.
  2. Plastics and plasticizers: Certain compounds, such as bisphenol A (BPA) and phthalates, used in the manufacturing of plastics, can leach into food and water and affect hormonal systems.
  3. Personal care products: Some cosmetics, shampoos, and lotions contain EDCs that can be absorbed through the skin.
  4. Industrial chemicals: Chemicals used in manufacturing processes, such as polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and dioxins, can act as EDCs.
  5. Pharmaceuticals: Some medications can have endocrine-disrupting effects, especially those that affect hormone levels.
  6. Food additives: Certain additives used in food processing can also have endocrine-disrupting properties.

Exposure to endocrine-disrupting chemicals has been associated with a wide range of health effects, including reproductive disorders, developmental abnormalities, hormone-related cancers, metabolic disorders, and immune system dysfunction.

As EDCs are widespread in our environment, there is ongoing research and regulatory efforts to better understand their effects and to limit exposure to these chemicals to protect human and environmental health.

Presentation: Five Harmful Chemicals to Watch Out For in Plastics

The following panel was hosted by The Endocrine Society in December of 2020. See the key points from each expert speaker below the video.

Summary of Presentation

Overall, the main point was that plastics contain a diverse array of EDCs beyond BPA, these are linked to many health effects, exposure is increasing, and there is a need for greater regulation and transparency around chemicals in plastics.

Here are the key points made by each speaker in the webinar:

  • Dr. Judy Domino discussed endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs) that are present in plastics, including bisphenol A (BPA), phthalates, and alkylphenols. She covered the health effects linked to these chemicals, such as reproductive disorders, cancer, diabetes, and neurological issues.
  • Dr. Paulina Puzan discussed additional EDCs found in plastics, including perfluorinated compounds (PFOS, PFOA), brominated flame retardants, UV stabilizers like benzotriazoles, and toxic metals like lead and cadmium. She explained how these chemicals can leach out and cause health effects.
  • Sara Brosché from IPEN discussed the projected increase in plastic and chemical production globally and the resulting increase in exposure to EDCs from plastics. She emphasized the need to reduce plastic production and remove hazardous chemicals.
  • Dr. Puzan also presented on the new EU Chemicals Strategy which aims to identify and restrict EDCs, accelerate test methods, and restrict chemicals by families rather than single compounds.

Main Points from Dr. Judy Domino

Her main points covered the major EDCs present in plastics, how they leach out, and the range of health effects they have been associated with in studies. She provided details on the toxicity of key chemicals like BPA and phthalates.

  • Many endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs) are present in the building blocks of plastics or used as additives during manufacturing.
  • EDCs like bisphenol A (BPA), phthalates, and alkylphenols can leach out of plastic products and contaminate the environment.
  • These EDCs have been linked to reproductive disorders, cancer, diabetes, obesity, and neurological impairments in studies.
  • BPA specifically has been shown to impact brain development, behavior, reproduction, and increase cancer risk.
  • Replacement BPA chemicals like BPS and BPF have similar structures and may have similar toxicity.
  • Phthalates reduce testosterone and estrogen levels, disrupt thyroid hormones, and are associated with fertility issues, diabetes, and obesity.

Main Points from Dr. Paulina Puzan

Her main points focused on covering additional concerning EDCs used as plastic additives and their health effects, as well as discussing new EU regulations targeting EDCs.

  • She discussed additional endocrine disrupting chemicals found in plastics, including alkylphenols, perfluorinated compounds (PFOS/PFOA), brominated flame retardants, UV stabilizers, and toxic metals.
  • Alkylphenols are surfactants used in paints, pesticides, cleaners, and personal care products. They are estrogenic and can disrupt male fertility.
  • PFOS/PFOA are used for water/stain resistance in food packaging, cookware, textiles. They are persistent and linked to liver toxicity, thyroid disruption, lower birth weight.
  • Brominated flame retardants are added to electronics, furniture, toys and are associated with thyroid hormone disruption and neurodevelopmental issues.
  • Metals like lead and cadmium used in plastics are developmental neurotoxicants and can disrupt the endocrine system.
  • She introduced the EU’s new chemical strategy which will identify and restrict EDCs, accelerate test methods, and restrict chemicals by families.

Main Points from Sara Brosché

Her main points emphasized the projected rise in plastic use and EDC exposures, the issues with plastic waste disposal, the need for regulatory action and corporate responsibility, and the role of individual consumers in driving change.

  • Plastic and chemical production is projected to increase globally, which will likely increase human exposure and health impacts from EDCs in plastics.
  • Plastic waste and microplastics release EDCs into the environment and food chain, contaminating ecosystems.
  • Recycling and incineration of plastics is problematic – recycling transfers EDCs to new products, while incineration releases toxic emissions like dioxins.
  • Concrete actions needed include: reducing plastic production drastically, removing hazardous additives, implementing policies to restrict EDCs, making producers responsible for plastic waste.
  • People can take individual action by using alternatives to plastics, advocating for change, and pressuring companies to reduce plastic usage and reliance on EDCs.

The Impact of Charging for Plastic Bags: Lessons for the Environment and Human Health

Key Points:
– The use of single-use plastic bags in England has dropped by 98% since retailers began charging for them in 2015.
– Seven leading grocery chains have seen a significant decline in the distribution of plastic carrier bags, from 7.6 billion in 2014 to 133 million last year.
– Environmental campaigners are urging the government to learn from this success and take further action.

 

Analysis:
1. Impact on Human Health:
– The reduction in single-use plastic bags will have a positive impact on human health.
– Plastic bags take hundreds of years to decompose, and their production contributes to air and water pollution.
– By reducing the usage of such bags, the amount of plastic waste entering ecosystems and potentially reaching human bodies through food and water sources will decrease.

2. Impact on Climate Change:
– Although plastic bag usage has a relatively small impact on climate change compared to other factors, the reduction is still significant.
– The production of plastic bags requires fossil fuels, contributing to greenhouse gas emissions.
– By decreasing the demand and distribution of plastic bags, there will be a reduction in the extraction and burning of fossil fuels, leading to a decrease in carbon emissions.

3. Actions Individuals Can Take:
– Avoid using single-use plastic bags and opt for reusable bags instead.
– Support governmental initiatives and policies that aim to reduce plastic waste and promote sustainable alternatives.
– Educate and raise awareness about the detrimental effects of plastic pollution on the environment and human health.
– Engage in recycling programs and properly dispose of plastic waste instead of letting it end up in landfills or oceans.
Original Article:https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/jul/31/government-urged-to-repeat-success-of-plastic-bag-charge