Introduction
Plastic waste is one of the most topical concerns of the modern world. This substance is known for multiple adverse effects caused on climate and environment, such as deterioration of the quality of water and soils, harm caused to animals, and human health. Moreover, the amount of plastic consumed does not reduce, which means the problem remains topical. For the selected community, plastic dumped in landfills interacts with water and forms hazardous chemicals affecting people’s health and the quality of their lives. For this reason, there is a need for change to attain the improvement of the situation and avoid its further deterioration. The use of recycling procedures, combined with waste classification and prohibition of its dumping in landfills, can be an appropriate solution to the problem. It will help to protect the state of natural environments, control long-term effects, and help the community to evolve.
Scope of the Problem
The topicality of the problem of plastic waste is preconditioned by several factors. First of all, since its commercial development in the 1950s, plastic has become one of the integral elements of the modern world (Rudolph 23). It is used for packages, things, toys, bottles, tools, and other things. Ease of production and shaping, low cost, resistance to influence, and convenience made plastic omnipresent (Rudolph 23). It can be viewed as one of the first root causes for the growing topicality of the issue. Furthermore, the consumer society preconditioned the overproduction and overuse of goods containing plastic, which also increased the topicality of the problem. Finally, regardless of the spread of plastic, there are still no effective ways to manage it accepted by communities. For this reason, it is dumped in landfills or just abandoned in nature (Rudolph 99). It results in the accumulation of negative effects and long-term impacts on wildlife.
The recent research shows that the significance of the problem cannot be denied as it promotes several severe effects. First of all, microplastic can enter the human body through ingestion or inhalation, resulting in numerous adverse effects, such as oxidative stress, apoptosis, necrosis, and cancer (“Plastic and Human Health”). Moreover, the health of individuals suffers from the reduced quality of water contaminated by plastic waste stored in landfills (“Plastic and Human Health”). The statistics show that the people living close to such areas face a higher risk of acquiring multiple diseases associated with poor water quality, such as intoxication, compared to individuals living in safer areas (“Plastic and Human Health”). Furthermore, nature and animals also suffer from plastic waste because of its effects. The quality of soils reduces, and plants cannot acquire needed minerals, while animals living in the area suffer from diseases (“Plastic and Human Health”). Finally, a significant part of plastic comes to the ocean, leading to its contamination and deaths of creatures living there. Under these conditions, multiple severe effects show the need for an immediate solution.
From another perspective, plastic waste can be viewed as a substantial financial burden for states. The reports show that about eight million tons of plastic occur in oceans every year, causing catastrophic damage to its ecosystems (Rudolph 56). It costs about $13 billion of economic damage per year, including effects on fish, creatures, and other elements (Rudolph 34). For communities, the unresolved problem of plastic waste means the constantly increasing costs paid for treating the negative effects of water and soil population (“Plastic and Human Health”). Moreover, there is a need for investments to restore lands damaged by plastic pollution and ensure there are no more severe effects that can accumulate. In such a way, it becomes a severe problem for communities and governments.
Finally, the disregard of the given problem can result in the emergence of severer issues in the future. The researchers state that if the speed of plastic production and consumption preservers, the plastic waste will outweigh fish in the world’s oceans by 2050 (Rudolph 45). Numerous adverse effects will also be observed on the land, including the worse health of population groups living close to landfills, their inability to recover, and increased infant mortality rates (“Plastic and Human Health”). For this reason, there is a critical need for the introduction of an appropriate intervention aimed at mitigating the risks and providing communities with the chance for better living.
Proposed Solution
Considering the scope of the problem outlined above, several causes for its emergence, and multiple effects caused by it, the solution should presuppose a systemic and continuous impact. For this reason, it is vital to promote the adoption of the recycling procedures, classification of waste, and prohibition of its dumping in landfills (Feil et al. 175). Today, several methods and innovative technologies help to recycle plastic. One of these presupposes its use for building roads, which can be viewed as an attractive measure helping to resolve the problem. The needed amount of plastic can be collected using waste management and excluding all plastic components from the waste stored in landfills (Feil et al. 175). The contracts with companies responsible for processing this substance can ensure the reduction in pollution rates and protection of nature from the harmful influences of this substance.
The main cause for promoting this solution is the number of advantages associated with it. First of all, using better recycling techniques, it is possible to reduce the negative influence of plastic on the environment (Genc et al. 907). Furthermore, it is possible to use plastic to resolve some topical problems with infrastructure, as communities will also demand good roads (Genc et al. 907). At the same time, the prohibition of storing plastic on landfills will have a positive impact on the quality of soil and water as it will help to minimize the amount of substance contaminating the environment (Rudolph 134). Finally, cooperation with companies responsible for such projects will help to generate additional contracts for local agencies and reduce the financial burden of plastic waste (Rudolph 178). These advantages prove the necessity to adopt this solution and use it in the future.
However, as any measure, the proposed solution has several disadvantages or factors opponents can use to prevent its adoption. The central argument against using recycling is the high cost of such incentives. For instance, the effective programs can cost about $150 per ton, while collection and disposal demand an additional $200 per ton (Feil et al. 178). Considering the constantly growing amount of plastic waste, it can be a serious financial burden for local budgets. Furthermore, there are still doubts whether projects involving using plastic to build roads are practical enough to resolve the problem. Finally, as far as the need for areas to store this type of trash remains, it is impossible to prohibit using landfills for this purpose entirely. Although these disadvantages are relevant and might create some barriers to the implementation of the solution, they are outweighed by the positive effects related to this measure.
Refuting the claims mentioned above, it is possible to focus on costs and long-term effects. The price for recycling can be high; however, considering information about the financial burden of plastic waste mentioned above, it remains appropriate, and it can be accepted to avoid additional spending on treating people who suffer from microplastic or decreased quality of water and soil (Genc et al. 907). Moreover, the adoption of the given solution will help to prevent plastic from moving to the ocean and causing critical environmental damage to it (Ragossnig and Schneider 130). In its turn, this solution will help to reduce spending, and saved funds can be used for other purposes, including the gradual improvement of communities’ lives. In such a way, it remains an advantageous solution that should be adopted to manage the problem of plastic waste.
Conclusion
Altogether, the problem of plastic waste remains critical for numerous communities. Being stored in landfills, it deteriorates the quality of soils, poisons water, and causes severe damage to the environment. For this reason, there is a need for the effective solution to resolve the question and protect people from adverse effects preconditioned by it. The proposed intervention presupposes plastic recycling to build roads, better waste management, and prohibition of using landfills to store this type of waste. It will help to prevent the further deterioration of the situation, protect the environment, the world’s oceans, and ensure that communities will benefit from the high quality of their lives. Moreover, it will create the basis for new improvements and discussion of other environmental concerns.
Works Cited
Feil, Alexander, et al. “Separate Collection of Plastic Waste, Better than Technical Sorting from Municipal Solid Waste?”Waste Management & Research, vol. 35, no. 2, 2017, pp. 172–180.
Genc, Ayten, et al. “Cost Analysis of Plastic Solid Waste Recycling in an Urban District in Turkey.” Waste Management & Research, vol. 37, no. 9, 2019, pp. 906–913.
“Plastic and Human Health: A Lifecycle Approach to Plastic Pollution.” CIEL.
Ragossnig, Arne M., and Daniel R. Schneider. “What Is the Right Level of Recycling of Plastic Waste?” Waste Management & Research, vol. 35, no. 2, 2017, pp. 129–131.
Rudolph, Natalie. Understanding Plastics Recycling: Economic, Ecological, and Technical Aspects of Plastic Waste Handling. Hanser Publications, 2017.