top of page

Posts List

Netflix’s documentary, The Plastic Detox, explores potential health impacts of microplastic exposure in everyday life, focusing on endocrine-disrupting chemicals and fertility. Unlike other plastic documentaries, this one gives an intimate insight into plastic’s effect on human health in their home and town, rather than on plastic pollution in the oceans. It highlights the scarily vast and extensive amount of plastic that is in our daily lives. From the minute you wake up and shower using products in plastic containers, to eating lunch from plastic tubs using plastic cutlery, and cleaning your house with products containing plastics that are in plastic bottles: plastics are everywhere. Different from your regular environmental documentary, it follows 6 couples experiencing unexplained infertility as they undertake a 90-day plastic detox under the guidance of environmental and reproductive epidemiologist, Dr Shanna H. Swan. The couples dramatically reduce their exposure to plastics by replacing food containers, utensils, cosmetics, and clothing with alternatives that contain fewer plastic-related chemicals. Their exposure to substances such as phthalates and bisphenol A (BPA) is monitored through biological testing before and after the intervention. Phthalates: makes plastic soft and flexible BPA: makes plastics hard and is used on thermal paper receipts Various scientists explain how plastics release chemicals that act as endocrine disruptors, interfering with hormones that regulate reproduction, development, and metabolism. Examining how microplastics have been detected in human tissues including the blood, brain, reproductive organs and placenta, the documentary highlights the growing evidence linking these chemicals to declining sperm counts, infertility, cancers, and developmental disorders. Subscribe to our fortnightly newsletter Get our top stories straight to your inbox every two weeks and stay informed about plastic pollution! SUBSCRIBE Combined with personal accounts, the documentary explores the wider issue of chemical regulation. Researchers argue that many plastic-related chemicals enter the market with limited long-term safety testing and that regulatory systems have struggled to keep pace with scientific evidence. This inquisitive documentary combines expert insight with an intimate 90-day experiment, exposing the effects of plastic exposure in daily life on health and fertility. It also offers practical ways to reduce exposure anyone can try: Avoiding heating food in plastic containers Reducing consumption of ultra-processed foods Limiting the use of plastic packaging where possible The Plastic Detox is an engaging documentary that blends personal stories with emerging analytical research to increase awareness about the potential health impacts of plastic exposure in everyday life. It encourages viewers to think critically about their use of plastics while providing an investigative yet intimate insight into what is potentially going on in their homes. +++++++++++++++++ For more information contact: info@scarabtrust.org.uk Image: Poster from Netflix’s Plastic Detox from #BreakFreeFromPlastic

What is The Plastic Detox? A Review of Netflix’s Must Watch Documentary

Netflix’s documentary, The Plastic Detox, explores potential health impacts of microplastic exposure in everyday life, focusing on endocrine-disrupting chemicals and fertility. Unlike other plastic documentaries, this one gives an intimate insight into plastic’s effect on human health in their home and town, rather than on plastic pollution in the oceans. It highlights the scarily vast and extensive amount of plastic that is in our daily lives. From the minute you wake up and shower using...

Read More

Health

98% of plastic is made from natural organic materials like oil and gas. Ranking in the top three global producers of oil and natural gas. In the context of Russia’s war on Ukraine, purchasing Russian hydrocarbons to make products like plastic is inextricably linked to the funding of the Russian war economy. The question then is whether our current international regulations are effective at responding to this dual problem? Before the war, Russia’s hydrocarbon industry accounted for roughly 45% of their federal budget, which makes up 14% of global produce or 10.5 million barrels of oil per day. Since 2022, this proportion has fallen due to sanctions imposed on Russia by the EU, the UK and Australia, but recent reports show that export volumes have in fact begun to increase since 2024, signalling the need for even stricter international action. Last year, the Zero Waste Alliance Ukraine (ZWAU) conducted a study titled “How Russian Fuel Feeds the World of Plastic: A study of the correlation between fossil fuels and plastic”. The report underlined the vicious cycle of how consuming Russian fuel to make plastic is essentially funding aggression. They conclude that the solution to countering Russian aggression is interconnected with our responsibility to counter plastic pollution, which requires policy steps that go further than the current sanctioning. Subscribe to our fortnightly newsletter Get our top stories straight to your inbox every two weeks and stay informed about plastic pollution! SUBSCRIBE The ZWAU recommends: Diversifying energy supplies away from Russia and other authoritarian regimes, and towards renewable energy Pushing for a Global Plastic Treaty Creating a more circular economy by building a system on waste minimization, reuse and refill systems, and better recycling infrastructure The global petrochemical industry consumes around 15% of the world’s oil to make its products. However, this figure could reach closer to 40% by 2030 if consumption patterns of materials like plastic continue. As policymakers look for ways to reduce reliance on Russian fuel, they should also consider how a broader shift away from reliance on the fossil fuel industry can be pursued. +++++++++++++++++ For more information contact: info@scarabtrust.org.uk Image: Factory pollution ships - Image by Chris Leboutillier (ST ref: 1210)

Closing the Loophole: Plastic fuelling Russia's war

98% of plastic is made from natural organic materials like oil and gas. Ranking in the top three global producers of oil and natural gas. In the context of Russia’s war on Ukraine, purchasing Russian hydrocarbons to make products like plastic is inextricably linked to the funding of the Russian war economy. The question then is whether our current international regulations are effective at responding to this dual problem? Before the war, Russia’s hydrocarbon industry accounted for roughly 45%...

Read More

Pollution

Plastic is a non-biodegradable material and has long-lasting negative effects on both the environment and public health. However, plastic has become the preferred material of manufacturers due to its cheapness, easy storage, cost-effectiveness, and convenience. Because of the above, the packaging industry is not looking to replace plastic anytime soon. However, they have noticed that the newer generations of consumers (aged 20 to 50 years old) are more likely to reject single-use plastic bags or items packaged in single-use plastic. This is because awareness campaigns and education have instilled everyday consumers with a need to actively reject this pollutant whenever convenient. Consumer opinion can have a large impact on other consumers’ decisions and therefore plays a major role in business owners’ choices regarding environmental and health-conscious changes, such as reducing single-use plastic packaging. The factors influencing consumer choices need to be addressed, so that businesses remain aligned with consumers’ wants and needs. Subscribe to our fortnightly newsletter Get our top stories straight to your inbox every two weeks and stay informed about plastic pollution! SUBSCRIBE This has led to a concept known as ‘Greenwashing’, whereby businesses address consumer perception and enact practices to moderately reduce the usage of plastic packaging. Businesses may then market certain products as more environmentally friendly or recyclable, despite the changes that have been made having no real impact on the plastic pollution crisis. Targeted marketing gives consumers the illusion of a greener, more environmentally conscious choice. However,the products being sold rely heavily on cheap plastic or similar combinations and derivatives that cannot be processed and recycled because they contain mixed materials or metal components. This marketing also includes buzzwords such as “eco-friendly”, “natural”, or “kind to the environment”, despite a lack of evidence to support these claims. Customers are then left overestimating the positive environmental impact of their choice in packaging and food or household items, and incorrectly assuming that their waste is being recycled or biologically degraded. Due to the misleading effect of the Greenwashing Wave, consumers who actively go out of their way to avoid non-recyclable plastic packaging are finding that their weekly plastic waste is still ending up in a landfill or body of water somewhere. Informed consumer’s well intentions are then all for naught, as despite their more “environmentally friendly” choices the plastic pollution crisis is still largely untouched and unlikely to improve as individuals are under the impression they already “did their part”. Read more about packaging and supermarkets' greenwashing tactics in episode 3 of this series. +++++++++++++++++ For more information contact: info@scarabtrust.org.uk Image: Greenwashing synonyms - Image from spunout.ie (ST ref: 1297)

How companies market 'green' products - too good to be true?

Plastic is a non-biodegradable material and has long-lasting negative effects on both the environment and public health. However, plastic has become the preferred material of manufacturers due to its cheapness, easy storage, cost-effectiveness, and convenience. Because of the above, the packaging industry is not looking to replace plastic anytime soon. However, they have noticed that the newer generations of consumers (aged 20 to 50 years old) are more likely to reject single-use plastic bags...

Read More

Corporate

Plastic pollution should be on everyone’s mind, with single-use plastic items such as plastic bags and snack and food wrap packaging being at the top of the list. These items pose a serious risk globally by destroying natural environments, creating unmanageable waste, and increasing health hazards. A typical UK household generates 20 to 30 items of single-use plastic a week (most of which comprises soft plastic packaging such as film lids and food wrappers). This has led to an increase in calls for the consumption of more environmentally friendly and recyclable alternatives. Tackling the ever-growing mountain of single-use waste has jumped to the forefront of global policy making, such as the UK Simpler Recycling legislation calling for improved waste separation from businesses. Increased awareness of single-use waste has also led consumers to rethink their plastic-buying choices when shopping at the supermarket or their local corner shop. Subscribe to our fortnightly newsletter Get our top stories straight to your inbox every two weeks and stay informed about plastic pollution! SUBSCRIBE Campaigns to raise awareness and influence public consumer behaviour have proven critical to the success of the most popular plastic management solution: recycling. The solution has been sold, marketed and popularised by both governments and businesses alike to instil environmental consciousness through media and public education. But how successful is recycling as a strategy? And are UK households doing enough to help off-set the negative effects of plastic pollution? In April 2024, a survey conducted by Greenpeace and Everyday Plastic estimated that UK households discard 1.7 billion pieces of plastic per week. A large portion of the plastic packaging within that figure that has been accredited as “recycled” in the United Kingdom is actually making its way elsewhere, largely to Turkey, that allows exported waste to be included in recycling figures.This is due to a loophole in post-brexit regulations following a process of “prior informed consent”, a system that is open to abuse with Britain being the second-biggest producer of plastic waste globally., This raises a final question: are green consumer choices really better than non-green ones? Read more about packaging and supermarkets' greenwashing tactics in episode 2 of this 4 part series. +++++++++++++++++ For more information contact: info@scarabtrust.org.uk Image: shelf of vegetables - Image by Firda Faradiba (ST ref: 1303)

Recycling plastic - real solution or marketing ploy?

Plastic pollution should be on everyone’s mind, with single-use plastic items such as plastic bags and snack and food wrap packaging being at the top of the list. These items pose a serious risk globally by destroying natural environments, creating unmanageable waste, and increasing health hazards. A typical UK household generates 20 to 30 items of single-use plastic a week (most of which comprises soft plastic packaging such as film lids and food wrappers). This has led to an increase in...

Read More

Waste

In short: Ammonia is unique among petrochemicals – its molecule contains no carbon, yet more than 99% of ammonia is produced using fossil fuels. It is the foundation of industrial agriculture but also generates enormous greenhouse gas emissions and locks food production into fossil fuel supply chains. Instead of decreasing our reliance on ammonia, the industry is seeking new markets by promoting ammonia as a "green" fuel for shipping and power generation. This article explores how ammonia became central to modern agriculture, why its production is so carbon-intensive and why expanding ammonia infrastructure risks prolonging our dependence on fossil fuels rather than accelerating the transition away from them. In our previous article, We can’t quit fossil fuels without tackling petrochemicals, we discussed why petrochemicals keep us tied to the fossil industry independently of fossil fuel use. We also promised to bring you a separate article on ammonia, since it occupies a unique place among petrochemicals. Many might be surprised to know that ammonia is a petrochemical. Although ammonia itself contains no carbon (its chemical formula is NH₃), almost all ammonia produced today is made using fossil fuels. Natural gas, coal or oil are used to produce hydrogen, which is then combined with nitrogen from the air through the Haber–Bosch process. Why is ammonia so important? Historical context Ammonia is deeply entrenched in our economy. It is a primary source of active nitrogen (meaning nitrogen that can be incorporated into other molecules through chemical reactions) and almost every synthetic molecule that contains nitrogen atoms is synthesised using ammonia. Most ammonia is used to produce fertilisers and ammonia-derived fertilisers support around 50% of global crop production.. But this has obviously not always been the case. Centuries before the development of industrial agriculture, farmers from different parts of the world used organic waste to fertilise the fields. In the 19th century, industrialising Europe and the United States transformed agriculture through global fertiliser markets, relying heavily on nitrogen resources extracted from South America. First, by exploiting Peruvian deposits of guano, the nitrogen- and phosphorus-rich excrement of seabirds accumulated over centuries. Then, by extracting Chilean deposits of sodium nitrate, which became the main industrial nitrogen fertiliser in the late 19th century. At the time, Western Europe and the United States had become increasingly dependent on imported nitrates. Control over these deposits became a matter of geopolitical and imperial competition, as agricultural productivity and military power both depended on access to nitrogen. However, the reserves were being depleted at an alarming rate, and by the end of the 19th century it was evident that demand for nitrogen compounds would soon exceed the available supply. This boosted research efforts to develop a method that could capture nitrogen from the air and convert it into a reactive form. Fritz Haber, later known for his central role in the development of chemical weapons, developed a method for synthesising ammonia from nitrogen and hydrogen under high pressure. Recognising its industrial potential, the German chemical company BASF acquired the rights to the invention and employed Carl Bosch to scale up the process for industrial production. In 1913, BASF commissioned the first commercial ammonia plant based on the Haber-Bosch process in Oppau, Germany. Subscribe to our fortnightly newsletter Get our top stories straight to your inbox every two weeks and stay informed about plastic pollution! SUBSCRIBE Synthetic ammonia production expanded rapidly during the First World War as the British naval blockade restricted Germany’s access to overseas nitrate supplies, while military demand for nitrogen compounds increased dramatically. After the war, Germany emerged as the leading centre of synthetic ammonia technology. Since then, ammonia production has expanded worldwide, especially from the 1960s onward, when natural gas replaced coal-based processes as the main source of hydrogen, making ammonia production much cheaper. Ammonia production now Ammonia production currently sits at 200 million tonnes per year. According to data from 2020, when global ammonia production was 182 million tonnes, direct CO2 emissions from the global production amounted to 450 million tonnes, with an additional 170 million tonnes from indirect emissions (electricity generation and emissions from reactions that take place when ammonia-derived fertilisers are applied to soils). This means that ammonia production is responsible for around 1.7% of the global CO2 emissions. Ammonia is also one of the most emission-intensive materials produced by heavy industry – on a per-tonne basis, emissions from ammonia production are almost twice as intensive as those from steel production and four times as intensive as those from cement production. Ammonia’s per tonne emissions are comparable to plastic production (e.g polyethylene production emits around two tonnes of CO2 per one tonne of plastic). There are alternatives to the regular, carbon-intensive ammonia production process. The industry differentiates between various approaches by assigning colours to them. - Grey ammonia is produced using the conventional fossil-based Haber–Bosch process (and brown is sometimes used to differentiate the coal-based process). - Blue ammonia is made using fossil-based processes but combined with CO2 capture. - Green ammonia is made using hydrogen coming from water hydrolysis (i.e. non-fossil-based). However, the blue and green alternatives still represent only a tiny fraction of global production – the combined share of net-zero production methods for ammonia is negligible at less than 1% of global production. Alternative methods are also more expensive – green ammonia costs two to four times more than conventional ammonia. The future of ammonia Ammonia is a solid link that connects our food systems with petrochemicals. Moreover, its production is extremely unsustainable. It would be logical to choose a development path that reduces our dependence on ammonia, eventually eliminating its use completely. Obviously, such a path is not acceptable for petrochemical companies or the ammonia industry. The production of ammonia for fertilisers is constantly increasing, yet the industry is still looking for new applications. Tony Will, CEO of the world’s largest ammonia producer, CF Industries, recently said, “Up to this point, we have made a business by selling the nitrogen value of the molecule. What’s really exciting [...] is now there is an opportunity and a market that values the hydrogen portion of the molecule.” The nitrogen portion is used to produce fertilisers, explosives and other synthetic materials containing nitrogen. The hydrogen portion can provide energy, which means that ammonia can also be used as fuel. This illustrates a major strategic shift. Instead of viewing ammonia primarily as a source of nitrogen for fertilisers, producers increasingly present it as a carrier of hydrogen for the energy sector. Ammonia is now presented as the “green” fuel of the future, mostly for ships and as co-fuel for gas-powered power plants. The reality is that ammonia is far from green. First of all, basically all ammonia produced nowadays is fossil-based grey ammonia. There are many new projects promising blue ammonia, but the carbon capture projects have often failed to achieve their promised capture rates and captured CO₂ is sometimes used for enhanced oil recovery rather than permanent storage. Moreover, blue ammonia does not address the main issue, which is the dependence on fossils. This could be solved by green ammonia, but the electrolysis-based process is not efficient enough at this point to produce ammonia at large enough scale. Additionally, the production and use of ammonia and ammonia-derived chemicals pose environmental concerns related to methane and nitrous oxide emissions. These could become of a major concern if the production increases since methane and nitrous oxide are much more potent greenhouse gases than CO2. Don't fall for the ammonia hype It is important to understand that the narrative presented by the fossil companies and the ammonia industry, in which expanding the ammonia infrastructure will soon enable a transition towards green shipping fuel, is just a greenwashing strategy for fossils. Ammonia is not a viable fuel solution on a large scale and it is essentially oil or gas in disguise. Expanding ammonia infrastructure risks locking in decades of additional fossil fuel dependence. Public investment would be better directed towards solutions that reduce energy demand and fossil fuel use rather than creating new markets for fossil-derived ammonia. Instead of relying on strategies that simply maintain business as usual, we need a change in approach to both shipping (where ammonia could be used as a fuel) and agriculture (where ammonia is already used to produce fertilisers). More sustainable alternatives include, for example, wind propulsion and organic fertilisers, which can bring real environmental benefits, provided that they are combined with a general scale-down of the shipping industry and industrial agriculture. +++++++++++++++++ For more information contact: info@scarabtrust.org.uk Image: Photo by Wolfgang Weiser on Unsplash Edited 16 Aug 26

Ammonia: the invisible petrochemical that fuels industrial agriculture

In short: Ammonia is unique among petrochemicals – its molecule contains no carbon, yet more than 99% of ammonia is produced using fossil fuels. It is the foundation of industrial agriculture but also generates enormous greenhouse gas emissions and locks food production into fossil fuel supply chains. Instead of decreasing our reliance on ammonia, the industry is seeking new markets by promoting ammonia as a "green" fuel for shipping and power generation. This article explores how ammonia...

Read More

Climate

Transitioning to a circular economy would mean moving away from a ‘throwaway’ economy and towards a system which prioritises resource-efficiency, reuse and repair, and designing out waste entirely. The UK lacks a set of ambitious policy recommendations that would structure this transition. A Circular Economy Plan for the UK was originally scheduled for autumn 2025. Yet, given the upcoming leadership change, climate organisations and some industry leaders worry that the government strategy promised to them may never materialise. The UK’s approach is too slow While the UK parliament is yet to release a plan, Scotland’s devolved parliament launched its own national Circular Economy Strategy (CES) back in 2016 and has continued to push forward reforms: Since 2016, it is estimated that circular economic activity has accounted for £4 billion to the Scottish economy. Updated in 2024, the strategy sets a roadmap for 2045. It targets specific sectors and products such as packaging and unwanted electrical and electronic equipment. Scotland follows behind the EU, whose Circular Economy Action Plan introduced 54 actions which were all adopted or implemented by 2019. 14 member states, eight regions and 11 cities also followed suit with their own individual plans. The next EU Circularity Act aims to double the EU’s current circularity rate of 12% to 24%. Subscribe to our fortnightly newsletter Get our top stories straight to your inbox every two weeks and stay informed about plastic pollution! SUBSCRIBE Industry and organisational pressure on the UK government is building Industry leaders have recently called for greater urgency in a letter to the Secretary of State. Signed by 50 businesses and trade associations, the letter explains that clear and decisive government policy is vital for attracting much-needed investment. The letter emphasises that not only is a plan overdue amidst this climate crisis but a national plan would promote growth and create jobs. Green Alliance has also launched a campaign to hold the government accountable for its duty to follow through on its plans. Green Alliance highlights key industries where the UK lacks policy clarity such as chemicals and plastics, and material recovery. Moreover, the UK waste framework was written over 15 years ago, and thus is long overdue for re-examination. The UK parliament, severely lagging behind the European and Scottish parliaments, is not only delaying the urgent need for reforming our supply chains but losing out on potential growth opportunities. +++++++++++++++++ For more information contact: info@scarabtrust.org.uk Image: Art, Music, Hands - Image by Manuel Torres Garcia from Pixabay (ST ref: 1400)

Why the UK Needs a Circular Economy Plan

Transitioning to a circular economy would mean moving away from a ‘throwaway’ economy and towards a system which prioritises resource-efficiency, reuse and repair, and designing out waste entirely. The UK lacks a set of ambitious policy recommendations that would structure this transition. A Circular Economy Plan for the UK was originally scheduled for autumn 2025. Yet, given the upcoming leadership change, climate organisations and some industry leaders worry that the government strategy...

Read More

Legislation

In 2022, UN member states passed a resolution titled ‘End Plastic Pollution’ and since then governments and corporations have been working on a number of global treaties and voluntary commitments to reduce their plastic footprints, with varying degrees of success. The Nice Ocean Action Plan The United Nations Ocean Conference (UNOC) is a three-yearly formal UN summit. In June 2025, the third conference, UNOC3, took place in Nice, France. This resulted in the Nice Ocean Action Plan. This called for greater global action to reduce the impact of climate change on oceans, supported a binding global treaty, and led to a significant increase in ratifications of the High Seas Treaty. The UN High Seas Treaty The UN High Seas Treaty (BBNJ Agreement) officially entered into force on 17 January 2026. It is the first legally binding agreement focused on protecting marine life in international waters. The UK formally ratified the Treaty on 10 July 2026. The Treaty helps close regulatory gaps in areas beyond national jurisdiction, areas where a lot of plastic accumulates and governance has historically been weak. Subscribe to our fortnightly newsletter Get our top stories straight to your inbox every two weeks and stay informed about plastic pollution! SUBSCRIBE Global Plastics Treaty The Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC) meetings continue, despite an impasse in August 2025 created by petrochemical interests blocking agreement on plastic production. Following an interim INC5.3 meeting, a revised text for INC 5.4 scheduled for March 2027 is currently being drafted and there are hopes that this will include proposals that are already supported by a majority of UN countries in order to break the deadlock of consensus. MARPOL Convention The International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL) Annex V was updated in May 2026 at the 84th session of the Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) in London. It included a 2026 Strategy and Action Plan on marine plastic litter, a code for transporting plastic pellets and a reporting system for lost and abandoned fishing gear. The MEPC targets pollution from the shipping sector, whereas the UN Global Plastics Treaty aims for a full life-cycle approach across the entire global economy Our Ocean Conference The Our Ocean Conference (OOC) is an annual event focused on multi-sector voluntary pledges. The 11th Our Ocean Conference (OOC) took place in Mombasa, Kenya, in June 2026, bringing together global leaders, NGOs, and businesses. It resulted in 320 new commitments worth US$6.4 billion for ocean conservation. Significant progress is being made but, for the most important provision, the Global Plastics Treaty, to succeed, civil society and the majority of countries must pressure petrostates to accept meaningful changes to plastic production. +++++++++++++++++ For more information contact: info@scarabtrust.org.uk Image: globe encased in plastic - Image by MART PRODUCTION on Pexels (ST ref: 1375) Edited by Sophia Stilwell, Mark Johnston

What's actually being done to fight plastic ocean pollution?

In 2022, UN member states passed a resolution titled ‘End Plastic Pollution’ and since then governments and corporations have been working on a number of global treaties and voluntary commitments to reduce their plastic footprints, with varying degrees of success. The Nice Ocean Action Plan The United Nations Ocean Conference (UNOC) is a three-yearly formal UN summit. In June 2025, the third conference, UNOC3, took place in Nice, France. This resulted in the Nice Ocean Action Plan. This...

Read More

Legislation

Every product takes a unique journey through the supply chain before reaching store shelves. But what about the packaging trail it leaves behind? To bring this into focus, let’s take a closer look at a product in high demand among UK consumers and produced across the country: British beef. In 2023, UK farmers supplied 80.9% of the beef that was consumed nationwide, offering a clear case for tracing the role of packaging closer to home. Beef is a nationally relevant product because outdoor grazing suits the UK climate, and the familiar image of pasture-raised cattle makes it easy to overlook packaging as part of the production. Subscribe to our fortnightly newsletter Get our top stories straight to your inbox every two weeks and stay informed about plastic pollution! SUBSCRIBE The Role of Packaging: Farm to Fork Pregnancy: Supplementary feed for pregnant cows arrives in large plastic or woven bags to keep the mothers healthy before calving. Calving: Bedding, typically straw sourced from arable farms, arrives in large square bales, tied with plastic string or twine, used during indoor calving. Weaning: Calves transition from milk to grass with “cake,” a mix of grains and other ingredients typically packaged in plastic bags. Health: Vaccines and dewormers are essential before calves head to pasture, and come in medical packaging for example bottles, syringes and boxes. Supplementary Feeding: Silage, a nutrient-rich fermented grass fed to cows mainly in winter and sometimes in spring and autumn, is typically stored in plastic-wrapped silage clamps or bales to preserve its quality. Winter Bedding: Cows typically come indoors for winter and are provided with straw bedding, usually delivered by plastic curtain-sided lorries with Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC)-coated curtains for weather protection. Processing: At the abattoir, carcasses are butchered and then vacuum-packed or wrapped in plastic to preserve freshness. Transport: Meat is moved in plastic-lined trays or bags to ensure hygiene and protection during transit to processors or retailers. Retail: Supermarkets often repackage meat into consumer-ready packaging, using plastic trays sealed with film and sometimes cardboard sleeves. This isn’t meant to discourage, but to show that a product's packaging journey begins much earlier than most realise. Farmers play a vital role in keeping society running, and this case study simply highlights the hidden packaging built into many supply chains. By rethinking end-stage packaging, we can free up plastic use for more essential stages, like supporting animal health and development. Ultimately, creating a more balanced system that uses plastic and other packaging where it’s most needed and cuts it where it’s not. +++++++++++++++++ For more information contact: info@scarabtrust.org.uk Image: cows on grass - Image from Magnific (ST ref: 1398) Edited by Sophia Stilwell

The Case of UK Beef: Tracing Packaging Through the Supply Chain

Every product takes a unique journey through the supply chain before reaching store shelves. But what about the packaging trail it leaves behind? To bring this into focus, let’s take a closer look at a product in high demand among UK consumers and produced across the country: British beef. In 2023, UK farmers supplied 80.9% of the beef that was consumed nationwide, offering a clear case for tracing the role of packaging closer to home. Beef is a nationally relevant product because outdoor...

Read More

Waste

In 2026, The Big Plastic Count estimated that the UK bins 82 billion pieces of plastic each year, with over half, 59%, being burnt in the UK. So how much are we consuming? The World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) published a report in 2019 based on research that estimated humans ingest around 5g of plastic weekly, a credit card’s worth, equating to around 50 plastic bags annually. A shocking number, shared by news outlets globally, but how true is it? Microplastics are particles smaller than 5mm, with nanoplastics measuring even smaller (<1 𝜇m). They occur from the breakdown of larger plastics such as bags, bottles, and boxes, or they are manufactured at microscopic sizes. Found in drinking water, seafood, salt, produce and the air we breathe, so it isn't so shocking that we consume so much. Subscribe to our fortnightly newsletter Get our top stories straight to your inbox every two weeks and stay informed about plastic pollution! SUBSCRIBE Researchers have detected microplastics in the blood, lungs, kidneys, breast milk, placenta, testes and many more areas of the human body. Studies suggest that microplastics may trigger inflammation, damage cells, and alter immune responses but these studies expose cells to concentrations much higher than humans typically encounter, therefore it is unknown whether exposure equates to harm in humans. Whilst there is no direct correlation to disease yet, the exposure is widespread. However, the estimate was not based on direct measurements of people. Instead, the research combined data from multiple studies measuring microplastic volume in food, water, and air, then estimated average exposure and ingestion. A modelled estimate, not observed fact. The claim is therefore controversial as the evidence is incomplete with scientists not knowing how much plastic different people consume, country variance, and food ingestion versus inhalation. Recent studies indicate previous estimates may have overestimated exposure due to sampling contamination while others suggest underestimation due to the undetectable nanoplastic. So the answer remains uncertain, with no simple yes or no. What can we do to reduce exposure? Drink filtered tap water Reduce single-use plastics Choosing natural fibres when possible Avoid heating food in plastic containers Home ventilation to reduce airborne fibres Whilst the credit card per week headline grabbed the world's attention, the real story is far more interesting. The microplastic world remains unknown, but what we do know is that it is everywhere, in the air, our food, water, and homes. As research continues, the challenge isn't only measuring how much we are exposed to, but determining what that exposure means for future generations. +++++++++++++++++ For more information contact: info@scarabtrust.org.uk Image: Kitchen, Scale, Weight - Image by Rudy and Peter Skitterians from Pixabay (ST ref: 1399)

A Credit Card’s Worth - How much?!

In 2026, The Big Plastic Count estimated that the UK bins 82 billion pieces of plastic each year, with over half, 59%, being burnt in the UK. So how much are we consuming? The World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) published a report in 2019 based on research that estimated humans ingest around 5g of plastic weekly, a credit card’s worth, equating to around 50 plastic bags annually. A shocking number, shared by news outlets globally, but how true is it? Microplastics are particles smaller than 5mm,...

Read More

Health

The plastic industry is pushing back against the EU’s Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation (PPWR), claiming it “discriminates” against plastic. In a joint statement, three major trade associations, European Plastics Converters, IK, and Elipso, argued that the proposed regulation unfairly singles out plastic by imposing specific bans on plastic packaging, while providing exemptions for other materials. They claim the PPWR sets out different rules for plastics when it comes to recycling requirements and waste reduction goals. They also argue that the PPWR will prevent fair competition by disadvantaging plastic producers and favouring companies using other materials. Further, these trade associations commissioned a legal assessment by the firm Dentos, published in February 2024. The authors argue that the regulation does not just violate the principle of equal treatment, but could also backfire environmentally. By pushing out lightweight, recyclable plastic, Dentos maintains, the regulation may actually encourage the use and mass production of harder-to-recycle materials, which could lead to even more waste and emissions in the long-run]. Subscribe to our fortnightly newsletter Get our top stories straight to your inbox every two weeks and stay informed about plastic pollution! SUBSCRIBE It is interesting to see the plastics industry leaning on fair competition arguments. This position may appear contradictory, especially given its long-standing role in the packaging waste problem. But, this does show how tricky it is for policymakers to strike a balance. Cutting down on waste while keeping the rules fair and legal isn’t exactly straightforward, especially with so many materials involved in the unseen journey from production to the shop shelf. Learn more about plastic throughout our supply chains and how it might apply in the UK in our next post. +++++++++++++++++ For more information contact: info@scarabtrust.org.uk Image: Cardboard for recycling - Image by Debby Urken (ST ref: 1315) Edited by Sophia Stilwell

The Plastic Sector’s Response to regulation

The plastic industry is pushing back against the EU’s Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation (PPWR), claiming it “discriminates” against plastic. In a joint statement, three major trade associations, European Plastics Converters, IK, and Elipso, argued that the proposed regulation unfairly singles out plastic by imposing specific bans on plastic packaging, while providing exemptions for other materials. They claim the PPWR sets out different rules for plastics when it comes to recycling...

Read More

Waste

There is considerable scientific consensus that plastic is found in the human body. However, researchers have called some of these studies into question. When the media report on this kind of scientific disagreement, they often use dramatic headlines that imply that an entire field of research has been undermined. But is this really the way that science works? Microplastics are found in the air we breathe and the food and drink we consume; therefore, it is no surprise that some of it ends up in the human body, with scientific studies discovering micro and nanoplastics in the blood, tissues, organs and brain. In January 2026, The Guardian published the article ‘A bombshell’: doubt cast on discovery of microplastics throughout the human body, which revealed how researchers have challenged the reliability of some of these studies on micro and nanoplastics. One of the criticisms focuses on the technical difficulty in identifying tiny plastic particles, especially in human tissue. The sensationalist headline suggests that studies that find plastic in human bodies can no longer be trusted. Subscribe to our fortnightly newsletter Get our top stories straight to your inbox every two weeks and stay informed about plastic pollution! SUBSCRIBE In contrast to the headline, it is more accurate to say that there is a large body of evidence to show that plastic is in the human body, but our current analytical techniques and possible environmental contamination make it difficult to quantify plastic in human samples. In other words, there is further scientific work to do. The Microplastic Research Group points out that it’s good scientific practice to question the methods and reliability of studies. Some studies will hold up to scrutiny while others won’t. Analytical standards and procedures may need to be refined and further studies can be developed. Scientific knowledge is constantly improving in this way. Scientists challenging studies does not mean that a whole area of microplastics research is ‘debunked!’ or ‘disproven!’ as some headlines might suggest. Misleading media headlines on environmental issues are not uncommon. We have seen this with climate change, as any uncertainty or criticism amongst scientists gets dramatised, ultimately spreading misinformation and leading to general public scepticism. Past environmental disputes have shown how vested interests weaponise uncertainty, insisting that we should wait until we have all the available evidence before introducing regulations. However, policy makers need to assess risk based on the best available science at the time. Delaying action due to normal scientific debate could have dangerous repercussions for human health. We need to act now. +++++++++++++++++ For more information contact: info@scarabtrust.org.uk Images: newspaper stand - Photo by Hümâ H. Yardım on Unsplash (ST ref: 1396) Chemist holding vial - Image by Bermix Studio on Unsplash (ST ref: 1226)

Plastic in the Human Body - Dramatic Headline Confuses the Science

There is considerable scientific consensus that plastic is found in the human body. However, researchers have called some of these studies into question. When the media report on this kind of scientific disagreement, they often use dramatic headlines that imply that an entire field of research has been undermined. But is this really the way that science works? Microplastics are found in the air we breathe and the food and drink we consume; therefore, it is no surprise that some of it ends up...

Read More

Plastic pollution

According to the UN, clothing production doubled from 2000 to 2015 and the world produces around 92 million tonnes of textile waste every year, 89% of which contains synthetic fibres. If we continue with our throwaway fast fashion culture, this situation will only get worse. Sub-Saharan Africa is a major destination for the Global North’s unwanted clothing, receiving 70% of the world’s donated clothing. Shockingly, some of these clothes arrive in Africa having been slashed to prevent reselling. Ghana, home to the world’s largest second-hand clothes market, receives about 15 million second-hand garments in unreturnable ‘donations’ every single week. In theory, this is charity, yet 50% of them are considered unsellable and end up: in huge piles that form informal dumpsites, taking decades to decompose, releasing greenhouse gases and blocking drains, which intensifies flooding; being burnt, either in open fires or for fuel, which releases dangerously high levels of toxic substances, including carcinogens, into the air; and in waterways, increasing the risk of waterborne diseases amongst vulnerable people, smothering animals’ natural habitats and destroying fishing communities’ livelihoods. Similar scenarios are to be found across Africa. It’s no wonder this situation has been labelled ‘waste colonisation’ and ‘environmental racism’. Subscribe to our fortnightly newsletter Get our top stories straight to your inbox every two weeks and stay informed about plastic pollution! SUBSCRIBE So how can we help tackle this injustice? A focus on sustainable production alongside reusing and repairing textiles is what the UN recommends. It’s advisable to choose items that we think will last, such as bags, purses and clothes with sturdy-looking zips, where applicable. Many of us in the UK live close to charity shops where we can purchase second-hand clothes. We can also offer up unwanted clothes and obtain new-to-us clothes through online or in-person marketplaces, groups and sales. We should be wary of collection bins and door-to-door collections for textiles because these sometimes end up being shipped to developing countries. It’s often better to give away unwanted textiles to people you know or take them directly to a charity shop. What’s more, we can spread the word on social media and sign Greenpeace’s petition about fast fashion and plastic pollution. In the words of the anti-consumerist activist Annie Leonard, ‘There is no such thing as ‘away’. When you throw something away, it must go somewhere.’ +++++++++++++++++ For more information contact: info@scarabtrust.org.uk Image: Waste on Shore in Ghana - Image by Kevin McElvaney / Greenpeace (ST ref: 1395)

Africa: the Global North’s dumping ground for unwanted clothes

According to the UN, clothing production doubled from 2000 to 2015 and the world produces around 92 million tonnes of textile waste every year, 89% of which contains synthetic fibres. If we continue with our throwaway fast fashion culture, this situation will only get worse. Sub-Saharan Africa is a major destination for the Global North’s unwanted clothing, receiving 70% of the world’s donated clothing. Shockingly, some of these clothes arrive in Africa having been slashed to prevent...

Read More

Waste Trade

Indonesia is one of the most recent Southeast Asian countries to ban plastic waste imports. Despite the ban, the consequences of plastic waste imports inundating Indonesian communities remain, and they serve as a warning for neighbouring countries yet to impose their own bans. The Indonesian government initially attempted to create livelihoods with the waste imports. Paper mills were to use these imports to source scrap paper to reuse in their production, and local communities were to be recruited to sort these scraps from plastics. The sheer scale of the imports turned this idea into a health nightmare for local communities. Where locals once dried agricultural products outside their homes, unsorted plastic and paper waste was unloaded in truck-fulls. It would take families over a month to process just one batch, and they sold the sorted scrap paper to a paper factory for the equivalent of just £4.30. Subscribe to our fortnightly newsletter Get our top stories straight to your inbox every two weeks and stay informed about plastic pollution! SUBSCRIBE The locals were left to deal with the leftover plastic by themselves, a lot of which was recognisably the packaging of products sold in Britain. When Indonesia’s recycling waste management infrastructure was struggling to keep up, what could locals do to clear the leftover plastic from imports? Most burnt it. Burning plastic releases microplastics and toxins into the surrounding environment and infiltrates other food sources, such as chicken eggs. If you were to eat just one egg produced near the site of a plastic-fuelled fire, your daily intake of plastic toxins would surpass 70 times that designated as tolerable by the European Food Safety Authority. Exposure to these toxins has been linked to cancer, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and endometriosis. Many locals were unaware of the health risks, and some activists believed that even if they were, they would have continued due to the lack of alternative livelihoods. Every actor in the chain passed on the risk to these families: The UK palmed off its plastic waste to exporting companies; Exporting companies profited from the Indonesian government purchasing the waste; The Indonesian government stimulated growth and tax income in the paper industry; and The paper mills increased their profit margins by outsourcing cheap, informal labour to sort their waste. And who suffered the most risk? Local families just trying to provide for their loved ones. It is time for the UK government to take full responsibility for processing our plastic waste on our own shores, rather than continuing to poison developing countries’ citizens. +++++++++++++++++ For more information contact: info@scarabtrust.org.uk This is Part Three of the series: Part One: Is rinsing out your yogurt pot pointless? Part Two: How the UK poisons Southeast Asia with plastic Images Indonesian kids with bits of trash - Image from BFFP: Story of Plastic (ST ref: 1067) burning waste landfill peru - Image by Alex Proimos on creativecommons. (ST ref: 1099)

Indonesian health impacted by UK plastic waste

Indonesia is one of the most recent Southeast Asian countries to ban plastic waste imports. Despite the ban, the consequences of plastic waste imports inundating Indonesian communities remain, and they serve as a warning for neighbouring countries yet to impose their own bans. The Indonesian government initially attempted to create livelihoods with the waste imports. Paper mills were to use these imports to source scrap paper to reuse in their production, and local communities were to be...

Read More

Waste Trade

When you hear of plastic ocean pollution, you may only think of images of floating waste like The Great Pacific Garbage Patch (litter that has ended up spinning on the surface of the North Pacific Ocean) — a large and visible reminder of the scale of plastic pollution in our oceans. However, what’s less discussed is what’s actually happening beneath the surface. What does plastic ocean pollution do to marine life that is less visible? It affects marine life in many ways. Plastic ingestion by sea life not only has immediate negative effects, but also long-term flow-on effects to other species and marine ecosystems, including humans. Biomagnification (or bioaccumulation) is one example of this and refers to when contaminants or toxins build up in predators faster than they can be broken down. Animals higher on the food chain will eat a higher volume of their prey, resulting in a higher volume of toxins in their body. As humans are at the top of this food web, this means we are consuming the largest concentration of microplastics out of any species. A new study found microplastics in 99% of seafood samples, with the highest levels in shrimp, showing just how polluted our seafood is with microplastics. Subscribe to our fortnightly newsletter Get our top stories straight to your inbox every two weeks and stay informed about plastic pollution! SUBSCRIBE Plastic ocean pollution also has detrimental effects to marine habitats, with coral reefs being a clear example of this. Plastic debris in the ocean can smother coral, blocking the sunlight needed for coral to thrive and exposing it to harmful toxins that compromise coral health. Alongside this, chemical pollution (when the ocean is contaminated with chemicals not found there naturally), also occurs directly and indirectly from industrial or agricultural run-off, landfill, urban sewage and wastewater, or oil spills and leaks, and impacts the survival of individual species and the balance of populations of sea life interacting in an environment. From food chains injected with plastic pollution to ruined habitats, what happens to marine life below the surface matters - not only because it directly impacts the humans above it, but because it directly impacts everything above it. "Living for nearly a hundred years on this planet, I now understand the most important place on Earth is not on land, but at sea,” Sir David Attenborough said in his 2025 documentary Ocean with David Attenborough. “For if we save the sea, we save our world." +++++++++++++++++ For more information contact: info@scarabtrust.org.uk Images: floating plastic bag - Photo by Naja Bertolt Jensen on Unsplash (ST ref:1392) Galapagos shark entangled with a closure ring for plastic drums - Image by Naiti Morales (ST ref: 1393) Plastic on corals, pockets - Image by q phia (ST ref:1394)

What’s really happening beneath the Ocean surface?

When you hear of plastic ocean pollution, you may only think of images of floating waste like The Great Pacific Garbage Patch (litter that has ended up spinning on the surface of the North Pacific Ocean) — a large and visible reminder of the scale of plastic pollution in our oceans. However, what’s less discussed is what’s actually happening beneath the surface. What does plastic ocean pollution do to marine life that is less visible? It affects marine life in many ways. Plastic ingestion...

Read More

Ocean Series

Every 60 seconds the world produces staggering amounts of plastic. It is expected that we will produce a total of 766 million tonnes of plastic per year by 2040, equivalent to 75 trillion plastic bottles. Despite decades of recycling campaigns, the problem is only getting worse. A new report from the Environmental Investigation Agency (EIA), Bending the Curve, argues that we cannot recycle our way out of the plastic crisis and that it is imperative we reduce plastic production at the source. Under current trends, global plastic production is expected to reach 766 million tonnes per year by 2040, while plastic waste is projected to climb to 621 million tonnes per year. This indicates that 10 million tonnes of plastic will be mismanaged, ending up in rivers, oceans, landscapes, and communities across the globe. Subscribe to our fortnightly newsletter Get our top stories straight to your inbox every two weeks and stay informed about plastic pollution! SUBSCRIBE For decades, recycling has been promoted as the solution. However, the report outlines that recycling cannot keep up with the pace at which plastic is entering the system, as the production of virgin plastic continues to grow at a faster rate than recycling. Plastics currently generate around 2.4 billion tonnes (Gt) of CO2 equivalent emissions (CO2e) every year, rising to 3.9 billion tonnes by 2050. Five countries account for over 70% of global primary plastic production: China, India, Russia, Saudi Arabia, and USA, with China alone contributing 36% of global production. The report uses modelling to explore what may happen if countries agreed to place limits on plastic production as part of the proposed Global Plastics Treaty. Rather than banning all plastic, the scenarios focus on gradually reducing the production and consumption of the most common plastic polymers while encouraging greater reuse and recycling. The EIA also highlights an often-overlooked consequence of plastic production: climate change. Manufacturing plastics relies heavily on fossil fuels, making the industry a significant source of greenhouse gas emissions. Without intervention, plastics alone could generate more than 51 billion tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions between 2025 and 2040, consuming around 39% of the remaining global carbon budget needed to keep warming below 1.5°C. Perhaps the report’s most important conclusion is that meaningful change doesn’t necessarily require every country to agree immediately. Instead, the modelling demonstrates that a ‘coalition of the willing’, particularly when joined by major producers such as China, could significantly reduce global plastic pollution while encouraging international participation. A coalition of high-ambition countries acting alone could reduce global plastic production by 16-18 % below business as usual levels by 2040. When China joins this, reductions increase to 38%. Rather than waiting for universal consensus, the Global Plastics Treaty could establish a strong baseline while allowing ambitious countries to move ahead first. Ultimately, Bending the Curve challenges the idea that recycling alone can solve the plastic crisis. Recycling, better waste collection, and improved product design all remain essential, but they address the symptoms rather than the cause. To truly bend the curve of plastic production, we must ‘turn off the tap’ rather than clean up the flood. +++++++++++++++++ For more information contact: info@scarabtrust.org.uk Images: TurnOffThePlasticTap - Image by Von Wong (ST ref: 1310) oil refinery - WiX Media: oil-refinery missing politicians - Image from Magnific (ST ref: 1365) Infographic - author

The Global Plastics Treaty - progress without consensus

Every 60 seconds the world produces staggering amounts of plastic. It is expected that we will produce a total of 766 million tonnes of plastic per year by 2040, equivalent to 75 trillion plastic bottles. Despite decades of recycling campaigns, the problem is only getting worse. A new report from the Environmental Investigation Agency (EIA), Bending the Curve, argues that we cannot recycle our way out of the plastic crisis and that it is imperative we reduce plastic production at the source....

Read More

Legislation

In response to recent attacks by the US-Israel alliance, Iran restricted shipping in the Strait of Hormuz. Before the war, around one-fifth of global oil and liquefied natural gas passed through this route. This shipping restriction disrupted energy supply chains and led to a big increase in global oil prices. So what’s the connection with plastic? Oil and gas aren’t only burnt as fuel for energy. They are used to make petrochemicals, which are manufactured into a wide range of everyday products including detergents, textiles and fertilisers. Over 99 percent of plastic is made from petrochemicals sourced from fossil fuels. Fossil fuels also power energy-intensive plastic production. Any disruption in oil and gas will affect the price of petrochemicals and the price of plastic. Plastic exports are also directly affected by the ongoing Strait of Hormuz restrictions. The region is responsible for a quarter of global polyethylene and polypropylene exports – two of the most common plastics. The bombing of petrochemical infrastructure across the region has led to further shortages. With a drop in supply comes a rise in prices. Subscribe to our fortnightly newsletter Get our top stories straight to your inbox every two weeks and stay informed about plastic pollution! SUBSCRIBE Items like disposable plastic cutlery, plastic toys or plastic bags are likely to increase in cost over the coming months. Plastics are also used across supply chains, notably in packaging and transport, so the cost of non-plastic products will be affected too. It’s hard to predict exact price increases or how long it will take for consumers to feel it. There are no guarantees that the situation in Iran will resolve or that prices will stabilise. The Iran war has shown that we are overly reliant on oil and gas. This reliance has grave environmental, economic and geopolitical consequences. The fossil fuel industry and plastic are intimately connected; the demand for plastic only increases our demand for fossil fuels. It’s time to rethink our relationship with fossil fuels and reduce our consumption of plastic. +++++++++++++++++ For more information contact: info@scarabtrust.org.uk Images: Strait of hormuz between iran and oman - Photo by Planet Volumes on Unsplash (ST ref: 1390) oil tanker - Image by Gerhard Traschütz from Pixabay (ST ref: 1391)

What Does the Iran War Have to Do With Plastic?

In response to recent attacks by the US-Israel alliance, Iran restricted shipping in the Strait of Hormuz. Before the war, around one-fifth of global oil and liquefied natural gas passed through this route. This shipping restriction disrupted energy supply chains and led to a big increase in global oil prices. So what’s the connection with plastic? Oil and gas aren’t only burnt as fuel for energy. They are used to make petrochemicals, which are manufactured into a wide range of everyday...

Read More

Climate

Menstrual products are essential for health, hygiene, and wellbeing, enabling millions of people to manage menstruation safely and participate fully in daily life. However, while these products provide important benefits, many commonly used disposable options also have significant environmental impacts, particularly through plastic pollution. Disposable menstrual products such as sanitary pads, tampons, and their applicators are often made from a combination of cotton, wood pulp, synthetic fibres, adhesives, and significant amounts of plastic. Most of these plastics are derived from petrochemicals and can persist in the environment for hundreds of years after disposal. It has been estimated that a person who menstruates may use more than 11,000 disposable menstrual products over their lifetime, and the environmental consequences of this consumption are substantial. Across Europe, tens of billions of disposable menstrual products are used every year, generating hundreds of thousands of tonnes of waste. In 2017 alone, the amount of menstrual waste generated in Europe was equivalent to the weight of roughly 3,000 blue whales. Because many products contain plastic, they can take hundreds of years to break down in landfills. Subscribe to our fortnightly newsletter Get our top stories straight to your inbox every two weeks and stay informed about plastic pollution! SUBSCRIBE Large numbers of pads, tampons, and applicators are also improperly disposed of and enter waterways and oceans, where they contribute to marine litter. In the UK alone, 2 billion of disposable menstrual products are flushed down toilets every year, contributing to sewer blockages and marine pollution. As these products degrade, they fragment into microplastics that can be ingested by fish, seabirds, and other wildlife. Beyond plastic pollution, concerns have been raised about the toxic chemicals found in some disposable menstrual products. Studies have detected substances such as PFAS ("forever chemicals"), traces of toxic metals including lead and arsenic, and fragrances and bleaching by-products such as dioxins. Once these substances leach from discarded menstrual products into soil and water, they can bioaccumulate in wildlife and natural ecosystems, contributing to long-term environmental contamination. Organisations such as Women's Environmental Network have helped raise awareness by promoting greater transparency around menstrual product ingredients, advocating for stronger regulations and policies, and encouraging safer and lower-waste alternatives that benefit both people and the environment. Reusable menstrual products, including menstrual cups, reusable pads, and period underwear, offer a practical alternative to disposable products. By reducing waste and limiting the demand for single-use plastics, these options can significantly lower the environmental footprint of menstrual care while continuing to support health, safety, and hygiene. +++++++++++++++++ For more information contact: info@scarabtrust.org.uk Image: boy plastic waste - Photo by Hermes Rivera on Unsplash (St ref: 1389) Slide from WEN

Environmental Impact of Menstrual Care

Menstrual products are essential for health, hygiene, and wellbeing, enabling millions of people to manage menstruation safely and participate fully in daily life. However, while these products provide important benefits, many commonly used disposable options also have significant environmental impacts, particularly through plastic pollution. Disposable menstrual products such as sanitary pads, tampons, and their applicators are often made from a combination of cotton, wood pulp, synthetic...

Read More

Reuse

Africa is disproportionately affected by plastic pollution despite contributing just 5% of global plastic production. Waste dumping, discarded textiles and plastic products sold by multinational corporations reflect a wider environmental injustice whereby waste generated in the Global North is exported to lower-income countries. This has prompted many environmental campaigners to describe the practice as plastic colonialism. Yet this is only part of the story. Alongside the challenges posed by plastic pollution in Africa are traditions of reuse, repair and locally sourced materials, demonstrating that effective zero-waste systems already exist in many communities across the continent. At a time when countries around the world are introducing new policies to tackle single-use plastics, these zero-waste schemes offer practical examples of how reuse and refill systems can become part of everyday life. Subscribe to our fortnightly newsletter Get our top stories straight to your inbox every two weeks and stay informed about plastic pollution! SUBSCRIBE Before reusable coffee cups and plastic bag charges became commonplace elsewhere, many communities across Africa have long relied on systems built around reuse, repair and locally sourced materials. A report published by GAIA highlights handwoven baskets as a longstanding alternative to plastic bags in Morocco, Uganda, Ethiopia, Tanzania and Rwanda. These are made from plant leaves and are therefore completely biodegradable, reducing waste while supporting local livelihoods and preserving traditional knowledge. Zero-waste innovation is also building on these traditions. In Senegal, grassroots organisations are transforming invasive Typha weeds into building materials, biofuel and other products, creating jobs in the local community while offering an alternative to single-use plastics. While these solutions are rooted in local cultures, economies and communities and are not universal across the continent, they demonstrate that effective zero-waste systems don't always depend on new methods or technology. As countries around the world work to reduce plastic pollution, these cases across Africa show that some of the most effective solutions may already exist in traditional knowledge, systems and locally sourced materials. +++++++++++++++++ For more information contact: info@scarabtrust.org.uk Images: African children illegal dump - Image by Riccardo Mayer (ST ref: 1133) Glass refillable water bottle. © adansonia.green

What Africa can teach us about zero waste

Africa is disproportionately affected by plastic pollution despite contributing just 5% of global plastic production. Waste dumping, discarded textiles and plastic products sold by multinational corporations reflect a wider environmental injustice whereby waste generated in the Global North is exported to lower-income countries. This has prompted many environmental campaigners to describe the practice as plastic colonialism. Yet this is only part of the story. Alongside the challenges posed...

Read More

Reuse

Plastic is often seen as a miracle material. It certainly has useful properties: it’s durable, versatile and cheap. But what exactly is plastic? Plastics are moldable materials made up of polymers – long chains made from repeating molecules. Almost all plastics are derived from fossil fuels such as crude oil and natural gas. These contain a mixture of hydrocarbons which are processed in various stages to make plastic: Refining - Fossil fuels are extracted and refined into products. For example, crude oil is heated and distilled into fractions. One of these fractions is used for plastic. Cracking – High heat, pressure and catalysts are used to break down (crack) these molecules into petrochemicals such as ethylene and propylene. Polymerisation – These small molecules are chemically bonded together to form long-chain polymers. For example, ethylene molecules are bonded to make polyethylene. Additives - Chemicals such as plasticisers, stabilisers and colourants are mixed with the polymer resin to make plastic products. The length and structure of polymers make plastic durable, moldable and resistant to chemicals. Different polymers and additives give plastic a range of useful properties: soft, hard, rigid, stretchy, opaque, coloured. So why is plastic such a problematic material? Fossil fuel extraction and the energy-intensive manufacturing process lead to pollution and significant greenhouse gas emissions. In addition, the unregulated, untested and often harmful chemicals that give plastic its versatile properties, can leach out of products damaging human health and the environment. Worryingly, the durability of plastic makes it hard to get rid of. Almost all plastics are non-biodegradable; microorganisms can’t break down the polymer bonds. Plastic just breaks up into smaller pieces – microplastics – polluting the environment for hundreds of years. Bioplastics have been developed as ‘sustainable’ alternatives. These may be biodegradable or made partially from biomass. However, bioplastics are still plastics; they have many of the same problems. Subscribe to our fortnightly newsletter Get our top stories straight to your inbox every two weeks and stay informed about plastic pollution! SUBSCRIBE Plastic use is accelerating All materials have benefits that need to be balanced against harms to the environment. However, plastic is a uniquely challenging material. With an explosion in single-use plastic and plastic waste set to triple by 2060, we are now facing an urgent environmental crisis. Profit-driven corporations are responsible for pushing plastic onto consumers. Packaging and consumer goods companies enjoy the benefits of a cheap and disposable material. Fossil fuel companies and the petrochemical industry have a vested interest in accelerating plastic production, especially of multiple single use products, in order to compensate for a reduction in fuel demand. These industries continue to block negotiations for a Global Plastics Treaty that aims to tackle plastic pollution. We need a strong treaty to not only manage plastic waste, but to drastically reduce plastic production. We need to turn the tap off at its source. +++++++++++++++++ For more information contact: info@scarabtrust.org.uk Image: plastic, polymer, granules - Image by Frank from Pixabay (ST ref: 1388)

Plastic – The Miracle Material?

Plastic is often seen as a miracle material. It certainly has useful properties: it’s durable, versatile and cheap. But what exactly is plastic? Plastics are moldable materials made up of polymers – long chains made from repeating molecules. Almost all plastics are derived from fossil fuels such as crude oil and natural gas. These contain a mixture of hydrocarbons which are processed in various stages to make plastic: Refining - Fossil fuels are extracted and refined into products. For...

Read More

Plastic pollution

Perhaps you’re thinking oh - plastics aren’t my problem. Turtles getting trapped is sad, but I’m safe. You’d be wrong. The idea that plastic pollution only affects wildlife is a dangerous misconception. In reality, humans are part of the marine food web, and we’re already consuming the consequences of plastic waste. Microplastics - particles smaller than 5mm - are now found in 99% of seafood. Shrimp, mussels, fish and even sea salt have tested positive for plastic contamination. A 2022 study carried out by the University of Hull in the UK found microplastics in 100% of mollusc samples. Sources of microplastics Where do these microplastics come from? Surprisingly, clothing and textiles are a major source - responsible for over 80% of microplastics (UNEP 2021). Every time a synthetic fabric like polyester or nylon is worn or washed, it sheds tiny fibres. These make their way through wastewater systems, many of which are unable to filter them out, especially in developing countries. Other sources include: Tyre wear Paint Construction and building materials (polystyrene) Plastic feedstock that is called plastic pellets Cosmetic products (like face and body scrubs with microbeads) Industrial waste Packaging breakdown Subscribe to our fortnightly newsletter Get our top stories straight to your inbox every two weeks and stay informed about plastic pollution! SUBSCRIBE Once ingested by fish or shellfish, microplastics can bioaccumulate - building up in tissues, organs and reproductive systems. The chemicals attached to plastics - like BPA, phthalates and flame retardants - are known to disrupt hormones and may increase cancer risks. Health implications Microplastics aren’t just in seafood. We are ingesting them daily. They’ve been found in human blood and organs, human brains, breast milk and placentas. The long-term health implications are still unclear, but the potential for immune system disruption, infertility and developmental harm is significant. These stats aren’t meant to cause alarm, they’re meant to inspire action before related health impacts get out of control. Plastic pollution is no longer confined to ocean gyres or distant shorelines - it’s in our bodies, our homes and our future. We must act not just out of concern for whales and turtles, but for our own health and survival. +++++++++++++++++ For more information contact: info@scarabtrust.org.uk Images: Seafood - Wix image two yellow cells inside a cell - Photo by National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases on Unsplash (ST ref:1348) Thanks to Frédérique Mongodin from Seas at Risk and Laura Díaz Sánchez from BFFP for editorial support.

Plastic and people: from shrimp to the dinner plate

Perhaps you’re thinking oh - plastics aren’t my problem. Turtles getting trapped is sad, but I’m safe. You’d be wrong. The idea that plastic pollution only affects wildlife is a dangerous misconception. In reality, humans are part of the marine food web, and we’re already consuming the consequences of plastic waste. Microplastics - particles smaller than 5mm - are now found in 99% of seafood. Shrimp, mussels, fish and even sea salt have tested positive for plastic contamination. A 2022...

Read More

Health

bottom of page