The Philippine Plastics Industry Association (PPIA) opposes two bills passed at the lower house imposing an excise tax on plastic bags and banning single-use plastic (SUP) products.
The group in a statement over the weekend expressed apprehension over the passage in the lower house of House Bill (HB) 9147 or the SUPs Regulation Act and HB 9171 or the Plastic Tax Act, imposing an excise tax of P20 per kilogram on plastic bag products.
PPIA said both were pushed to purportedly curb the plastic waste problem.
PPIA president Danny Ngo said phasing out recyclable plastics such as SUP or substituting them with the current alternatives are not the true solution to the waste problem but could in fact be more damaging to the environment and the economy.
Ngo cited findings of “Life Cycle Impacts of Plastic Packaging Compared to Substitutes in the United States and Canada” which show plastics material such as SUPs have the lowest carbon footprint compared to the more than double carbon footprint of alternatives paper, glass, tin and aluminum.
Ngo said shifting to compostable starch-based plastics as provided for in HB 9147 must first undergo an in-depth analysis to truly determine their environmental impact.
Composting organic material under anaerobic condition has the greater potential to release methane, a heat-trapping gas that is 24 times more potent than carbon dioxide (CO2).
The substitute packaging paper, glass, steel and aluminum, he said, have more than double global warming potential than plastics based on life cycle analysis.
PPIA said plastics are the safest and most hygienic packaging material and preserve food for a much longer shelf life. This helps reduce the 8 to 10 percent global greenhouse gas emissions that come from food loss and food wastage.
Plastics, Ngo said, saves more resources than producing the substitutes that uses five times more water consumption, generates four times more solid wastes, and double the amount of energy consumption than plastics along their respective production processes.
