- Shaken Not Burned
- Posts
- Balancing plastic waste with Seven Clean Seas
Balancing plastic waste with Seven Clean Seas
Shaken Not Burned
November 14, 2024
Shaken Not Burned
Highlighting changemakers and solutions
Welcome to another week of Shaken Not Burned!
The world has come together in Baku for the 29th Conference of the Parties (COP29). The climate conference is set for a challenging couple of weeks as the focus is firmly on climate finance, with discussions hindered by huge disparities in finance and capacity between developed and developing economies. 2024 saw the largest fossil emissions to date, yet the COPs continue to welcome lobbyists of every stripe – surely not a promising start to a good-faith conversation about what needs to happen to achieve global climate goals.
This week we talk to Tom Peacock-Nazil, founder of Seven Clean Seas, an ocean conservation group focused on finding ways to solve the plastics problems. The fossil fuel industry is eyeing plastic as its next significant source of income as even the International Energy Agency believes that fossil fuel use is peaking. The alarming state of ocean health is partly behind the call for the 30x30 protection target under the Nature COP, COP15. But even though we’re talking about protection, we’re not talking about what flows into oceans: plastic.
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), which will be under threat during the Trump administration, estimates that approximately 8 million metric tons of plastic enter the ocean annually, which averages to about 22,000 metric tons per day – roughly equivalent to dumping one garbage truck of plastic into the ocean every minute. That plastic ruins rivers and shorelines, affects fish, birds and corals, and harms ecosystems and communities. We need both upstream (design, reduction) and downstream (collection, recycling) solutions. Seven Clean Seas has a dual approach: cleaning up plastic waste from the ocean while helping companies measure and reduce their plastic impact.
A global plastics treaty is expected to be announced by the end of this year. Plastic, like climate and nature, needs its own intergovernmental approach because it's too huge a problem for one country to tackle. It’s not that there isn’t a use for plastic, but we need to find new ways to design it, use it, and manage the implications of its end of life. Regulatory frameworks, such as Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR), are vital, but voluntary corporate actions remain crucial, especially in terms of compensating for plastic waste. Localised waste management, particularly in coastal and river areas, is identified as a more impactful approach than ocean cleanups, and transparency about sustainability claims (such as "ocean plastic") is essential for consumer trust.
Ultimately, companies can lead in reducing plastic pollution by fostering accountability, supporting effective partnerships, and taking proactive sustainability steps, all of which contribute to a circular economy and healthier ecosystems.
Don’t forget to listen to this week’s episode wherever you get your podcasts. We hope you enjoy the newsletter and if there’s anything you’d like to see more information about, you can email us at [email protected].
If you enjoyed this episode, please share it far and wide, and if this email was forwarded to you make sure you subscribe to our free newsletter here.
What we’ve been reading this week
Phasing out of fossil fuels feels far away
The climate COP is taking place in Baku but the signs on the ground are concerning. There is a huge disconnect between the finance needed to address climate change (estimated to be around $2 trillion) and the amount offered by developed economies ($125 billion). The Azeri head of the COP conference was caught discussing the potential for fossil fuel deals on the ground. While some carbon accounting rules were agreed upon, even setting the agenda has proven problematic. What’s more, fossil fuel emissions rose again to the highest point on record, up 0.8% year on year, despite commitments to cutting subsidies. When you consider that 2022 saw over $7 trillion in fossil fuel subsidies, there’s a disconnect between politics, the status quo and the need to act on climate.
NDCs remain a murky proposition at COP29
Brazil has cut its deforestation rates by 31%, a much-needed win for climate and nature. Yet, as countries publish their nationally determined contributions (NDCs), the situation remains murky. Brazil has increased its climate target while simultaneously planning to boost its oil and gas production by 36% by 2035. Part of the challenge lies in the lack of detail on how climate targets are going to be achieved – and that’s a problem everywhere, not just in Brazil. The UK got kudos for raising its target to 81% emissions reduction but, again, it leaves out aviation and shipping. There’s also a major legal concern that the UK has not calculated whether achieving the climate goal is even possible.
US states could offset Trump’s anti-climate stance
Despite the election of a climate change denier, the potential for States to drive action on climate change has gained momentum with the news that California’s climate risk reporting legislation has cleared a hurdle. It has survived a major legal challenge, though litigation will continue. Climate litigation will be critical in driving action over the coming years. While many are saddened by the fact that the judgement against Shell was overturned in the Netherlands, it's clear that a legal precedent was set. As Tim Bleeker at the University of Utrecht explains, the Court of Appeal confirms that Shell has a duty of care to align its business model with climate objectives, specifically the goal of limiting global warming to 1.5°C, and noted that Shell, as a producer of fossil fuels, has a responsibility to contribute to the mitigation of climate change.
Insurance is increasingly a core lever for climate action
It’s a truism that if you can’t get insurance, you’re unlikely to build or invest. Today the insurance industry remains happily backing new fossil fuel exploration and exploitation. The EU insurance regulator, however, has called for higher capital requirements for fossil fuel assets due to transition risk. The European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority (EIOPA) published a report covering three distinct areas of risk including the market risk of assets exposed to the climate transition, the impact of climate risk-related prevention measures on non-life underwriting risks and the treatment of social risks. Specifically, EIOPA recommends raising capital requirements by up to 17% for fossil fuel-related stocks and a capital charge of up to 40% for bonds. Insurers are pulling out of California and Florida because insuring property in certain areas no longer fits a risk-return profile that leads to profit. But what if insurers start to decide that fossil fuel investments are too high risk?
Net zero remains a distant dream for multinationals
According to the latest analysis from Accenture, only 16% of the world’s largest companies are on track for net zero. Accenture's "Destination Net Zero" report is an analysis of net zero commitments, carbon reduction activities and emissions data for the 2,000 biggest companies worldwide. It found that, while full net zero target-setting has stalled at 37%, more than half (52%) of companies have cut both carbon emissions and emissions intensity since the Paris Agreement was adopted in 2016. On a more positive note, more companies are using employee incentives to hit their climate goals – a key alignment of corporate values and action.
Reply