Measures to reduce the release of microplastics in the environment
Date: 2023-03-06
Institutions: Directorate-General for Environment, European Commission
Subjects: EU environmental policy



IMMC.Ares%282023%291602395.ENG.xhtml.PART-2023-83696V1.docx








FACTUAL SUMMARY REPORT OF THE PUBLIC CONSULTATION ON THE MICROPLASTICS INITIATIVE


Disclaimer: This document should be regarded solely as a summary of the contributions made by stakeholders on the microplastics initiative. It cannot in any circumstances be regarded as the official position of the Commission or its services. Responses to the consultation activities cannot be considered as a representative sample of the views of the EU population.



1.OBJECTIVES OF THE CONSULTATION


This public consultation aimed to support the European Commission’s initiative on microplastic pollution. This initiative focuses on microplastics that are unintentionally released into the environment, such as resulting from material spills, fragmentation or abrasion. The public consultation is one of several activities, including interviews with selected stakeholders and dedicated workshops. The results of all consultation activities will feed into the impact assessment that will accompany the Commission’s legislative proposal. This document provides a factual summary of the responses to the public consultation. A full analysis of the results will be included in the synopsis report annexed to the Commission’s impact assessment. An overview of all consultation activities on microplastic pollution is available here. 


2.APPROACH TO THE PUBLIC CONSULTATION


The questionnaire was made available in all EU languages and published on the European Commission’s EU Survey website. The consultation period started on 22 February 2022 and ended on 17 May 2022, lasting 12 weeks. To maximise the response rate, the consultation was publicised on DG Environment’s Microplastics page and on social media. 


The questionnaire was split into two sections: one for citizens with a general interest in microplastics and another for experts. The latter was targeted at a broad range of stakeholder groups, including public authorities, individual companies/business organisations, industry and sectorial business associations, environmental and consumer NGOs, academic and research institutions, and any other organisation or individual interested in responding to the questionnaire. The questionnaire focused on the sources with the highest known release potential of microplastics: plastic pellets, synthetic textiles, tyre abrasion, paints, geotextiles and detergent capsules.


3.RESPONSES TO THE PUBLIC CONSULTATION 


3.1.Respondent profile


In total, 411 responses were used for the final analyses. EU citizens represented the highest share in total responses (30%), followed by company/business organisations (20%), business associations (18%), consumer and environmental NGOs (14%) and academic/research institutions (10%). Public authorities represented 4% of the respondents, and non-EU citizens and other respondents 2% each, as shown in 

Figure 


1

.








Figure 1 Distribution of type of respondents


Respondents from business organisations were divided into four groups depending on company size. Micro enterprises (1-9 employees)  were represented by 24%, small enterprises (10-49 employees) 11%, medium enterprises (50-249 employees) 15%, and large-sized companies (employing 250 or more employees) about 50%. A full breakdown of companies by size is presented in 

Figure 


2

.







Figure 2 Size of organisations


Most respondents were from France and Germany, with an equal split of about 28%, followed by Italy and Spain, with 14% and 6%, respectively. Ukrainian and Finnish respondents were the smallest share (2%, 1 response). Most respondents wished to address textiles as a source of microplastic emissions (21%), followed by pellets (19%) and detergent capsules (17%). The distribution according to the countries and sources answered can be seen in 

Figure 


3

.







Figure 3: Composition of responses by country and sources answered




3.2.High-level findings from the responses


This section provides a breakdown of the responses to some of the key questions in the public consultation. A more comprehensive description of the results and their analysis will be included in the synopsis report accompanying the Commission’s impact assessment. Note that a more detailed analysis of responses could reveal differences in views across different stakeholder groups, which may not be reflected in this document.


Overall, 76% of EU citizens agree with the hazardous nature of microplastic emissions, while about 14% somewhat agree. About 91% of NGOs, 66% of research institutions and 56% of business organisations completely recognise the hazards of microplastics. EU citizens (67%) completely agree with the harmful effects of microplastics on humans via ingestion and inhalation, whereas about 18% somewhat agree. About 41% and 20% of business organisations completely and somewhat agree on the same. More details on health concerns are shown in 

Figure 


4

.






Figure 4: Microplastic pollution: health concerns


NGOs (91%), research institutions (67%), public authorities (69%), EU citizens (76%) and non-EU citizens (90%) completely agree with the long-distance transmission of microplastics and its capacity to contain and accumulate hazardous chemicals, while 56% of business organisations and 31% of business associations completely agree to the same. Among EU citizens, 75% and NGOs, 88% completely agree with the persistence of microplastics. About 48% of business organisations and about 24% of business associations agree completely with the same. More details on the accumulations and persistence of microplastics are shown in 

Figure 


5

.






Figure 5: Microplastic pollution: accumulation and persistence


Regarding the harmful economic effects of microplastics, EU citizens overall were spread out across the scale, where about 43% completely agree, 15% somewhat agree, and 29% maintain a neutral stance. Business associations showed a similar pattern, but around 50% of business organisations agreed or somewhat agreed, while 65% of NGOs completely agreed with the statement. 


There is a general agreement among all stakeholders to undertake action at all levels of authority. Most respondents agree with legislation (87% of 389 respondents), and the majority agrees with voluntary measures (71% of 353 respondents) and international action (95% of 388 respondents).


On the questions specific to different sources of microplastics, in spite of the need for some expert knowledge, all respondents were allowed to respond. 


3.2.1.Pellets


EU citizens (81%), business organisations (65%) and NGOs (96%) agree on the lack of risk assessment of pellet handling activities by companies. On the lack of economic incentives, NGOs (55%) remain neutral, while EU citizens (68%) and research institutions (58%) rather agree. EU citizens (68%) and NGOs (65%) completely agree with the improper handling of pellet-related activities, while half of research institutions, 45% of public authorities and 38% of business organisations completely or somewhat agree. NGOs (65%) completely agree, while business organisations (45%), research institutions (58%) and public authorities (45%) completely or somewhat agree on improper transferring protocols. Business organisations (41%)  and public authorities (54%) are in general agreement over improper worker training. There is general agreement among all stakeholders (70% of 150 respondents)  who responded regarding the lack of accounting for pellet discharge.


There is general agreement (71-85%) across respondents that the industry should prioritise preventive measures, and the same applies to public reporting measures. Over half of research institutions (58%) and almost half of EU citizens (49%) completely agree with the creation of a remediation fund by the industry, while business organisations are more spread out across the scale. Most research institutions (92%), EU citizens (77%), and business organisations (66%) welcome independent audit policies. Most stakeholders somewhat agree on the importance of multi-stakeholder governance, while 42% of EU citizens completely agree on the same.


Respondents agree on the need for EU legislation to set up a comprehensive system for pellet-handling companies, except business associations that somewhat agree or remain neutral on this measure. There is high support among all respondents for international measures, with about 75-100% of all responses in complete agreement. The same applies to extended producer responsibility.


3.2.2.Tyres


All respondents agree or somewhat agree to have tyres designed to reduce abrasion. Business organisations (72%), NGOs (95%) and EU citizens (70%) completely agree on legal limits on tyre abrasion. There is support among most stakeholders for the labelling of tyres in terms of abrasion; only business associations are neutral. Most business organisations and research institutions completely or somewhat agree (90-95%) with road requirements for abrasion, while public authorities somewhat agree, and NGOs mostly remain neutral. There is general agreement on the capture and treatment of road run-off water where business organisations (50%) and research institutions (54%) completely agree, whereas business associations (79%)  and public authorities (78%) completely or somewhat agree. A similar picture appears for improvements in road cleaning in high-emission spots. About 39% of business organisations and one-third of EU citizens completely agree, while 55% of NGOs somewhat agree with implementing AI and advanced assisted driving technologies. Business organisations (61%), business associations (53%), NGOs (92%), all public authorities and EU citizens (80%) agree with higher fees in extended producer responsibility for less-performing tyres.


3.2.3.Synthetic textiles


Business organisations (50%), NGOs (67%), research institutions (50%), public authorities (40%) and EU citizens (41%) believe that emissions from the manufacturing of synthetic fibres, thread, yarn, and other raw materials from garment production are very significant, while only 22% of business associations agree on the same. Emissions from pre-wash cycles after production are also significant for the stakeholders where business organisations (63%), business associations (50%), NGOs (75%), public authorities (70%), EU citizens (76%) and research institutions (59%) find it very significant. On the consumer end, garment wear contributes significantly to emissions for most business organisations (65%), NGOs (79%) and EU citizens (54%), while business associations (39%) find it very little significant and public authorities (40%) somewhat significant. The majority of all stakeholders who responded (75% of 240 respondents) attribute use-phase washing cycles as somewhat or very significant contributor to microplastic emissions, while use-phase drying cycles as a source is more distributed in the scale of significance. A garment’s end of life holds high significance for the stakeholders as 65% find it somewhat or very significant.


Regarding measures for textiles, all stakeholders, in general, completely agree on product design requirements and specific waste-water treatment in production plants. Business associations and public authorities somewhat agree with a restriction of all synthetic fibres for certain applications and those with high microplastic content, while 84% and 97% of EU citizens and 72% and 91% of NGOs completely or somewhat agree on the same. There is a majority agreement among stakeholders on emissions limits during production and emissions limits on textiles placed on the EU market. About half of business associations and business organisations agree on mandatory pre-washing before market placement, while 72% of NGOs, 46% of research institutions and 56% of EU citizens completely agree. Most stakeholders completely agree on consumer awareness, washing machine filters, and laundry emission limits. There is a general agreement  (76%-100%) among all stakeholders who responded to all measures listed in the questionnaire.




3.2.4.Paints


Initial spray painting and end-of-life hold high significance for the respondents across stakeholder groups, except for 50% of research institutions who believe it is insignificant. Wear and tear from infrastructure, roads, boats, and buildings hold significance among NGOs (81-100%) and research institutions (58-100%), whereas 57% of public authorities believe that roads and boats are significant for wear and tear. Emission from cars was considered somewhat or very significant only by NGOs (81%) and research institutions (57%). For maintenance emissions from ships and boats, research institutions (100%), public authorities (75%), and EU citizens believe that they are highly significant. Most stakeholders remain neutral on the emissions from car maintenance, while NGOs (75%) and research institutions (71%) agree on the significance of maintenance emissions from infrastructure.


There is a general agreement on the following measures: promotion of alternative solutions without paint (64% of all respondents); inclusion of microplastic aspects in EU ecolabel and green public procurement (71% of all respondents); regulated dust protection and capture for key industries (78% of all respondents); and regulation of plastic content share in paints (69% of all respondents). All business associations maintain a neutral stance for increasing the share of biodegradable plastics in paints; increasing application yield; improving the lifetime of paints; dust cover improvements; and gypsum waste management in construction and demolition waste. EU citizens, NGOs and business organisations are broadly in agreement over all measures listed in the question.


3.2.5.Geotextiles


Most stakeholders completely agree on measures to regulate the type of fibre or polymer used (77% of all respondents)  and promote alternatives and eco-friendly materials (74% of all respondents). Business associations and public authorities somewhat agree to regulate the range of applications, while half of the research institutions somewhat disagree. Research institutions are also split between taking a neutral stance or completely agreeing on regulating emission limits. 


Regarding geotextiles used for protecting coasts from erosion, all research institutions maintain a neutral stance regarding the types of geotextiles used for such applications. Business organisations, on the other hand, are in complete agreement with the effectiveness of geotextiles of all types. About 50% of business organisations agree, while NGOs remain highly in favour (67%) of geotextiles made with natural fibres to protect the coast from erosion. About 60% of NGOs disagreed with non-woven geotextiles, and the same percentage of respondents preferred woven geotextiles.


For geotextiles used in road construction, all research institutions remain neutral – whether woven, non-woven or made with natural fibres. EU citizens largely prefer geotextiles made with natural fibres as material to build roads, and they also prefer woven geotextiles over non-woven ones by a 40% share.


All researchers are neutral about the non-existence of alternatives to geotextiles for drainage, whereas 73% of NGOs completely disagree with the statement.


3.2.6.Detergent Capsules


While responses recognise the extensive use of PVA in capsule shells, one response highlights recent advances in using casein, a milk protein, as a polymeric film which is water-soluble and biodegradable.


Most stakeholders (73%-100%) completely agree with the measures listed in the question, except business associations that remain rather neutral. A quarter of EU citizens somewhat agree with the restriction of non-biodegradable water-soluble capsule shells, and the same share somewhat disagrees with extended producer responsibility. 


3.2.7.All sources


Addressing all sources, apart from business associations who somewhat agree, most other stakeholders who responded (68-100%)  completely or somewhat agree with a common system to monitor and report microplastic release throughout the lifecycle of the source. The same applies to specific waste water treatment in urban waste water treatment plants. There is general support (86% of all respondents) for international agreements across all stakeholders. The majority of all stakeholders (57-100%) agree to specific waste water treatment in recycling plants.