2021-08-25 EMC Agenda item 5-b(1) - Final-PSRWG-Report-to-Leg

Home

The study should analyze the following two specific scenarios: (1) packaging EPR initiatives; and (2) initiatives. The study should evaluate: the best science available; costs and benefits to all stakeholders (i.e. environment, consumers, taxpayers, government, and businesses, etc.); the pros and cons; as well as feasibility. VIII. Potential Lifecycle and Environmental Implications of Alternative Products The lifecycle of plastic packaging has been known to have damaging effects on the environment. Hawais geographic location makes it especially vulnerable to the impacts of plastic consumption and use around the Pacific Rim (Hawaii Ocean Resource Management Plan, 2020). A recent study found that windward beaches collect a greater abundance of marine debris, with concentrations that were 1-2 orders of magnitude more plastic pollution than leeward beaches. Leeward beaches were found to collect debris, which more commonly included whole items (i.e. sunglasses or dive masks (45%) on the sea floor, and cigarette filters (48%) on beaches), from local inputs and maritime activities, which are more readily controllable by local residents and visitors. Windward beaches, however, included debris that was highly weathered and buoyant, indicating longer residence time in the ocean and foreign debris origin (Brignac, et al 2019). One damaging environmental effect is ingestion of plastics by organisms in various stages of their life (including fish species integral to recreational and commercial fisheries, and turtles), which is well documented in Hawaii (Clukey et. al., 2017 and Gove et. al., 2019). Ingestion can reduce survivorship and exposure to persistent organic pollutants that attach onto marine plastic pollution. In order to make intermediary steps towards a more plastics-free society, the lifecycle and environmental implications of alternative materials and products must be assessed. The State should consider existing lifecycle assessment studies that have made such evaluations (or any new/updated lifecycle analysis as they become available), create policies that discourage the use of the most harmful options, and encourage the use of least harmful options (see Appendix F). The Working Group recommends the legislature take the following actions: Refer to existing lifecycle analysis (LCA) studies (or any new/updated LCA as they become available) for plastic alternatives: o Prioritize products and options that have the least negative environmental andsocio- economic impacts. Variables to consider should include: - The total greenhouse gas emissions (Carbon Dioxide equivalent \[COe\]) generated 2 (e.g., Carbon Dioxide (CO2), Methane (CH4), Nitrous Oxide (N2O), Fluorinated Gases, etc.) 10