Plastic Pollution Rules Stall Amid Federal Efforts Boosting Oil

No product is more useful—and troubling—than plastic. From construction, transportation, fashion, food, and medicine, plastic is used in almost every industry and in products from cars and phones to cosmetics and clothing. However, plastic’s popularity comes at a cost, and we are at the early stages of understanding plastic’s effects on Earth’s natural systems, wildlife, and humanity.

Two recent events will shape plastic policy in the months and years ahead: President Donald Trump reshaping the Environmental Protection Agency and the collapse of global plastic treaty talks.

Plastic’s versatility and low production cost have made it the material of choice for most manufacturing processes and plastic production is expected to double by 2040. More than 98% of plastics are produced from fossil fuels, and many oil and gas companies are increasingly shifting production to plastic. Plastic is particularly concerning because it isn’t biodegradable, remaining in the environment for decades. Larger plastic products break down into smaller particles called microplastics, now found in tap and bottled water, soil, clouds, and human bodies. Nanoplastics, the smallest microplastics, are known to pass the blood-brain barrier, potentially increasing neurological diseases.

Growing public awareness of plastic pollution has brought the issue to the attention of legislators, lawyers, and litigants at the local, state, national, and international levels.

Federal Regulatory Landscape

While scientists recognize that harm from plastic can arise throughout its life cycle—from extraction of coal, oil, and gas, through its use and disposal into the environment—regulators and policymakers have traditionally treated plastic as a waste problem. Efforts such as the Save Our Seas Act of 2020 focused on removing plastic from marine environments and improving waste management strategies such as recycling.

The November 2024 National Strategy to Prevent Plastic Pollution shifted away from focusing on waste, and provided a strategy to reduce US pollution throughout the plastics lifecycle. Similarly, global plastic treaty discussions focused on the lifecycle of plastic, with many countries focusing efforts “upstream,” pushing for a cap on production.

Trump’s second term signals a return to federal policy that embraces—and protects—the oil and gas industry and treats plastic pollution as an end-of-life or waste problem caused by other countries. Conversations about reducing or capping plastic production will be replaced with discussions about the controversial process called chemical recycling or advanced recycling.

Unlike conventional mechanical recycling—which cleans, shreds, and melts plastic into pellets to be used in new plastic products—chemical recycling converts plastic into fuel or chemicals that can then be used to create new plastic. Chemical recycling is being promoted by oil and gas companies to increase recycling rates, but the processes are currently regulated as incineration and are subject to stricter regulations under the federal Clean Air Act to protect public health.

EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin announced March 12 that the agency would reconsider regulations that harm the oil and gas industry. Expect a loosening of the rules around chemical recycling to allow for its expansion.

International Agreements

Trump has once again withdrawn the US from international environmental agreements such as the Paris Climate Accord. Although the Global Plastic Treaty talks dissolved before Trump’s inauguration, the failure to finalize an agreement after two years of negotiations leaves the plastic treaty’s future in question.

Two coalitions emerged during treaty talks: The High Ambition Coalition countries supported policies that addressed the entire life cycle of plastic, while oil-producing countries preferred a narrower focus on waste management strategies. Although no treaty was signed, countries agreed to meet again in 2025, and the High Ambition Coalition remains committed to a binding agreement. The US will likely take a back seat to any international agreements concerning plastic pollution.

Industry Efforts

Almost immediately after treaty discussions stalled, industries reliant on plastic began retreating from their earlier sustainability commitments. For example, the day after treaty negotiations concluded, Coca-Cola released a statement shifting its 2025 voluntary recyclability goals to 2035. Other manufacturers and retailers including Mars, Colgate, and Target, said they are likely to fall short of 2025 recyclability goals.

Given the goals of the Trump administration, the collapse of treaty talks, and the slow progress by companies, solutions to plastic pollution will be generated at the local and state levels, both through the legislatures and courts.

This article does not necessarily reflect the opinion of Bloomberg Industry Group, Inc., the publisher of Bloomberg Law and Bloomberg Tax, or its owners.

Author Information

Sarah Morath is a law professor at Wake Forest University and frequently writes on plastic pollution for both the popular press and scholarly journals.

Write for Us: Author Guidelines