top of page

Posts List

The UK’s recycling rates are around 70% lower than in leading Deposit Return Scheme (DRS) countries with return rates exceeding 90% such as Germany, Finland and Norway. Financially incentivising recycling and reducing waste is important, but our end goal must be a reuse, not throwaway, economy.  A DRS that includes glass is key. Glass is infinitely recyclable (although currently energy intensive). Inclusion of glass, as seen in Wales’ proposed model, helps improve resource recovery and reduce emissions.  Wales and Scotland are pursuing better DRS models, with improvements such as the inclusion of glass and alignment with broader circular economy goals. Public engagement is key to long-term success. We must redesign systems, products and packaging to support a circular economy. This involves reducing single-use plastics and reusing containers, transforming our production and consumption mindset. Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) will hold manufacturers accountable for the lifecycle of their packaging. Tax breaks and grants can spur businesses innovation and investment in refill stations and digital tracking systems. Consumer education will highlight the economic and environmental benefits of reusing over discarding. Technology and innovation partnerships will support smart solutions whilst legislation must mandate reuse-friendly designs. Monitoring reuse rates and environmental impacts will drive continual improvement. We must: Reduce plastic production and rethink how products are used, such as: Using a refillable cleaning spray bottle and adding concentrate plus water at home (this avoids transporting water). Bringing jars and bags to refill at zero-waste stores with grains, cereals and more. Reuse by shifting the economy towards models where reuse is cheaper and more convenient than discarding.  Reorient and diversify packaging and production methods to favour sustainability. Plastics must be recyclable in the markets where they’re sold, and recycling infrastructure must be economically viable. Only 9% of plastics are currently mechanically recycled. This must change. A reuse-driven circular economy can help build a sustainable and resilient future. +++++++++++++++++ For more information contact: info@scarabtrust.org.uk Image: Food preservation containers - Image by Freepik (ST ref: 1246)

A Deposit Return Blueprint for the UK

The UK’s recycling rates are around 70% lower than in leading Deposit Return Scheme (DRS) countries with return rates exceeding 90% such as Germany, Finland and Norway. Financially incentivising recycling and reducing waste is important, but our end goal must be a reuse, not throwaway, economy. A DRS that includes glass is key. Glass is infinitely recyclable (although currently energy intensive). Inclusion of glass, as seen in Wales’ proposed model, helps improve resource recovery and reduce...

Waste

The idea that plastic will outweigh fish in the ocean by 2050 has become one of the most widely-quoted statistics in environmental discussions. But this disguises the real nature of the problem.  Fish make up around 29% of animal biomass on this planet (Ritchie 2024) but calculating their mass in oceans is very difficult. We can estimate algae concentrations from satellite imagery - a proxy for fish food  - but actual marine biomass remains uncertain and rather variable.  Estimating ocean plastic is a similarly complex process. Much of it breaks down and the vast majority directly sinks to the sea floor. Many projections are based on extrapolations - assuming that plastic production and pollution will continue rising exponentially. That’s not certain to happen but that is the industry's plan to gain with plastics what they will be losing from oil and gas. Same corporations, same dramatic environmental and social results. A False Equivalence The real issue is that comparing plastic to fish creates a false equivalence. It suggests a contest between two measurable things, when in reality, things are far more complex. Even a small, nearly invisible amount of plastic can do massive harm. Plastic in our oceans has been recorded entangling at least 340 marine species, including whales, turtles and seals. It’s been ingested by over 230 species, blocking digestive tracts and stunting growth. Microplastics accumulate up the food chain, causing biomagnification and bioaccumulation and eventually reaching humans through the food we eat. In addition, humans also ingest microplastics from food and drink and inhale microplastics from air and dust. Plastic and microplastics also act as vehicles for invasive species, travelling long distances across oceans and introducing organisms into fragile new environments. Coral reefs are particularly vulnerable - plastics can cut, suffocate, or poison them, threatening entire ecosystems.  Breaking Ecosystems Whether or not plastic outweighs fish is not what we should be focusing our attention on. The real concern is that even at current levels, ocean plastics are breaking ecosystems apart. Framing the issues as a race to the bottom misses the urgency of the current situation - and what we urgently need to change. +++++++++++++++++ For more information contact: info@scarabtrust.org.uk Images: Turtle swimming/ Turtle caught in net from Wix media Thanks to Frédérique Mongodin from Seas at Risk and Laura Díaz Sánchez from BFFP for editorial support.

What do the fish-vs-plastic myths distract us from?

The idea that plastic will outweigh fish in the ocean by 2050 has become one of the most widely-quoted statistics in environmental discussions. But this disguises the real nature of the problem. Fish make up around 29% of animal biomass on this planet (Ritchie 2024) but calculating their mass in oceans is very difficult. We can estimate algae concentrations from satellite imagery - a proxy for fish food - but actual marine biomass remains uncertain and rather variable. Estimating ocean...

Plastic pollution

Founded in 1919, the French company Danone includes brands Evian, Activia, Actimel, Volvic, Alpro, and more. In 2020, it sold products in 120 countries with global sales reaching 23.6 billion euros, making it one of the world’s top ten largest plastic packaging producers. Danone claims to be committed to producing products that preserve the planet’s resources whilst also growing its business. This article will examine how committed Danone really is to reducing its plastic footprint. ​ A Sustainability Strategy In 2023, Danone launched the Danone Impact Journey, a new sustainability strategy with three goals: 1. Achieving 100% fully reusable, recyclable, or compostable packaging by 2030. 2. 50% reduction in the use of virgin fossil-based packaging by 2040 (30% by 2023) 3. Recover as much plastic as they use to prevent plastic pollution by 2024. Danone is a signatory of the Ellen MacArthur Foundation’s (EMF) New Plastics Economy Initiative, which aims to drive behavioural change in the plastic pollution crisis through reusable packaging schemes and improving plastic recovery and circularity.  This initiative promised to reduce plastic production by 2025; however, Danone missed its targets and faced no consequences. Voluntary initiatives like this one allow corporations to pledge to reach certain environmental targets that are never intended to be met. These targets are used to distract consumers and governments from the extreme harm plastic production causes to the planet and people. By claiming it will clean up more plastic than it produces by 2030, Danone creates the illusion of accountability and environmental progression, while continuing to pollute. ​ Plastic Dumping Grounds While Danone attempts to appear environmentally conscious in Western nations, its sustainability projects are not equally dispersed. Irresponsible manufacturing by corporations like Danone has led to rampant single-use packaging in the Global South. Danone also uses states in Asia and Africa as plastic dumping grounds, where it uses harmful and ineffective methods, such as chemical recycling, to dispose of plastic waste. The Danone-owned brand Aqua was identified as the biggest plastic polluter in Indonesia, leading Danone to commit to recovering more plastic than it uses in Indonesia by 2025.  Plastic offsetting reduces a corporation's plastic footprint by paying other companies to remove plastic from the environment. This is done primarily in the Global South, where plastic polluters employ waste pickers, fund recycling schemes, and build incineration sites to turn plastic into fuel. In Bali, Danone funded a partner company to open the Samtaku Jimbaran plastic offsetting facility in September 2021. This site was closed in April of 2024 after breaching housing regulations and impacting the local community’s health. The plastic-burning facility released toxic emissions that were dangerous to inhale and was built mere metres from homes without consulting residents, leaving locals unable to open their windows and hospitalising many. The facility, marketed as a safe and sustainable recycling centre, did not burn plastic in cement kilns to control the release of environmentally harmful emissions. Instead, it burned plastic to heat boilers, despite the risks open-air plastic burning poses to public health and the environment. ​ According to EMF figures, Danone’s use of virgin plastic in fossil-based packaging has only been reduced by 13% globally from 2019 to 2023. To reach their goal of reducing virgin fossil-based packaging use by 50% by 2040, Danone could: switch to reusable packaging materials that are less harmful to the planet. set up deposit systems, where consumers return their single-use plastics to the corporation for it to dispose of them responsibly, relieving consumers of undeserved blame for the climate crisis. To work towards sustainability, Danone must be transparent about its plastic footprint and make consistent changes, including in the Global South. This is Part One. Read more about Danone’s greenwashing tactics in Part Two:  "Danone Taken to Court"... +++++++++++++++++ For more information contact: info@scarabtrust.org.uk Image: Landfill, Waste disposal, Garbage - Image by Mumtahina Rahman from Pixabay (ST ref: 1334) Edited by Sophia Stilwell

Danone: Polluting paradise

Founded in 1919, the French company Danone includes brands Evian, Activia, Actimel, Volvic, Alpro, and more. In 2020, it sold products in 120 countries with global sales reaching 23.6 billion euros, making it one of the world’s top ten largest plastic packaging producers. Danone claims to be committed to producing products that preserve the planet’s resources whilst also growing its business. This article will examine how committed Danone really is to reducing its plastic footprint. ​ A...

Corporate Greenwash

Paper-based packaging. Following the recognition of the harmful environmental and social impact of plastics, paper packaging has been adopted as a sustainable and ‘eco-friendly’ alternative. Paper-based packaging has become the largest source of packaging waste in the European Union, accounting for 41.1% of packaging waste – more than plastic and glass combined. While paper packaging may seem like a sustainable solution, research has highlighted the sustainability challenges it poses.  A report published by Profundo, a Dutch Sustainability Research Institute, warns against the misleading marketing of paper-based products as environmentally friendly. Paper and paper-based materials account for a third (33.3%) of the world's packaging, with the greatest demand coming from the food and beverage industries. According to Profundo, paper-based packaging poses a threat to the environment due to the impact of wood pulp production, the management of growing levels of paper waste, and the challenge of recycling paper-based composites and contaminated paper products. Paper production  Paper-based products are made of cellulose fibres derived from renewable sources such as wood pulp, recycled paper, or agricultural residues. Considered a more ‘natural’ option, 90% of all paper-based goods are made from wood pulp. A recent surge in demand for wood pulp has led to increased deforestation and environmental degradation (particularly in the global south), causing biodiversity loss. Profundo’s report reveals that paper production is responsible for 35% of all clear-felled trees globally. Composites and add-ons Before the advent of plastic, paper packaging offered innovative solutions for the storage and transport of confectionery and dried food. However, paper alone has limitations, so manufacturers combined paper materials with plastics, foils, and a variety of chemical additives and treatments to extend the functionality and lifespan of paper products. These additives and treatments protect the contents of paper packaging, while additions such as lamination, glue, and labelling are often key to a brand’s marketing. The incorporation of chemical additives to fulfil demand for functional, easily marketable paper packaging has led to questions around safety, particularly in relation to food contamination and the migration of chemical compounds, such as PFAS, into the environment and the human body. Is paper really recyclable and compostable?  Whilst most paper-based products are made from recycled materials, paper is not infinitely recyclable – it has a limited life span of 6 or 7 uses. Its biodegradability also relies on the assumption that the paper has remained in its natural state. While they are visually interesting and functional, multi-material products are harder to recycle. Once pure pulp has been contaminated, it is difficult to separate the paper from non-recyclable additives such as coated resin or plastic lamination. Also highlighted in Profundo’s report is the mounting pressure on the recycling industry to cope with increased paper waste. This results in neglect during the collection and sorting process, which is worsened by infinite combinations of paper composites that need to be sorted. As a result, many paper products will end up in the landfill, with composite products slowing their decomposition rate.  What packaging offers a truly sustainable solution? Paper food packaging may have significantly less negative impacts than plastic packaging, whilst still being adaptable and inexpensive, but it does not present a miracle, impact-free solution. Given the projected growth in demand for packaged food and beverages over the coming decades, a sustainable alternative to paper packaging is necessary to avoid increased waste and deforestation. The answer The answer is not really a choice between plastic and paper, but a shift away from single-use packaging altogether, so that packaging and other ‘throw-away’ products have a continuous lifespan rather than being used just once. +++++++++++++++++ For more information contact: info@scarabtrust.org.uk Image: street food coffee eco-friendly packaging - Photo by Magda Ehlers on Pexels (ST ref: 1376)

Does paper packaging beat plastic?

Paper-based packaging. Following the recognition of the harmful environmental and social impact of plastics, paper packaging has been adopted as a sustainable and ‘eco-friendly’ alternative. Paper-based packaging has become the largest source of packaging waste in the European Union, accounting for 41.1% of packaging waste – more than plastic and glass combined. While paper packaging may seem like a sustainable solution, research has highlighted the sustainability challenges it poses. A...

Waste

The Deposit Return Scheme (DRS) is an environmental policy that will tackle litter and pollution, reducing the environmental impacts of plastics and leading us towards a circular economy. Whilst the UK’s plans are still faltering, other countries are showing us how it’s done. Germany has an impressive 98% return rate for drinks containers! Consumers can return a wide range of containers, including plastic bottles, cans and glass bottles for financial reward. Norway’s DRS was introduced in the early 1990s and has been highly effective in increasing recycling rates. The scheme covers both alcoholic and non-alcoholic beverage containers and has a high deposit amount, incentivising consumers to return their containers. Finland has a return rate of 97% for its DRS, one of the most successful worldwide. They also focus on reusing - the return rate for reusable bottles in 2023 was 97%, all refilled approximately 33 times. Cans and glass bottles reached a return rate of over 98%. DRS in Finland is supported by the beverage packing tax - by becoming members of the DRS, manufacturers and importers are exempt from this tax.  The Netherlands has shown great success in litter reduction, with overall litter reductions of 66% within the first three years of the DRS and 80% fewer cans on the street. Latvia launched a DRS for both single-use containers (glass, plastic bottles, cans) and reusable glass bottles (with two standardised bottles) in 2022, blending recycling and reuse in an effective system that can be a model for other countries to follow. Changing regulations on plastics, particularly relating to packaging and waste regulation, mean that the goal posts are constantly shifting. As different countries implement different DRS schemes, it’s up to the UK to see what works and what doesn’t - and we should pick the best one for the environment.  The UK needs regulations that place responsibility for packaging on producers (such as the EPR - Extended Producer Responsibility - see episode 6 for more information) and an effective DRS that fully addresses the needs and expectations of our society and planet.  +++++++++++++++++ For more information contact: info@scarabtrust.org.uk Image: stop plastic - Photo by Volodymyr Hryshchenko on Unsplash (ST ref: 1164)

Lessons from Elsewhere

The Deposit Return Scheme (DRS) is an environmental policy that will tackle litter and pollution, reducing the environmental impacts of plastics and leading us towards a circular economy. Whilst the UK’s plans are still faltering, other countries are showing us how it’s done. Germany has an impressive 98% return rate for drinks containers! Consumers can return a wide range of containers, including plastic bottles, cans and glass bottles for financial reward. Norway’s DRS was introduced in the...

Legislation

Ocean plastic is often misunderstood - and misrepresented. Media images of massive garbage patches floating in the Pacific suggest the ocean is blanketed in rubbish. The reality is more complicated - and arguably more concerning.  Of the 460 million tonnes of plastic produced annually around the globe  (OECD 2022), 353 million tonnes go to waste and only about 9% is recycled in any meaningful way. Approximately 82 millions tonnes of this waste (of the 9%) is mismanaged - either littered, burned in open air or dumped in poorly controlled landfills. Around 19 million tonnes of this chunk leak into the environment each year, including rivers, fjords and lakes, coastal areas and the ocean. An estimated 1.7 million tonnes of plastic enter the ocean yearly - which may seem a small proportion compared to the scale of global waste, but is still catastrophic in ecological terms. Once there, plastic breaks down into micro and nano particles that are invisible to the human eye and virtually impossible to remove.  Most ocean plastic sticks around - lurking in shallow coastal waters. According to Our World in Data, 88% stays close to coastlines. Less than 0.1 million tonnes actually reaches the open ocean surface when over 90% lands in the ocean sediments. The highly visible garbage patches that grab headlines are notorious - but the real problem is what’s being dumped just off the coast, in estuaries, reefs and coastal ecosystems. These areas are also where marine biodiversity is richest. Over 80% of ocean plastic comes from land, is transported by rivers and wind and often comes from areas with inadequate waste infrastructure. Fishing gear - including nets, ropes and lines - makes up a smaller percentage globally (around 270%) but dominates in high seas and offshore patches. Understanding these numbers is a key first step. It helps us shift from spectacle and horror to strategic action. If most plastic stays near the land, then coastal waste management - not open-ocean cleanups - should be our main focus. +++++++++++++++++ For more information contact: info@scarabtrust.org.uk Image: floating plastic waste and clothing  - Image by Naja Bertolt Jensen on Unsplash (ST ref: 1223)

The real numbers behind ocean plastics

Ocean plastic is often misunderstood - and misrepresented. Media images of massive garbage patches floating in the Pacific suggest the ocean is blanketed in rubbish. The reality is more complicated - and arguably more concerning. Of the 460 million tonnes of plastic produced annually around the globe (OECD 2022), 353 million tonnes go to waste and only about 9% is recycled in any meaningful way. Approximately 82 millions tonnes of this waste (of the 9%) is mismanaged - either littered,...

Plastic pollution

The ‘Global Plastic Laws’ database. The Plastic Pollution Coalition (PPC) is a non-profit communications and advocacy organisation focused on the impacts of plastic on the environment, wildlife, the climate, human health, and social justice. Recognising the global scale of the plastic problem, the PPC launched the Global Plastic Laws database, which provides extensive information about local, national, and international legislation.  While policies are debated and determined behind closed doors in government offices, the Global Plastic Laws database offers legislative context and visibility. This database collects information from approximately 115 countries and is an accessible tool for all, from activists and NGOs to government organisations. The creators of this database hope that it will serve as an important and informative resource to support the global development of policies that address the issues associated with plastics. Partner institutions The PPC works collectively with data partners to gather information on current, global legislative activity. Ever evolving in response to updates from multiple contributors, the Global Plastic Laws database allows users to monitor changes in plastic legislation worldwide. Each partner is supported by a network of experts and volunteers and offers opportunities to get involved as either an individual or an organisation.  These data partners include: Break Free From Plastic Europe Environmental Law Alliance Worldwide Surfrider Foundation U.S.  Navigating the website Arranged into nine categories, the Global Plastic Laws database tracks policies across multiple industries. This allows users to be selective in their research and easily identify relevant information. These categories are as follows: Design + Reuse Extended Producer Responsibility Maritime Sources Microplastics Production + Manufacturing Reduction Transparency + Traceability Waste Management Waste Trade The inclusion of an interactive map also offers a geographical overview, allowing comparison between nations and providing direct access to relevant information on a specific region. This database can be explored using the link below. Explore the Laws +++++++++++++++++ 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

Want to Learn More About Global Plastic Laws?

The ‘Global Plastic Laws’ database. The Plastic Pollution Coalition (PPC) is a non-profit communications and advocacy organisation focused on the impacts of plastic on the environment, wildlife, the climate, human health, and social justice. Recognising the global scale of the plastic problem, the PPC launched the Global Plastic Laws database, which provides extensive information about local, national, and international legislation. While policies are debated and determined behind closed...

Legislation

For years, companies making misleading environmental claims faced little more than bad press. A campaign group would raise the alarm, a brand would issue a careful non-apology, and the cycle would begin again. In 2025, that changed. The Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024 came fully into force on 6 April 2025, giving the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) the power to impose fines of up to 10% of a company's global annual turnover for misleading environmental claims, without needing to go through the courts. For a major multinational company, that is a number that concentrates minds in boardrooms. The Chemical Recycling myth Chemical recycling sits squarely in the crosshairs. For years, consumer-facing brands have labelled products as "made with recycled plastic" or "recyclable" on the basis of pyrolysis processes that, as we have seen in this series, yield as little as 5% usable recycled material. Those claims are now legally vulnerable. Legal experts at Fieldfisher have noted that vague, unsubstantiated, or incomplete environmental messaging falls squarely within the CMA's enforcement priorities. The pressure tightened further at the start of 2026. On 22 January 2026, the CMA published new guidance titled "Making green claims: Getting it right, across the supply chain," making clear that responsibility for a misleading claim does not rest solely with the brand whose logo appears on the packaging. Every business in the supply chain that repeats, relies on, or passes along an environmental claim is now expected to verify it. A brand can no longer point to a chemical recycling supplier's certification and consider itself absolved. This series has traced a single thread: an industry that promised and then failed to deliver a technological fix, shipped the consequences overseas, and dressed the whole thing up as progress. The law is slowly catching up. Share this series with people who need to see it, and demand better from the brands and policymakers who have let this crisis fester for far too long. +++++++++++++++++ For more information contact: info@scarabtrust.org.uk Images:
50 pc recycled - AI image (ST ref: 1374) Greenwashing synonyms - Image from spunout.ie (ST ref: 1297)

The Law is catching up on Greenwashing companies

For years, companies making misleading environmental claims faced little more than bad press. A campaign group would raise the alarm, a brand would issue a careful non-apology, and the cycle would begin again. In 2025, that changed. The Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024 came fully into force on 6 April 2025, giving the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) the power to impose fines of up to 10% of a company's global annual turnover for misleading environmental claims,...

Legislation

If there’s one thing to take away from the United Nations Ocean Conference  (UNOC 2025) and the ocean plastics crisis, it’s that solutions do exist, but that they’re not scaling, not enforced and not shared equally. Cleanup technology may help in pollution hotspot areas, but they treat symptoms, not causes and are cost intensive. Recycling has a role, but its effectiveness is vastly overstated and most plastics are actually not recyclable to date. Individual actions - whilst valuable - won’t stop a system designed to produce waste.  We need to rethink the global plastics economy from the top down. That means: Capping virgin plastic production at global, regional and national levels Banning non-essential single-use plastics Mandating product redesign for durability, reuse and zero microplastic and hazardous emissions Supporting global south waste infrastructure through climate finance and fair trade Ensuring that new international treaties are binding, with monitoring and penalties We’re not starting from square one. The Basel Convention (2019) now regulates some plastic waste trade. The EU’s Single-Use Plastics Directive has set real limits on certain products, and treaty negotiations under UNEA could lead to the world’s first global agreement on plastic pollution. Oil and Gas Blocking Change All of this must be paired with political transparency. We must call out oil and gas industries blocking change and admit that current market logic - endless production and disposal - is incompatible with a liveable planet.  Plastic isn’t just a material. It’s a lens on global inequality, broken governance and environmental injustice. Tackling this issue will do more than protect the oceans - it will show whether we’re capable of changing the very systems that got us here, for the sake of future generations. We need action now more than ever. We can’t just raise public awareness, we have to take accountability, raise money and be brave about cleaning up our mess and stopping plastic from ever getting into our oceans - by stopping making it. +++++++++++++++++ For more information contact: info@scarabtrust.org.uk Image: TurnOffThePlasticTap  - Image by Von Wong (ST ref: 1310) Thanks to Frédérique Mongodin from Seas at Risk and Laura Díaz Sánchez from BFFP for editorial support.

Rethinking ocean plastic solutions

If there’s one thing to take away from the United Nations Ocean Conference (UNOC 2025) and the ocean plastics crisis, it’s that solutions do exist, but that they’re not scaling, not enforced and not shared equally. Cleanup technology may help in pollution hotspot areas, but they treat symptoms, not causes and are cost intensive. Recycling has a role, but its effectiveness is vastly overstated and most plastics are actually not recyclable to date. Individual actions - whilst valuable - won’t...

Legislation

October 2025 saw the 13th annual Great Global Nurdle Hunt, a citizen science project with over 1,500 volunteers in 25 countries searching their shorelines for nurdles. Nurdles are the pre-production building blocks of most plastic products. They’re lentil-shaped microplastic pellets, ~2-3mm in diameter, which are melted down in plastic production. Unfortunately, nurdles have found their way into every corner of the world, with this year's hunt reporting that 92% of participating countries found nurdles, including remote regions in the Arctic Circle and Fiji.  So how do nurdles end up in the environment?  Due to their small size, they are easily spilled during production and transport. They are lost to drains and waterways, eventually reaching the ocean. Over 445,000 metric tons of nurdles are estimated to be lost to the environment each year. In March 2025, a collision between two ships off the north east coast of England resulted in multiple shipping containers falling into the ocean, and millions of nurdles washing up on the English coast. Whilst the initial clean-up collected over 10,000kg of plastic from the beaches, nurdles continued to infiltrate the natural ecosystems for months after. Nurdles pose a great threat to coastal ecosystems and wildlife. Their shape and size means they are easily mistaken for food by seabirds and small mammals. When ingested, nurdles give the illusion of satiety, ultimately causing starvation. Worse, nurdles attract toxic chemicals known as Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs), which accumulate in the food chain. The Great Global Nurdle Hunt aims to gather as much data as possible to build an accurate representation of the global nurdle problem. Volunteers record the number of nurdles they find in a certain area and submit their results for analysis. The Great Global Nurdle Hunt  welcomes submissions of nurdle findings from everyone, all year round and encourages you to get involved with this important project.  +++++++++++++++++ For more information contact: info@scarabtrust.org.uk Image: Plastic on Fistral Beach - MJ

Join the Great Global Nurdle Hunt

October 2025 saw the 13th annual Great Global Nurdle Hunt, a citizen science project with over 1,500 volunteers in 25 countries searching their shorelines for nurdles. Nurdles are the pre-production building blocks of most plastic products. They’re lentil-shaped microplastic pellets, ~2-3mm in diameter, which are melted down in plastic production. Unfortunately, nurdles have found their way into every corner of the world, with this year's hunt reporting that 92% of participating countries...

Corporate

The Deposit Return Scheme (DRS) is an important step towards reducing litter and waste, but real progress means moving away from single-use packaging entirely. There are different types of DRS, some focusing on recycling single-use items, whilst others, particularly for glass, promote reuse. The idea behind DRS in the UK is to incentivise consumers to recycle drinks containers, but focusing on a reuse system is a better option.  Recycling plastic doesn’t always work. When it does, it consumes huge amounts of energy and resources. Plastic recycling often downcycles materials into lower quality products that eventually go to landfill or end up in the sea. Glass recycling can save up to 25% of the energy needed to create new bottles, which is still significant, but it’s only a temporary solution compared to the long-term benefits of reuse. Incineration is rarely part of a DRS for single-use containers (as the point of DRS is to avoid such waste disposal methods) but it still poses an issue in other waste systems, often shifting pollution into air and carbon emissions. The real future lies in reuse. An ideal future would see drinks containers returned, washed, refilled and used again. In countries like Germany, the Netherlands and Belgium, reuse systems are already working: durable glass and plastic bottles are collected, sanitised, and put back into circulation dozens of times before finally being recycled. Latvia also successfully introduced a combined DRS for both single-use and reusable containers in 2022, providing a strong model for other countries to follow. Focusing on reuse would reduce energy waste from manufacturing and recycling, lower carbon emissions across supply chains and massively reduce litter and ocean plastic. It would also reduce long-term costs for business and consumers.  Scotland and Wales are looking at how reuse can be built into future plans - but without strong public pressure, progress will be slow. Building a reuse economy requires investment, infrastructure and public participation. It demands that governments, brands and retailers rethink how products are packaged and sold. The DRS can be a stepping stone, but reuse has to be the destination. The faster we move towards it, the more we can protect our planet from environmental destruction, and secure our own safety alongside it. +++++++++++++ ++++ For more information contact: info@scarabtrust.org.uk Image: zero waste store by Wix (ST ref: 1304)

Reuse and Return: The Future Beyond Deposit Return

The Deposit Return Scheme (DRS) is an important step towards reducing litter and waste, but real progress means moving away from single-use packaging entirely. There are different types of DRS, some focusing on recycling single-use items, whilst others, particularly for glass, promote reuse. The idea behind DRS in the UK is to incentivise consumers to recycle drinks containers, but focusing on a reuse system is a better option. Recycling plastic doesn’t always work. When it does, it consumes...

Waste

When Britain's recycling targets are met on paper, it is worth asking: where does the plastic actually go? The answer is increasingly overseas. Chemical recycling, as we explored in the previous piece in this series, has failed to provide the domestic processing solution the industry promised. That failure has a direct consequence: plastic that cannot be recycled at home gets shipped abroad instead. In 2024 alone, the UK exported 598 million kilos of plastic waste, an increase of 30 million kilos from the previous year, according to the Environmental Investigation Agency. By June 2025, UK plastic waste exports to Asia were surging, with 3.3 million kilos shipped to Indonesia and 6.8 million kilos to Malaysia in that month alone. Mismanaged Waste The problem is not simply one of geography. Much of this exported plastic is mismanaged, dumped, or burned in the open air. In Indonesia, communities have been found burning imported plastic waste as fuel, with environmental pollutants known as dioxins subsequently detected in eggs from nearby chickens. Workers in receiving countries bear the health consequences of waste they did not produce. Campaigners have named this "waste colonialism." The EIA has called it an environmental scandal hiding in plain sight, arguing that exports allow the UK to register plastic as "recycled" for domestic target purposes while masking its overconsumption. Experts at Chemistry World have noted that reducing exports could actually provide more consistent feedstock for domestic recyclers — the same recyclers that chemical recycling was supposed to make redundant, but never did. The EU has already banned exports to non-OECD countries. The UK, despite a 2019 government pledge to follow suit, has yet to act. In the final piece of this series, we look at how the law is finally starting to catch up with companies that have spent years making false promises about recycling. +++++++++++++++++ For more information contact: info@scarabtrust.org.uk Images:  container ship - Image by Freddy from Pixabay (ST ref: 1370) plastic bottles recycling - Image by Hans from Pixabay (ST ref:1371)

Out of Sight, Out of Mind: How Britain Exports Its Plastic Waste Problem

When Britain's recycling targets are met on paper, it is worth asking: where does the plastic actually go? The answer is increasingly overseas. Chemical recycling, as we explored in the previous piece in this series, has failed to provide the domestic processing solution the industry promised. That failure has a direct consequence: plastic that cannot be recycled at home gets shipped abroad instead. In 2024 alone, the UK exported 598 million kilos of plastic waste, an increase of 30 million...

Waste

The Deposit Return Scheme (DRS), due to launch in Scotland, England and Northern Ireland in 2027, will reward consumers for returning single-use drinks containers. It promises to tackle litter and pollution - but is flawed.  The planned DRS covers aluminium, steel and PET (polyethylene terephthalate) plastic bottles, but excludes many common containers, including milk bottles (HDPE) medicine bottles, syrup bottles and, crucially, glass bottles. Discarded glass bottles can start fires, injure wildlife and harm people and pets. Wales is developing a broader scheme including glass - offering a better model. Whilst the DRS will help collect more containers, recycling itself has serious limitations. Although the DRS will reduce raw material usage, energy and CO2 emissions, most plastics are not really recyclable in the true sense and the DRS won’t slow the production of single-use items. Further false solutions like incineration risk compounding pollution and emissions. The German DRS is often hailed as a success, with a 98% return rate. However, this has increased the production of single-use plastic as businesses avoid the cost of cleaning and transporting reusable packaging. Shredding and re-forming plastic also uses energy and creates emissions. Even recycling glass has issues, only saving about 25% of the energy used to manufacture new glass. In the UK, requiring consumers to take bottles to shops or vending machines could deter participation, especially in rural areas or for online shoppers. Increased car trips could also undermine environmental gains. Until manufacturers are held responsible for their costs, through an Extended Producer Responsibility scheme (EPR) as explained in a later episode, these will be passed along the supply chain to consumers. Unless people return their bottles, they risk paying more without benefitting. The DRS is a useful step towards reducing waste, but it doesn’t address the root problem: the overproduction of single-use packaging. The proposed Global Plastics Treaty, currently under negotiation by 175 countries, aims to address the entire lifecycle of plastics through legally binding measures to reduce reliance on virgin plastic materials. Recycling alone won’t solve the current environmental catastrophe; real change means redesigning systems to prioritise reuse and reduction.  Next in DRS series: 3. The Future Beyond DRS +++++++++++++++++ For more information contact: info@scarabtrust.org.uk Image: plastic bottles recycling - Image by Hans (ST ref: 1162)

The Limitations of Recycling

The Deposit Return Scheme (DRS), due to launch in Scotland, England and Northern Ireland in 2027, will reward consumers for returning single-use drinks containers. It promises to tackle litter and pollution - but is flawed. The planned DRS covers aluminium, steel and PET (polyethylene terephthalate) plastic bottles, but excludes many common containers, including milk bottles (HDPE) medicine bottles, syrup bottles and, crucially, glass bottles. Discarded glass bottles can start fires, injure...

DRS Series

The 2025 United Nations Ocean Conference (UNOC) brought ocean issues back into the global spotlight. Delegates from over 100 countries convened to reaffirm commitments to SDG 14: Life Below Water, address overfishing and clamp down on marine pollution. The tone was urgent, the diversity of stakeholders impressive and the pledges ambitious - but the gap between promises and action remains as wide as ever, with a clear lack of dedicated funding to prevent plastic and microplastic pollution. The final declaration was filled with promising language about ecosystem restoration, pollution reduction and marine protection. However, a lack of enforceable mechanisms or clear accountability structures drew sharp criticism from civil society groups like ClientEarth. As they noted, “voluntary pledges are no substitute for binding action.” One glaring omission: the declaration did not commit to ending destructive fishing practices in Marine Protected Areas, in spite of present marine NGO networks such as Seas At Risk clearly calling for it. This would seem like an obvious move given that MPAs are wildlife havens with measured restoration benefits even outside of their limits. In Europe alone, bottom trawling continues in 86% of them. This contradiction undermines faith in ocean governance. On plastic, the conference reaffirmed support for the ongoing UN plastics treaty negotiations which were set to conclude in 2025 but are in fact at a standstill as a result of Saudi Arabia and its like-minded partners calling for minimum ambition. Divisions still remain even regarding this - many countries, especially major fossil fuel producers, are reticent, leaning towards weaker language focusing on waste management and recycling that avoids binding caps on plastic production and addressing plastic pollution at its source. Others, including small island states and many in the Global South, demand a strong treaty with global production limits, single-use plastic bans and financial support. UNOC is a platform, not a policymaking body, so its outcomes are symbolic rather than legally binding. These symbols can still hold weight, however. The signal from UNOC 2025 is clear: awareness is high, but political will is uneven and available funding for pollution prevention still scarce.  The ocean doesn’t need more promises - it needs binding prevention measures, with funding, oversight and enforcement. Until then, global ocean policy will continue to drift aimlessly, even as plastics keep pouring in. Next in Ocean series: 3/10. Rethinking Ocean Plastic Solutions +++++++++++++++++ For more information contact: info@scarabtrust.org.uk Images: plastic bottle ocean - Photo by Naja Bertolt Jensen on Unsplash (ST ref: 1366) super trawler Margiris - Photo by Pierre Gleizes, Greenpeace (ST ref: 1367) Thanks to Frédérique Mongodin from Seas at Risk for editorial support.

What UNOC showed - and what it didn’t

The 2025 United Nations Ocean Conference (UNOC) brought ocean issues back into the global spotlight. Delegates from over 100 countries convened to reaffirm commitments to SDG 14: Life Below Water, address overfishing and clamp down on marine pollution. The tone was urgent, the diversity of stakeholders impressive and the pledges ambitious - but the gap between promises and action remains as wide as ever, with a clear lack of dedicated funding to prevent plastic and microplastic pollution. The...

Ocean Series

On December 8th, 2023, an environmental crisis occurred off the northern coast of Spain when a cargo ship lost part of its load. In an alarming incident, an estimated 25 tonnes of plastic pellets, commonly referred to as nurdles, were released into the sea. This event elicited concern within the local community and renewed discussion about the environmental risks linked to plastic pollution. Nurdles are small, lentil-sized plastic pellets that serve as the starting material for various everyday plastic products, such as water bottles and plastic bags (see more about nurdles here). This crisis was referred to as the ‘white tide’, in contrast to the ‘black tide’ experienced by the same community in 2002 when the oil tanker Prestige sank off the Galician coast, spilling 60,000 tonnes of fuel oil onto the shore. Visible plastic pollution intensified from December 23rd, prompting a clean-up operation by regional workers and volunteers. However, the impact of plastic pellet spills goes beyond the immediate visual pollution.  Due to their composition, nurdles are resistant to degradation. As a result, spills like these pose a serious threat to marine life, water quality, and the overall environment. These tiny plastic particles can accumulate in marine environments, disrupting ecosystems and harming wildlife. The ingestion of nurdles by animals contributes to plastic pollution in the food chain, including in the food humans eat. Implications This incident emphasises the urgent need for increased awareness and action concerning plastic pollution. Following the pellet spill in Galicia, Spain, #BreakFreeFromPlastic members coordinated various reactions to the crisis, including an online petition and an open letter to EU decision-makers calling for ambitious pellet legislation. As consumers, it is essential that we reduce our reliance on single-use plastics and advocate for sustainable alternatives. Governments and industries must also collaborate to enforce stricter regulations on plastic production, distribution, and waste management. Last October, the European Commission warned of the dangers posed by plastic pellets, emphasising their non-biodegradable nature and accumulation in ecosystems, which poses a threat to human health. They proposed a new regulation aimed at preventing plastic pellet losses as part of a wider drive to reduce microplastic pollution. Applying these measures across the plastic supply chain would reduce pellet losses by 54% to 74%. This plastic pellet spill is more than just an isolated event; it is a call to action for all of us to rethink our relationship with plastic and actively participate in creating a cleaner, healthier environment for future generations. By taking small steps in our daily lives and supporting initiatives that address plastic pollution, we can collectively contribute to a more sustainable and pollution-free future. +++++++++++++++++ For more information contact: info@scarabtrust.org.uk Image: plastic pellets beach Aquitaine - Image from Wikimedia (ST ref: 1369) Edited by Sophia Stilwell

Plastic Pellets: Spanish Catastrophe

On December 8th, 2023, an environmental crisis occurred off the northern coast of Spain when a cargo ship lost part of its load. In an alarming incident, an estimated 25 tonnes of plastic pellets, commonly referred to as nurdles, were released into the sea. This event elicited concern within the local community and renewed discussion about the environmental risks linked to plastic pollution. Nurdles are small, lentil-sized plastic pellets that serve as the starting material for various...

Pollution

The petrochemical industry has long championed chemical recycling as the solution to the global plastics crisis. The pitch is straightforward: instead of sending plastic waste to landfill or incineration, break it down chemically back into raw materials and start again. Clean, circular, elegant. The reality is considerably messier. Chemical recycling works primarily through a process called pyrolysis. Plastic waste is heated in the absence of oxygen to produce an oil that can, in theory, be turned back into new plastic. In practice, the process has fundamental limitations that its proponents rarely discuss openly. A 2024 report by Zero Waste Europe contacted two independent chemical engineering experts, both of whom categorised pyrolysis as only a form of "partial recycling" that would require enormous investment to reach commercial viability. The report also noted that insiders acknowledge the technology will not be commercially viable for another fifty years. The contamination problem is central to this. A 2025 report by the Center for Climate Integrity found that the industry's own consultants have acknowledged pyrolysis is energy-intensive and generates substantial greenhouse gas emissions. Meanwhile, a ProPublica investigation found that from 100 pounds of plastic waste, the pyrolysis process is expected to yield only 15 to 20 pounds of reusable plastic, given losses at every stage of the process. Shell's own trajectory says it all. After pledging to convert one million tonnes of plastic waste annually into pyrolysis oil by 2025, the company quietly abandoned that goal, calling it "unfeasible" in its 2023 sustainability report, citing lack of feedstock, slow technology development, and regulatory uncertainty. Chemical recycling is not a solution. It is, at best, a partial measure. At worst, it is a decades-long distraction from the structural changes the plastics industry has resisted for years. In the next piece in this series, we look at where Britain's plastic waste actually goes, and why the answer should alarm us all. +++++++++++++++++ For more information contact: info@scarabtrust.org.uk Image: global warming pollution - Image by Chris LeBoutillier from Pixabay (ST ref: 1368)

The Recycling Industry's Dirty Secret

The petrochemical industry has long championed chemical recycling as the solution to the global plastics crisis. The pitch is straightforward: instead of sending plastic waste to landfill or incineration, break it down chemically back into raw materials and start again. Clean, circular, elegant. The reality is considerably messier. Chemical recycling works primarily through a process called pyrolysis. Plastic waste is heated in the absence of oxygen to produce an oil that can, in theory, be...

Rethinking Waste

UK consumers use 25 billion single-use bottles yearly, over 6.5 billion of which are not recycled. That’s over 17 million plastic, glass, aluminium or steel bottles daily, contributing to polluted beaches, oceans and a growing emissions problem.  You might have heard of the Deposit Return Scheme (DRS), a simple yet powerful environmental initiative that places a small refundable deposit - around 20p - on single-use drinks containers. Consumers can get their deposit back upon returning the container to designated points, encouraging responsible disposal and combating pollution. The DRS helps by placing value on what is typically considered waste. This incentive drives behaviour change, reduces litter and improves recycling rates. In countries like Germany, Norway and Lithuania, with established DRS, return rates exceed 90%. DRS can reduce beverage container litter by 70-84%, while also creating jobs and delivering long term savings in waste management costs. Unlike in Wales, the broader UK scheme set to come into action in 2027 (almost a decade after it was proposed) excludes glass - a major oversight. Indeed, recycling plastic has its limits: not all plastic is recyclable, and even if it is, the process can carry a significant carbon cost. It’s vital that glass be included in the system to reduce emissions and increase resource efficiency. A smaller-scale example of a de-facto DRS scheme that engages the community with recycling through a reward rather than deposit mechanism has been implemented by West Suffolk Council. The pioneering local scheme uses reverse vending machines into which residents deposit plastic bottles and aluminium cans, earning points via the “Trovr” app, which can be spent in local and national stores. This has seen cleaner streets, higher recycling rates and support for local economies. Whilst DRS is a promising start, it is not the end goal. To truly close the loop, we must go beyond single-use altogether and invest in systems for reuse and refill. This will require regulatory action, industry redesign and shifts in consumer behaviour - none of which happen easily or without great expenditure. So where do we go from here? What can we learn from countries doing it better? Follow this thread as we explore the answers to these questions… Next in DRS series: 2. The Limitations of Recycling +++++++++++++++++ For more information contact: info@scarabtrust.org.uk Image: Plastic bottles - Image by Nick Fewings on Unsplash (ST ref: 1216)

Deposit Return: A Solution to Plastic Waste?

UK consumers use 25 billion single-use bottles yearly, over 6.5 billion of which are not recycled. That’s over 17 million plastic, glass, aluminium or steel bottles daily, contributing to polluted beaches, oceans and a growing emissions problem. You might have heard of the Deposit Return Scheme (DRS), a simple yet powerful environmental initiative that places a small refundable deposit - around 20p - on single-use drinks containers. Consumers can get their deposit back upon returning the...

DRS Series

In 2016, headlines proclaimed that by 2050, plastic in the ocean could outweigh fish. The science behind this claim is weak - estimating biomass is notoriously difficult - but the message is no less important. The real issue isn’t a race between fish and plastic. It’s the failure of governments, industries and global systems to prevent known harm. At the 2025 UN Ocean Conference (UNOC), governments once again pledged action on marine pollution. But critics, including ClientEarth, argue that the outcomes are far from enough. Legal enforcement is minimal. Marine Protected Areas are often “protected” by so called paper parks. Bottom trawling continues inside MPAs across Europe, and no legally binding global ban on plastic dumping or overproduction exists. Despite producing over 460 million tonnes of plastic each year (OECD, 2022), the world recycles only a small fraction of under 10%. Most of the waste - roughly 353 million tonnes annually - becomes mismanaged and too often exported to lower income countries, especially in areas where waste infrastructure can’t keep up with urban development and expansion. The consequences are predictable: ecosystems collapse, species die and microplastics contaminate nearly every seafood sample tested and most of human organs and cells. Trade loopholes allow high-income countries to export their plastic waste to lower-income countries, many of which lack the infrastructure to manage it safely.  Plastic pollution is a slow-moving disaster that reflects deeper problems: a lack of regulation, limited corporate awareness, unequal accountability, and political inertia. Until there are preventative and enforceable laws, backed by funding and international cooperation, this crisis will continue. The problem isn’t floating bottles - it’s a complete lack of responsibility and governance. Next in Ocean series: 2/10. What UNOC showed... +++++++++++++++++ For more information contact: info@scarabtrust.org.uk Images:
missing politicians - Image from Magnific (ST ref: 1365) school of fish in plastic - Photo by Naja Bertolt Jensen (ST ref: 1181) Thanks to Frédérique Mongodin from Seas at Risk for editorial support.

Ocean plastics: a governance crisis?

In 2016, headlines proclaimed that by 2050, plastic in the ocean could outweigh fish. The science behind this claim is weak - estimating biomass is notoriously difficult - but the message is no less important. The real issue isn’t a race between fish and plastic. It’s the failure of governments, industries and global systems to prevent known harm. At the 2025 UN Ocean Conference (UNOC), governments once again pledged action on marine pollution. But critics, including ClientEarth, argue that...

Ocean Series

Coca-Cola has heavily promoted recycling as a solution to the problem of plastic pollution and environmental harm. This has unfairly shifted the burden of responsibility for plastic pollution onto consumers. Coca-Cola can continue to produce large quantities of cheap plastic bottles without any accountability, whilst the public takes the blame for litter. Recycling is a false solution to the plastic problem. Only 9% of plastic has ever been recycled. Many plastics can’t be recycled. Even ones that can, like the PET (polyethylene terephthalate) plastic commonly found in beverage bottles, cannot be indefinitely recycled in a circular fashion. After a few cycles non-recycled ‘virgin’ plastic needs to be added to maintain quality. Plastic bottles often end up being ‘downcycled’ into lower grade plastic products, like certain textiles and carpeting, which cannot be further recycled. In addition, the infrastructure to collect items to enable recycling isn’t always available. Often ‘recyclable’ packaging gets thrown into general waste. There are usually no recycling facilities in public spaces. Coca-Cola promotes recycling, but has shown a historic lack of responsibility for ensuring that there is infrastructure in place for collection.  Coca-Cola’s focus on recycling obscures various environmental problems. Recycling is an energy/resource intensive and polluting process. In addition, recycling is only a waste management solution to the plastic problem. Plastic production leads to significant greenhouse gas emissions, and there are health concerns surrounding the ingestion of microplastics and associated chemicals. Recycling doesn’t address these problems.  Life cycle analyses (LCAs) show that using reusable packaging is more environmentally friendly than single-use plastic, regardless of whether it gets recycled or not. In fact Coca-Cola conducted their own LCA in the 1970s which concluded this too, but it was never publicly released. The company ignored it and continued to use cheap, single-use plastic. Coca-Cola’s presentation of recycling as the solution to the plastic crisis amounts to greenwashing; this false solution is used to hide the full impacts their products have on the environment. In this way they can continue business as usual whilst appearing to be a sustainable brand.  Read more about The Coca-Cola Company’s greenwashing tactics in episode 4 of this seven part series…. +++++++++++++++++ For more information contact: info@scarabtrust.org.uk Image: Coca Cola plastic bottles - Photo by Tom Radetzki on Unsplash (ST ref:13460

Coca-Cola: The Recycling Myth

Coca-Cola has heavily promoted recycling as a solution to the problem of plastic pollution and environmental harm. This has unfairly shifted the burden of responsibility for plastic pollution onto consumers. Coca-Cola can continue to produce large quantities of cheap plastic bottles without any accountability, whilst the public takes the blame for litter. Recycling is a false solution to the plastic problem. Only 9% of plastic has ever been recycled. Many plastics can’t be recycled. Even ones...

Corporate Greenwash

For decades, we were told the recycling system was working. Sort your plastics, leave them at the kerb, and trust that they will find a new life. In 2026, that story is falling apart. 
The UK's plastics recycling sector is in freefall. In 2022, the country had 1.1 million tonnes of plastic recycling capacity. Within just 18 months, an estimated 260,000 tonnes per year of that capacity had been lost due to site closures. In the last two years alone, 21 recycling operations across Britain have shut their doors, according to a Guardian investigation cited by Green Alliance. A March 2026 report by Ecosurety and Recoup found that the UK has lost over 200,000 tonnes of plastic reprocessing capacity since 2024, and could lose the majority of its domestic capability by 2030. Throughout this collapse, the petrochemical industry has pointed to chemical recycling as the answer: a technological fix that would break plastic waste back down into raw materials and start the cycle again. But, as this series will show, that promise has consistently fallen short of the science, the economics, and basic accountability. In this series, we examine each layer of the crisis. First, why has chemical recycling always been shakier than the industry admits? Then we will examine how its failure to scale up has left the UK exporting its waste problem to countries like Indonesia, a practice campaigners have called "waste colonialism." And finally, why the law is starting to catch up with companies that have spent years making false claims about recycling. Britain's recycling crisis did not happen overnight. It was built through political inaction, industry lobbying, and a public kept in the dark. Follow the next three pieces in this series as we dig into exactly how we got here, who has been looking the other way, and what needs to change. +++++++++++++++++ For more information contact: info@scarabtrust.org.uk Image: Landfill, Waste disposal, Garbage - Image by Mumtahina Rahman from Pixabay (ST ref: 1334)

Britain's Recycling System Is Collapsing. Here's What They're Not Telling You.

For decades, we were told the recycling system was working. Sort your plastics, leave them at the kerb, and trust that they will find a new life. In 2026, that story is falling apart. The UK's plastics recycling sector is in freefall. In 2022, the country had 1.1 million tonnes of plastic recycling capacity. Within just 18 months, an estimated 260,000 tonnes per year of that capacity had been lost due to site closures. In the last two years alone, 21 recycling operations across Britain have...

Rethinking Waste

bottom of page