Takeaway food in several single-use plastic containers, carried in a couple of disposable plastic bags by someone in a throwaway face mask, has become a common scene across Asia during the global coronavirus pandemic. This surge in single-use plastic is seen by environmentalists as a catastrophe in the making, undermining hard-won recycling victories around the world. With an estimated 129 billion face masks – most commonly made using the thermoplastic polypropylene – and 65 billion gloves used globally every month, waste management is becoming a growing challenge for cities dealing with the consequences of the Covid-19 pandemic. The extra plastic waste, with a lifespan of at least 500 years, adds to the glut of the material already clogging rivers, washing up on shorelines and on the seabed – and found in whales’ bellies and the crops of seabirds. Plastics do not fully disappear, but instead disintegrate into invisibly small pieces called microplastics, which are linked to adverse health effects on humans as they move through the food chain. Long before the pandemic struck, conservationists had been warning of the ecological and human health threats posed by the scourge of plastic pollution. Now the problem is getting out of hand as people prioritise their health and safety and fail to understand that single-use products provide no more protection than washable and reusable alternatives. Von Hernandez, a coordinator with the global Break Free From Plastic movement, says coronavirus restriction measures enforced by the Philippine government, for example, have increased packaging waste and significantly damaged both the livelihoods of trash collectors and the viability of local recycling initiatives. Unite to battle plastic waste surge caused by Covid-19 “The practice of sorting and separating [discarded waste] to maximise the recovery of recyclable materials has been discouraged, due to fears that this could spread the transmission of the virus,” the Filipino says. “Cases of infection via surface transmission remain unproven, but the plastics industry has been quick to capitalise on public fears to justify the increasing use of single-use plastics.” More than 115 doctors, academics and health experts from around the world signed a Greenpeace statement in June saying there is no scientific evidence to show that only single-use plastic can protect consumers from Covid-19 transmission. Numerous scientific studies have found reusable and washable coverings and bags are just as effective at providing protection from the virus, and various countries have endorsed their use. The US government distributed washable and reusable face masks to some critical sectors, and its Centres for Disease Control and Prevention agency has issued instructions on how to make cloth varieties. The Australian government has provided mask sewing instructions. In Hong Kong, the government in May began providing free washable face masks to every resident who wanted one. Meanwhile, proposals to phase out single-use plastics have been swept under the rug in the Philippines. Both Parañaque City and Quezon City in Metro Manila banned plastic bags early this year, but have since stepped back from the decision, citing logistical concerns and public safety. “These backsliding decisions speak volumes about the lack of foresight and political resolve on the part of the decision-makers, and their basic inability to anchor their decisions to sound science and evidence,” Hernandez says. He notes that these local government failures stand in contrast to the decision by authorities elsewhere in Southeast Asia, for example in Jakarta, Indonesia, to push through with regulation of plastics amid the pandemic. Compounding the problem are the rock-bottom oil prices, which lead to cheap virgin plastics flooding markets, Hernandez says. This could result in an upsurge in waste that is likely to swamp town centres and overflowing landfills, and end up leaking into waterways and oceans. After China, Indonesia and the Philippines are the world’s biggest contributors to marine plastic pollution . The pandemic has led to rocketing demand for single-use personal protective equipment (PPE), such as masks, gloves, gowns and face shields. Again, the Philippines presents a problem. According to a recent Asian Development Bank report, the capital, Manila, is projected to produce the most Covid-19-related medical waste in Southeast Asia, with an additional 280 metric tonnes of the stuff per day. In an attempt to address this, the Philippines’ Environmental Management Bureau has issued a memo allowing the disposal of Covid-19 waste materials by incineration, bypassing the Clean Air Act and Code of Sanitation, which prohibit burn technologies that emit toxic fumes. Hernandez notes that waste incineration is a false solution being aggressively pushed by proponents in the Philippine Congress, who are packaging it as a “waste to energy” solution. “Burning these materials will transform them into a formidable toxic pollution problem that will expose communities to greater harm, and make them more susceptible and vulnerable to diseases,” Hernandez argues. Jorge Emmanuel, an expert on the safe disposal of hazardous waste and an adjunct professor of environmental science and engineering at Silliman University in the Philippines, agrees that incinerating medical waste is dangerous. The process releases particulate matter, including extremely hazardous PM2.5 particles, into the atmosphere. This exposure has been linked to increased Covid-19 fatality rates in a number of health studies. Incineration also exposes people to polychlorinated dioxins and furans, considered by the World Health Organisation to be the most toxic substances known to science. These chemicals are lethal at very low concentrations and persist in the environment for centuries. “Incineration is not a viable option for the Philippines because of the country’s lack of technical capacity to independently and continuously monitor dioxin emissions from incinerators,” Emmanuel says. He adds that the country also has inadequate environmental regulations, weak or non-existent environmental law enforcement, and a shortage of landfills for hazardous waste. Before the Covid-19 pandemic, medical waste management in health care facilities in the Philippines was regulated according to standards set down in the Department of Health’s Philippine Health Care Waste Manual, which require the separation of infectious waste from other refuse, and the use of environmentally sound infectious waste treatment technologies, such as autoclaves and microwaves, which have high-level disinfection capacities. The practice of sorting and separating [discarded waste] to maximise the recovery of recyclable materials has been discouraged, due to fears that this could spread the transmission of the virus Von Hernandez, global coordinator of Break Free From Plastic Emmanuel, who also served as the United Nations Development Programme’s chief technical adviser on global health care waste projects and played a key role in the response to Ebola virus outbreaks in Africa, says governments should promote safe decontamination systems and procedures to allow PPE to be reused. “In the waste management hierarchy, prevention of waste generation is a priority over treatment and disposal,” he says. “It is important to remember that the virus responsible for Covid-19 belongs to a group of pathogens that are the easiest to destroy. It is effectively destroyed when soaking contaminated material in 1 per cent bleach or 70 per cent ethyl alcohol for five minutes, or soaking or in hot water at 70 degrees Celsius for five minutes. “As we had done during the Ebola crisis, the decontaminated PPE can then be dried under the sun, then stored for reuse. Direct sunlight could reduce the infectivity of the virus at a rate of about 90 per cent every seven to 13 minutes. This simple method uses readily available material and is appropriate for low-income settings in developing countries. It could drastically reduce PPE waste while avoiding environmentally unsound technologies.” The medical waste expert says autoclaves – sterilising machines – operating at or above 121 degrees Celsius would be overkill in the case of the coronavirus. While the virus is putting unprecedented pressure on many aspects of people’s lives, proper waste management should not be overlooked, experts say, and people should rethink their carelessness with single-use plastics. Governments, too, should realign their priorities and assess the efficiency of waste management strategies at the national and local level. If there is a silver lining, Emmanuel believes the pandemic could be an opportunity for developing countries to strengthen their health care and waste systems, invest in environmentally sound treatment systems, and implement policies that regulate and reduce the use of plastics from both a public health and environmental standpoint. To emerge more strongly after the pandemic, he says, looking at the bigger picture is critical. Hernandez says: “While we recognise that there are situations which warrant the use of disposable PPEs, there is also increasing recognition of their long-term impacts. “After the pandemic has passed, the world will still need to confront and resolve the climate and plastic pollution crises. We should be looking at opportunities to avoid repeating the mistakes that have brought us into this crisis in the first place – the destruction of the environment.”