# data[].attributes.body
Black is basic info about Climate action and further instructions/info about this padlet

Red is things to prevent climate change

Orange is littering

Green is recycling

Blue is pollution

Purple is the U.S and other countries relation

# data[].attributes.body
the effectiveness of different mitigation strategies like carbon pricing or renewable energy adoption, the impact of climate policies on vulnerable populations, the role of community-based adaptation initiatives, the economic feasibility of green technologies, behavioral change interventions to promote sustainable practices, the influence of climate activism on policy change, the integration of climate considerations into urban planning, and the potential for carbon capture and storage technologies

# data[].attributes.body
A keyword that captures the core of Climate action/change

An issue or problem

A region of the world

An approach to solving the problem

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Goal 13 | Department of Economic and Social Affairs

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts

# data[].attributes.body
SDG 13, Climate Action, aims to address climate change and its impacts by enhancing resilience to climate-related hazards, integrating climate measures into national policies, raising awareness, and supporting green energy in developing countries. Key concerns include the fact that vulnerable regions experience significantly higher mortality rates from disasters, climate-related events have claimed 1.3 million lives, and global temperatures are projected to exceed 1.5°C by 2035, potentially triggering irreversible effects by 2100.

# data[].attributes.body
Climate change refers to long-term shifts in temperatures and weather patterns. Such shifts can be natural, due to changes in the sun’s activity or large volcanic eruptions. But since the 1800s, human activities have been the main driver of climate change, primarily due to the burning of fossil fuels like coal, oil and gas.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
ERROR: The request could not be satisfied

# data[].attributes.headline
Climate change: Science Daily; Which US counties are most vulnerable in the energy transition?

# data[].attributes.subject
Climate change: Science Daily; Which US counties are most vulnerable in the energy transition?

# data[].attributes.body
In "Which US counties are most vulnerable in the energy transition?" by Deborah Halber, the article explores the economic and social challenges faced by counties dependent on fossil fuel industries as the U.S. shifts toward cleaner energy. It highlights that regions reliant on coal, oil, and gas jobs may experience significant disruptions, leading to job losses, economic decline, and social unrest. The article also discusses the need for targeted policies and investments to support these communities through the transition, helping them diversify their economies and create new employment opportunities in renewable energy sectors.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
As the world moves away from fossil fuels, there is growing recognition of the need to support workers in carbon-intensive industries - and for policy to bolster a just transition.

The 2022 U.S. Inflation Reduction Act targets aid to Americans whose jobs are at risk when fossil fuel-based industries are phased out, but a new study shows that the act may not do enough for the most vulnerable.

According to research co-authored by Christopher Knittel, a professor of applied economics at MIT Sloan, because of the way the act is structured, it misses nearly half of America's most carbon-intensive communities while encompassing areas that aren't particularly vulnerable to the shift away from fossil fuels.

"This is potentially a billion-dollar oversight, with the IRA at risk of funneling clean investment away from the regions that desperately need to move away from fossil fuels," write Knittel and co-author Kailin Graham, a graduate researcher at the MIT Center for Energy and Environmental Policy Research, in a paper published last week.
Explore an interactive map of U.S. employment impacts by county
In addition to the most widely known fossil fuel-producing counties in West Texas, Appalachia, Wyoming, Montana, Oklahoma, the Gulf Coast, and elsewhere, counties in Nevada and the Great Plains that are reliant on heavy manufacturing stand to be impacted by the transition to clean energy. For example, recent decades have seen a rise of the heavy equipment, machinery, and industrial metal manufacturing sectors in the Great Plains.

"While these industries have not been the focus of existing efforts to quantitatively assess employment vulnerability ... we find many of them to be as carbon intensive as neighboring fossil fuel extraction communities, if not more so," the authors write. "There are communities that are highly reliant on fossil fuels where unemployment impacts may not yet have been felt."

In discussing the research, Knittel said he doesn't want to come down too hard on the Inflation Reduction Act, hailed as the single largest investment in climate and energy in American history. He would, however, like to see future climate change relief include areas at risk of high unemployment, not just ones that have already experienced it. "There's a need to be more proactive in attracting investment before bad things happen," he said.

A broader assessment of carbon-dependent counties

The act allocates extra subsidies and tax incentives to so-called energy communities across the U.S.

By definition, an energy community either has a coal plant that recently shut down or a significant share of its workforce employed in oil, natural gas, or coal, with an unemployment rate higher than the national average (which was 5.4% in 2021). Employment in currently operating coal-fired power plants is not counted toward the government's criteria - meaning communities with such plants qualify only after jobs have been lost.

In their analysis, Graham and Knittel identified many carbon-dependent counties, such as manufacturing and steelmaking communities in the Midwest, that don't qualify as energy communities under either of the two definitions. "They don't have coal plants, and they're not taking fossil fuels out of the ground, but they're still dependent on those fossil fuels further down the supply chain," Graham said.

Decarbonizing is projected to raise the price of energy for steel plants, for instance, as they shift from natural gas to more expensive hydrogen. "Those communities are at risk of having disruptions, even though they don't fit under the IRA definition of an energy community," Knittel said. Such disruptions can affect local tax revenues and cause spillover effects in adjacent industries.

What's more, "previous studies have shown that transition efforts need to begin before closures have impacted a region, not just afterward," Knittel said. "That's the problem with requiring an unemployment rate higher than 5.4%."

A better tool for identifying vulnerable regions

To better assess which communities will be hardest hit by the transition to clean energy, Graham and Knittel created a new metric of employment vulnerability called an "employment carbon footprint."

Using publicly available data, they measured the carbon intensity of U.S. jobs across the entire country within eight major sectors: agriculture, manufacturing, commercial, construction, coal mining, oil and gas extraction, other mining, and fossil fuel-based power generation. These sectors account for 86% of total U.S. employment and 94% of U.S. carbon emissions outside of transportation.
Explore the interactive map
While the Inflation Reduction Act targets areas that have relied largely on fossil fuel industries for employment and tax revenues for the past 15 years, Graham and Knittel considered how those industries' reach has extended to virtually every aspect of a community.

"We use economics to divide up the carbon content along the value chain," Graham said, noting that it's a complex process that takes into account the effects of both fossil fuel consumption and fossil fuel production.

A shopping mall buys electricity, so there's carbon in those jobs too.
Christopher Knittel Professor of Applied Economics, MIT Sloan
Think about a county populated with oil rigs: There's the carbon cost of drilling, plus the cost of transporting the oil to a refinery in another county. Then the gasoline is transported to yet more locations, where it's sold to consumers. Even retailers in commercial spaces aren't immune. "A shopping mall buys electricity, so there's carbon in those jobs too," Knittel said.

Using their findings, the researchers developed a map of the U.S. that uses shades of orange and blue to indicate where employment carbon footprints are above or below, respectively, the national average. Regions of North Dakota, Texas, and Wyoming, for instance, are shaded a deep brown because they are the most likely to experience economic shocks in a post-fossil fuel future. Areas shaded blue are much less vulnerable.

Graham developed a web-based tool, called Employment Vulnerability to the Energy Transition, that enables users to overlay other information on the map, such as population, median income, poverty, unemployment rates, and education levels. This allows government officials and local and state advocates to understand how community reliance on fossil fuels might overlap with other socioeconomic and demographic factors so they can target transition policy and allocate funds to the most vulnerable populations, the authors write.

Policy adjustments

How might future climate change legislation address employment vulnerability? One option is to drop the unemployment requirement altogether or have two classes of energy communities: those that have already met the disruption challenges and those that are likely to. Another option is to offer extra subsidies in areas where unemployment is rising.

The Inflation Reduction Act's approach is "pretty draconian in the sense that you either qualify or you don't qualify," Knittel said. "It doesn't have to be so binary."
Explore the interactive map

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Which US counties are most vulnerable in the energy transition? | MIT Sloan

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
As the world moves away from fossil fuels, there is growing recognition of the need to support workers in carbon-intensive industries - and for policy to bolster a just transition. The 2022 U.S.

# data[].attributes.body
I think I want to research Recycling which must be addressed to reach SDG #13. I will focus on Houston and littering and recycling rates. I want to research this because littering is one of the top reasons for pollution

# data[].attributes.body
Energy Efficiency: Use less energy by reducing heating/cooling, switching to LED bulbs, using energy-efficient appliances, washing with cold water, and improving home insulation. Replacing oil/gas furnaces with electric heat pumps can cut 900 kg of CO2e annually.

Switch to Renewable Energy: Check your energy source (oil, coal, gas) and switch to renewable options like wind or solar. Installing solar panels can reduce CO2e by 1.5 tons per year.

Sustainable Travel: Walk, bike, use public transport, and carpool to cut emissions. Going car-free can reduce CO2e by 2 tons annually.

Electric Vehicles: Consider electric cars, which produce fewer emissions than gas-powered vehicles, reducing CO2e by 2 tons per year. Hybrid cars can save 700 kg of CO2e.

Reduce Air Travel: Cutting down on flights helps reduce emissions, with one fewer long-haul flight saving up to 2 tons of CO2e per year.

Reduce, Reuse, Recycle: Minimize consumption, buy second-hand, and repair items. Plastics cause significant emissions, and less than 10% is recycled.

Plant-Based Diet: Eat more vegetables and less meat. A vegetarian diet can save up to 500 kg CO2e annually, and a vegan diet can save up to 900 kg.

Reduce Food Waste: Reduce food waste to prevent methane emissions and conserve resources. Compost leftovers to save up to 300 kg CO2e annually.

Plant Native Species: Replace non-native plants with native species to support local biodiversity. Avoid chemicals like insecticides.

Environmental Clean-Up: Properly dispose of waste and join local clean-up efforts to protect the environment from contamination.

Eco-Friendly Spending: Support companies that prioritize sustainability and invest in eco-friendly businesses to reduce your carbon footprint.

Advocacy: Encourage others to take action on climate change. Speak to communities, businesses, and leaders to push for bold environmental policies.

# data[].attributes.headline
A list of links to Pollution Prevention Tips at Home

# data[].attributes.subject
A list of links to Pollution Prevention Tips at Home

# data[].attributes.body
This website consist a list of websites that tell you how to help with pollution at home, with your family and community, your yard and garden, and your car.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The resources described below can help you prevent pollution in your home, car or garden. When you have reviewed these tips, be sure to check out EPA's Green Living Website with additional information on home and garden resources!

At Home

How can I find safer products for my family and my community?

EPA Greener Products Web Site is designed to help you navigate the complex world of greener products. It allows you to search for EPA programs related to greener products and links to additional greener products information from other sources.

How "Green" Is It? Keep an eye out for products that are designed with the environment in mind!

EPA's Safer Choice has recognized 2,500 products that are safer for people and the planet.
See how EPA is showcasing how LCD suppliers are reducing potent fluorinated GHG (F-GHG) emissions. Do's and Don't of Pest Control
How can I make my home more energy efficient and support cleaner electricity?

ENERGY STAR features energy efficient choices that can save families about a third on their home energy bills without sacrificing style or comfort.
Calculate your household greenhouse gas emissions
Green Power Locator can be used to find green power options in your area! You can choose how your electricity is generated by using EPA's Power Profiler. Green power technologies capture renewable energy to create electricity.

How can I reduce the amount of garbage I generate?

Americans generate 1.6 million tons of household hazardous waste per year. Reducing consumption, reusing items, and recycling products and materials help to protect the environment. EPA offers you information on how to prevent waste, reduce consumption, and reuse dozens of items.
Think Green Before You Shop. When you're out shopping carefully choose what you buy and how much of it you purchase.
Consumer's Handbook for Reducing Solid Waste
Learn about practical steps you can take to reduce the amount and toxicity of your garbage.

Recycle City Web Site helps you learn about and explore how residents in this make-believe city are protecting their environment.

(32 pp, 6.9 M, Reutilización + reciclaje + reduccion de desechos (PDF) About PDF)

How do I reduce household hazardous wastes?

The Household Hazardous Waste website has a lot of information on how you can reduce the amount of household hazardous waste you generate and ensure that those wastes are safely stored and handled.

What more can I do to make my home more sustainable?

Greener Living Tips for engaging in green practices around the home.

Conserving Water A family of four uses 400 gallons of water every day. Learn how EPA's WaterSense program helps conserve water for future generations.

Your Yard and Garden

How can I save water and reduce polluted run-off from my yard?

Water-smart Landscape Design Tips helps to reduce water usage by planting drought-tolerant plants and grasses for landscaping and reduce grass-covered areas.

USDA Local Cooperative Extension System Offices will help you find out what nutrients your lawn needs, test the soil through your local USDA Cooperative Extension System Office or home kit. Only Use What's Needed! If you use fertilizer, use a slow-release type no more than twice per year.

Pesticides: Controlling Pests - Lawn and Garden: Read the Label on any and all pesticides you use to be sure you use them properly.

Integrated Pest Management (IPM) is an effective and environmentally sensitive approach to pest management.

(20 pp, 1.63 M, Water-Efficient Landscaping: Preventing Pollution & Using Resources Wisely (PDF) About PDF) . Conserve water by mulching and by using a soaker hose or drip system. Install a drip-irrigation water system for valuable plants.
Jardinería ecológica
Your Car

How can I prevent pollution by maintaining my car?

Saving money at the pump. Regardless of the make or model, your car's estimated gas mileage depends on how you fuel, drive and maintain your car.

Fuel Economy.gov has more tips on how to save money on fuel costs.

EPA's Green Vehicle Web site and SmartWay Certified Vehicle Guide will show you if you have cleaner, more fuel-efficient choices in any vehicle size you need, even SUVs, trucks, and other heavy-duty vehicles.

Your on-board diagnostics (OBD) computer system is an advanced computer system responsible for monitoring your vehicle's engine, transmission, and emissions control components. This OBD system can save you time and money by identifying minor problems before they become major repair bills, if you drive a 1996 or newer car or light truck.

(8 pp, 217KB, Collecting Used Oil for Recycling/Reuse: Tips for Consumers Who Change Their Own Motor Oil and Oil Filters (PDF)About PDF). If you change your own motor oil, recycle it at a "quick lube" shop, gas station, or auto store that accepts used motor oil for recycling.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Pollution Prevention Tips at Home | US EPA

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The resources described below can help you prevent pollution in your home, car or garden. When you have reviewed these tips, be sure to check out EPA's Green Living Website with additional information on home and garden resources! EPA Greener Products Web Site is designed to help you navigate the complex world of greener products.

# data[].attributes.body
Individual behavior—or choosing to litter—means litter on the ground. Nearly one in five, or 17% of all disposals observed in public spaces were littering, while 83% disposed of litter properly.

# data[].attributes.body
In 2021, Keep America Beautiful released the 2020 National Litter Study, the largest of its kind, building on research dating back to 1969. Key findings include:

Nearly 50 billion pieces of litter along U.S. roadways and waterways, with more litter along waterways (25.9B) than roadways (23.7B).

Each U.S. resident is responsible for 152 littered items.

Over 2,000 pieces of litter per mile on both roadways and waterways.

90% of people believe litter is a problem in their state.

There are 6 billion litter items larger than four inches.

Cigarette butts remain the most littered item, though their presence has decreased by 70%.

Over 207 million personal protective equipment (PPE) items were littered.

The study, conducted with input from academics, social scientists, and researchers, uses a multi-method approach, examining observed litter, littering behavior, public attitudes, and the cost of litter.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Nearly 50 billion pieces of litter along U.S. roadways and waterways

Slightly more litter along waterways (25.9B) than roadways (23.7B)

152 items for each U.S. resident

More than 2,000 pieces of litter per mile (both roadway and waterway)

90% of people surveyed believe litter is a problem in their state

6 billion pieces more than four inches in size

Most littered item remains cigarette butts, but this litter
is down almost 70%

207.1Million PPE items littered

The Study uses world-class methodology and is led by academics, professional social scientists, and leading researchers with the support of corporate America, foundations, and individuals. It follows a multi-method approach looking at both quantitative and qualitative data composed of four components: Observed Litter, Littering Behavior, Attitudes About Litter, and the Cost of Litter.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Nearly 50 billion pieces of litter along U.S. roadways and waterways Slightly more litter along waterways (25.9B) than roadways (23.7B) 152 items for each U.S.

# data[].attributes.body
The recycling rate has increased from less than seven percent in 1960 to the current rate of 32 percent. Help us reach our current National Recycling Goal to increase the U.S. recycling rate to 50 percent by 2030.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
On America Recycles Day (November 15), EPA recognizes the importance and impact of recycling, which has contributed to American prosperity and the protection of our environment. The recycling rate has increased from less than seven percent in 1960 to the current rate of 32 percent. Help us reach our current National Recycling Goal to increase the U.S. recycling rate to 50 percent by 2030.

The recycling efforts of communities and business throughout the United States help with this success and growth. To build on our progress, EPA encourages every American to contribute by recycling right, not only on America Recycles Day, but all year long. This means checking with your local recycling provider to know what they will accept in your recycling bin. Items like cardboard, metal cans, and paper are commonly accepted by local curbside programs, and items like plastic bags, electronics and batteries do NOT go in the curbside recycling bin. Visit our How Do I Recycle?: Common Recyclables to learn how and where to recycle these and other items.
On this page:
Benefits of Recycling

Reduces the amount of waste sent to landfills and incinerators

Conserves natural resources such as timber, water, and minerals

Increases economic security by tapping a domestic source of materials

Prevents pollution by reducing the need to mine raw materials

Saves energy

Supports American manufacturing and conserves valuable resources

Creates new jobs in the recycling and manufacturing industries in the United States

What You Can Do To Reduce Waste

Find out what you can do to make a difference in our environment every day. Whether you're at home, on the go, in the office or at school, there are many opportunities to go green by reducing, reusing, and recycling. Visit the links below:

Also, check out our Think Green Before You Shop poster for questions you can ask yourself before shopping to reduce, reuse, and recycle more.

Recycling Saves Resources and Creates Jobs

In 2016, EPA published significant findings on the economic benefits of the recycling industry with an update to the national Recycling Economic Information REI study. This study analyzes the numbers of jobs, wages, and tax revenues attributed to recycling. The study found that in a single year, recycling and reuse activities in the United States accounted for:

681,000 jobs,

$37.8 billion in wages, and

$5.5 billion in tax revenues.

This equates to 1.17 jobs for every 1,000 tons of materials recycled.

The ferrous metals industry provides the largest contribution to all three categories (job, wage, and tax revenue), followed by construction and demolition, and non-ferrous metals such as aluminum.

Recycle More, Recycle Right

How often do you ask yourself what's right to put in your recycling bin? Next time you go to throw something away, get creative and think of ways to reduce waste in the first place! There are many ways to improve the recycling rate. Check out our What You Can Do to Improve the Recycling Rate fact sheet for ideas on how you can improve your recycling. Additionally, check out our poster to the right and our How Do I Recycle?: Common Recyclables webpage to learn how to recycle more and recycle right.

Check out our Frequent Questions on Recycling page for more information on ways you can contribute.

Save Energy By Recycling

Recycling everyday objects, such as paper, bottles and magazines, saves energy. The materials that you recycle are used to create the products you buy. This means less virgin material needs to be mined or harvested, processed, manufactured, and transported - all of which consumes energy. The iWARM tool is based on EPA's Waste Reduction Model (WARM) for solid waste planners and organizations. iWARM can be used to calculate how much energy organizations can save and how much greenhouse gases they can avoid by recycling versus landfilling their waste.

Resources for Educators

Educators: Our Reduce, Reuse, Recycle Resources for Students and Educators webpage has resources and activities for America Recycles Day.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
EPA celebrates America Recycles Day on November 15th each year.

# data[].attributes.body
How much plastic is actually being recycled? In the United States, only about 5% to 6% of plastics are being recycled each year—a paltry rate.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Skip to Content

Plastic is cheap to make and shockingly profitable. It's everywhere. And we're all paying the price.

On a Saturday last summer, I kayaked up a Connecticut river from the coast, buoyed by the rising tide, to pick up trash with a group of locals. Blue herons and white egrets hunted in the shallows. Ospreys soared overhead hauling freshly caught fish. The wind combed the water into fields of ripples, refracting the afternoon sun into a million diamonds. From our distance, the wetlands looked wild and pristine.

Further inland, we left the main river channel and paddled into the muddy heart of the marsh-and began to notice all manner of plastic waste. Big things appeared first: empty bags of chips tangled in the reeds, grocery bags just beneath the surface, Styrofoam trays covered in mud, plastic bottles mixed in with other debris.

As we traveled through the marsh, we kept seeing more, and increasingly tiny, bits of plastic. Not just straws, lighters, combs, and fishing line, but unidentifiable and seemingly never-ending small pieces, ranging in size from as big as my hand to as small as grains of sand. You could stay in the hinterlands plucking trash and never leave. Even in one of the less-polluted parts of the East Coast, outside a city with organized waste management and a recycling system, the land and water are awash in plastic waste.

Plastic, and the profusion of waste it creates, can hide in plain sight, a ubiquitous part of our lives we rarely question. But a closer examination of the situation can be shocking.

Indeed, the scale of the problem is hard to internalize. To date, humans have created around 11 billion metric tons of plastic. This amount surpasses the biomass of all animals, both terrestrial and marine, according to a 2020 study published in Nature.

Currently, about 430 million tons of plastic is produced yearly, according to the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)-significantly more than the weight of all human beings combined. One-third of this total takes the form of single-use plastics, which humans interact with for seconds or minutes before discarding.

A total of 95% of the plastic used in packaging is disposed of after one use, a loss to the economy of up to $120 billion annually, concludes a report by McKinsey. (Just over a quarter of all plastics are used for packaging.) One-third of this packaging is not collected, becoming pollution that generates "significant economic costs by reducing the productivity of vital natural systems such as the ocean." This causes at least $40 billion in damages, the report states, which exceeds the "profit pool" of the packaging industry.

These numbers are understandably hard to make concrete sense of, even at the scale of specific companies, such as Coca-Cola, which produced 3 million tons of plastic packaging in 2017. That's the equivalent of making 200,000 bottles per minute.

Notably, what doesn't get reused or recycled does not chemically degrade but rather becomes a fixture of our world; it breaks apart to form microplastics, pieces smaller than five millimeters in diameter. In the past few years, scientists have found significant quantities of microplastics in the further reaches of the ocean; in snow and rainfall in seemingly pristine places worldwide; in the air we breathe; and in human blood, colons, lungs, veins, breast milk, placentas, and fetuses.

One paper estimated that the average person consumes five grams of plastic every week-mostly from water. About 95% of the tap water in the United States is contaminated. Microplastics are also widely found in beer, salt, shellfish, and other human foods. Significant quantities of these plastic bits have turned up in common fruits and vegetables, as one recent study in Italy found.

All this meant that our journey in the kayaks, picking up plastic waste along the way, looking after our local environment, was-while a genuinely helpful service to our fellow humans-only fixing a symptom of a larger problem.

The solution to that problem lies further upstream: to address plastic pollution, those who produce plastics need to pay for the damage it causes, and the world will also have to make less of it. We'll have to develop better, more recyclable products. We'll also have to find sustainable alternatives and increase what ecologists call circularity-keeping those products in use as long as possible and finding ways to reuse their materials after that.

While these are not exactly new ideas, they've received renewed attention from global policymakers, innovators, and companies looking to make a sustainable future profitable.

About 430 million tons of plastic is produced yearly.

Making less is the most important goal-and the most politically charged one, given the immense profits and political power of plastic producers. "What's the best way to manage waste?" says Jenna Jambeck, an environmental engineer at the University of Georgia. "To not produce it in the first place."

Because consider this: most of the plastic we make, 72%, ends up in landfills or the environment, according to a 2022 report from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Only 9% of the plastic ever produced has been recycled, and 19% has been incinerated. Some of it reaches the sea; estimates suggest that between 8 million and 11 million tons of plastic waste enter the ocean each year. According to the National Academy of Sciences, that's the equivalent of dumping a garbage truck of plastic into the ocean every minute.

"A scourge on a planetary scale"

Plastic production has grown dramatically in recent years; in fact, half of all plastics in existence have been produced in just the last two decades. Production is projected to continue growing, at about 5% annually. If current trends continue, humans will have produced 34 billion tons of plastics by 2050-three times the current total.

Plastic pollution-"a scourge on a planetary scale," as French president Emmanuel Macron has put it-most affects those least able to deal with its consequences. Noting that the plastic industry generates upward of $700 billion a year in revenues, the UN Environment Programme also concluded that the industry "inflicts a heavy burden on human health and environmental degradation, with the poorest in society facing the highest impacts whilst contributing the least to plastic over-consumption and waste."

And 1/3 of that total takes the form of single-use plastics.

This is true at every stage of plastic's life cycle. Manufacturing plants are concentrated in communities of color-such as in Louisiana, in an area along the Mississippi River often called "Cancer Alley," which is home to nearly 150 oil refineries, plastics plants, and chemical facilities. Such plants emit air pollution that raises risks of cancer and other diseases. A panel of UN human rights experts said the situation amounts to a "form of environmental racism [that] poses serious and disproportionate threats to the ... human rights of its largely African American residents."

This pollution also disproportionately harms poor and developing countries that produce little or no plastic, such as those in Africa, the Pacific, and elsewhere.

"We have to dramatically reduce the amount of plastic that we make. Everything else is second order." Neil Tangri, researcher, University of California, Berkeley

Solutions such as recycling and reuse cannot deal with this much waste, says Marcus Eriksen, a marine scientist and cofounder of the 5 Gyres Institute, which studies plastic pollution. "There have to be drastic cuts in production," he says, especially of single-use plastics.

Dozens of studies and institutional reports-from the likes of the United Nations, the National Academy of Sciences, and the Pew Charitable Trusts-conclude that continued increases in production of virgin plastics will overwhelm actions to combat the problem.

A total of 26% of all plastics are used for packaging.

Alarmed by such data, and animated by growing public awareness of the issue, the United Nations Environment Assembly resolved at a March 2022 meeting to begin working toward a global treaty to end plastic pollution, forming an intergovernmental negotiating committee to accomplish this goal. This group has gathered twice and will meet another three times before the treaty is finalized in late 2024. All parties agree that it will be binding and will put forth a range of mandatory and voluntary approaches. Some have likened its importance to that of the Paris accords on climate change.

Few details have yet been ironed out, but the majority of countries agree that a primary way to prevent plastic from polluting the environment is to make less of it.

Neil Tangri, a researcher at the University of California, Berkeley, and a member of an informal advisory group called the Scientists' Coalition for an Effective Plastics Treaty, strongly agrees: "We have to dramatically reduce the amount of plastic that we make. Everything else is second order."

At the second round of talks in Paris this summer, international leaders made this desire clear. Humanity has a duty to begin "[reducing] the production of new plastics," said Macron, "and to ban as soon as possible the most polluting products." Representatives from many other countries, from Ghana to Mauritius to Norway, argued the same.

Yet the countries that have not yet embraced limits on production include the biggest producers, such as China and the United States, though they are participating in the process.

And 95% of that total is disposed of after one use.

Limits or levies on production are not currently being considered as a solution, according to a member of the US State Department (which coordinates the country's delegation at the UN meetings), who was not authorized to speak publicly on the matter.

"We really need to find a way to bring everybody on board," this person said, and such "supply side" changes might be unpalatable to certain countries. "We want the strongest and most ambitious obligations that we can get consensus around."

The American Chemistry Council, the trade group that represents plastic producers, has also not embraced such policies. Limits or levies could "affect all sectors of the economy" and "create a lot of unintended consequences for those least able to afford it," says Stewart Harris, the group's senior director of global plastics policy.

Inspiration from nature

How can we make less plastic, and deal with the pollution that already exists? Circularity may be the most promising answer. Circularity can mean reusing or recycling plastics, or employing alternatives that can be reused or recycled as well. Proponents often describe the concept as an attempt to imitate the natural world, where there is no waste; everything has a use.

Ghana and several other countries worldwide are currently working to establish a country-level circular economy for plastic, says Oliver Boachie, who chairs the African Group of Negotiators for the UN treaty-making process and is an advisor to the Ghanaian government. This will involve gradually banning single-use plastics that have little reuse value, such as thin plastic films used in food packaging, as well as instituting robust collection, reuse, and recycling efforts.

Many existing waste management techniques have already been shown to reduce plastic pollution and demand for plastic in the first place. But they are energy and time intensive.

In Tanzania, for instance, a group called Nipe Fagio ("give me the broom" in Swahili) runs waste management and recycling systems that have reduced landfill waste by 75% to 80% in neighborhoods in several cities. Waste collectors visit households once a week to gather four different varieties of trash before transporting it to a collection center. There, workers further sort the recyclable materials for sale, turn organic waste into compost and chicken feed, and send the rest to the landfill.

"The amount of plastic on our planet-it's like one big oil spill." Katrina Knauer, polymer scientist, National Renewable Energy Laboratory

To help fund programs like Nipe Fagio, and to help them grow on a much larger scale, many countries are looking to extended producer responsibility (EPR) plans, policies requiring producers of plastic bottles, packaging, and the like to provide some funding to support management of these materials after their initial use. Just about every country in Europe has an EPR scheme, and Ghana too is working to create a national program.

Currently, however, EPR schemes are limited in their impact, since those that have done the most to embrace and pay for them are bottlers and manufacturers of products like beverages, known as "midstream" producers.

To make a bigger difference, the programs need to bring in the "upstream" producers-those that create virgin plastics and polymers, like Exxon, Dow, Sinopec, and Saudi Aramco. An overwhelming 98% of plastics come from fossil fuels, and plastic production and use accounts for 3.4% of humanity's carbon emissions. Many big plastic producers-such as the world's biggest, ExxonMobil-are highly entangled with Big Oil or representatives of it. "Beyond a physical pollution crisis, it's becoming an energy crisis," says Katrina Knauer, a polymer scientist with the National Renewable Energy Laboratory. "The amount of plastic on our planet-it's like one big oil spill."

Nevertheless, these companies do not currently pay for the consequences of plastic pollution, Boachie says, adding: "We believe that those who are [most] heavily responsible for the proliferation of plastics around the world are the polymer and virgin plastics producers, and they should be responsible for providing funds for countries to manage the plastic waste that they create."

Ghana has introduced a proposal to the UN to extend the "polluter pays" principle to these polymer producers, and Boachie says he believes elements of it will find their way into the final UN agreement. That would "allow us to mobilize a significant amount of resources to provide all countries the means to manage their plastics."

But Ana Lê Rocha, the executive director of Nipe Fagio in Tanzania, argues that waste management is not actually a solution to the pollution crisis but merely a way to deal with a symptom. "We need to remember that the main issue-the main goal of the UN treaty-must be to reduce production," she says.

Obstacles to circularity

Reuse is the most energy-efficient version of circularity. Collecting, cleaning, and refilling glass bottles was once common and widespread, and it remains a small but significant part of the economy in many countries. It's also the norm in many places to buy foods in bulk and transport them in reusable bags.

But one of the biggest obstacles to circularity is a lack of infrastructure, says Ellie Moss, CEO of a company called Perpetual, which is "looking to stand up a whole reuse ecosystem [at] the scale of a small city" to change that. Four cities, to be exact-Galveston, Texas; Hilo, Hawaii; Ann Arbor, Michigan; and Savannah, Georgia. In Galveston, where Perpetual is furthest along, it is working to create a system whereby metal beverage containers can be reused by many restaurants in the city, saving large amounts of plastic and creating new green jobs. It hopes to hire companies that will have the program up and running there by the middle of 2024.

"If we want reuse to work, it has to happen at scale, and the community has to have a voice in how the system is set up," Moss says.

Other companies are also exploring refill and reuse schemes. One Chilean company, Algramo, founded in 2013, allows customers to buy various liquid products such as shampoo, laundry detergent, and soaps in reusable plastic bottles, purchased from a large network of filling stations. The company has the explicit goal of eliminating the "poverty tax," the penalty that lower-income people often have to pay for not being able to buy in bulk; it charges the same unit price for each item regardless of how much volume is sold. Algramo (which means "by the gram" in Spanish) has expanded throughout Chile and is now opening locations in the United Kingdom.

These schemes can be thought of as a type of system redesign, requiring a radical shift in infrastructure and behavior. We spent nearly a century "building out an exceptionally complex linear economy for these materials," says Kathryn Beers, a polymer chemist at the National Institute of Standards and Technology, who leads an institute-wide program geared toward facilitating a circular economy. But we never "built the second half of the system" that would make it circular, she says. "It needs all the complexity and nuance of the front half-and that takes time."

Awareness helps prompt such shifts-viral moments such as the video of a turtle with a straw in its nose that circulated widely in 2017 are credited with greatly increased demand for straw bans or alternatives. But for real change, policies are necessary, including bans as well as fees and taxes. Research shows that all of the above can greatly reduce plastic waste.

Redesigning products to use less plastic and to be more easily reused or recycled is also critical, said Inger Andersen, executive director of UNEP, at the opening of the second meeting. "Is there a good reason that businesses can't look at refillable bottles, reusable packaging, take-back services, and so on? Of course not," she said.

Some manufacturers have already made strides to use less plastic in their products. Such incremental changes help but will still not be enough.

To solve the pollution crisis, many "unnecessary and problematic" plastics-such as polyvinyl chloride, or PVC-will have to be eliminated and replaced with more sustainable alternatives, says Imari Walker-Franklin, a research chemist who published a book with MIT Press on plastics earlier this year. PVC, which is often used to make pipes and other materials, breaks down into toxic chlorine-containing components and cannot be recycled.

One of the most promising replacements is a substance called PHA, or polyhydroxyalkanoate, a type of bio-polyester made by bacterial fermentation of sugars and lipids. "We'd love to see an all-PHA future," NREL's Knauer says, in part because the plastic can degrade into nontoxic components over the course of months.

It's important to note, however, that producing more sustainable plastics is difficult, and most of the so-called "biodegradable" and "compostable" plastics on the market biodegrade only in industrial reactors. Industrial composters, for example, reach temperatures that cannot be achieved in people's yards or homes. Moreover, most of these materials are not actually less toxic than conventional plastics, says Bethanie Almroth, an ecotoxicologist with Sweden's University of Gothenburg.

"Bioplastics are plastics. And they are usually quite harmful," Lê Rocha agrees.

For that reason, it's vital that bio-based plastics don't just become a replacement.

"The best alternative is reusable systems, because replacing a single-use plastic with a single-use bioplastic won't change the problem," says Andrea Lema, an advocate for zero-waste systems in Quito, Ecuador, who's involved in the UN process.

Non-plastic alternatives, such as packaging made from fungi, hemp, and other environmentally friendly materials, may hold the most promise in the long term, but in the short term they are generally not economically viable given how cheap plastic is. That could change with the right set of progressive policies and economic incentives.

How much plastic is actually being recycled?

In the United States, only about 5% to 6% of plastics are being recycled each year-a paltry rate. As with reuse, increasing this rate should decrease the demand for virgin polymers. The biggest problem is a shortage of the costly infrastructure that's required, says Kate Bailey, chief policy officer with the Association of Plastic Recyclers.

The further you get from large cities, the less recycling there is, because rural areas can't afford it, says Knauer: "We need more state and federal incentives to build an infrastructure for collection."

The vast majority of "recycling" involves grinding up plastic, melting it down, and re-forming it. Doing this type of mechanical recycling well involves properly sorting and cleaning materials, which can be time intensive and expensive. It's also very difficult or impossible to recycle many types of plastic more than once without causing the material to acquire defects and contaminants. In fact, many recycled materials commonly contain significant levels of unwanted toxins, Almroth says.

Local policies can make a huge difference in encouraging recycling. In Maine and Oregon, which have invested in recycling programs, up to 80% of bottles made from PET (polyethylene terephthalate) are recycled, Bailey says. In some states, such as in the South, that percentage is in the single digits. The national average for these materials is 30%, which is a shame, Bailey says, because 100% of PET bottles could be recycled.

Some states, though, have instituted policies that actually hinder progress. Industry lobbyists are increasingly helping to institute state-level laws that prevent bans or limits on the use of plastics, especially plastic bags. Over a dozen states currently have preemptive laws on the books to prevent ordinances limiting plastics, though some of the same states are also trying to pass anti-preemption laws.

Fundamentally, to solve the plastic pollution crisis, society must address the root problem: plastics are shockingly profitable and cheap.

One way to improve recycling-and prevent unwanted health effects and environmental problems-would be to simplify and standardize the process of plastic production, Walker-Franklin says. Currently, more than 10,000 chemicals are used in the production of plastics, and upward of 3,200 have "one or more hazardous properties of concern," with the potential to harm humans and wildlife, according to UNEP. Very little or nothing is known about the health effects or basic properties of thousands more.

Another way to improve recycling would be to find a way to process mixed polymers into useful materials instead of having to sort everything first. One promising technique, described in an October 2020 study coauthored by Julie Rorrer, then a researcher at MIT, can process polypropylene and polyethylene into propane. Another process, described in a study published in Science the same month, can break down mixtures of common consumer plastics and re-form them into a bioplastic, in part by using an engineered soil bacterium.

Others dream of a day when microbes could be used to recycle or clean up all this waste. One French biotechnology company, Carbios, opened a pilot plant in September 2021 to break down and recycle PET using an engineered form of an enzyme first discovered in compost; it's currently building a full-scale facility due to open in 2025. In theory, this type of recycling could be truly circular, as it wouldn't require the high heat that normally causes much of the degradation seen with recycled plastics.

A microbe discovered in Japan in 2016, called Ideonella sakaiensis, produces two other enzymes that can break down PET. This microbe is especially intriguing because it is the first one identified that can live solely upon plastic as a food source. MIT researcher Linda Zhong-Johnson is working to create more efficient versions of the enzymes by tinkering with microbial genes. So far, one mutation she has identified creates an enzyme that appears to be up to 30% more efficient than its original wild form.

Reducing demand

Fundamentally, to solve the plastic pollution crisis, society must address the root problem: plastics are shockingly profitable and cheap because polymer producers do not pay for the abundant harm they cause. Any solution will require policy and behavioral changes small and large.

As an example of the former, policymakers in Washington, DC, instituted a five-cent charge on plastic bags that began in 2010. Estimates suggest that the number of bags used quickly dropped-by more than half in the months after it was instituted-and the quantity found in local waterways dropped between 30% and 70% thereafter. Seemingly tiny changes like this can add up to reduce demand and decrease pollution. Meanwhile, a global EPR scheme would be an example of a major shift, and the UN process is seeking other big changes to the status quo.

Of course, such changes will be difficult, but they can be instituted in gradual ways that don't hurt businesses, Boachie says: "My hope emanates from the fact that what we are talking about is not something that will impede the growth and success of any company." On the contrary, he adds, creating incentives for alternatives will spur innovation and create new jobs.

A lot of such innovation will doubtless be needed to reverse situations like what I saw in the Connecticut salt marsh. At one point we came upon a couple of osprey nests from which plastic strands billowed, unwittingly collected by the birds as they built their nests. Later, we found a vinyl firehose lodged intractably in the muck between oysters. I couldn't pull it out, nor could I cut into it with a small pocketknife. We reluctantly left it behind.

Douglas Main is a journalist and former senior editor and writer at National Geographic.

Deep Dive

Climate change and energy

Stay connected

Illustration by Rose Wong

Get the latest updates from
MIT Technology Review

Discover special offers, top stories, upcoming events, and more.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Think that your plastic is being recycled? Think again.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
On a Saturday last summer, I kayaked up a Connecticut river from the coast, buoyed by the rising tide, to pick up trash with a group of locals. Blue herons and white egrets hunted in the shallows. Ospreys soared overhead hauling freshly caught fish. The wind combed the water into fields of ripples, refracting the...

# data[].attributes.body
In 2023, about 66 million tons of pollution were emitted into the atmosphere in the United States. These emissions mostly contribute to the formation of ozone and particles, the deposition of acids, and visibility impairment.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Air Quality Trends

EPA creates air quality trends using measurements from monitors located across the country. The table below show that air quality based on concentrations of the common pollutants has improved nationally since 1980.

Emissions Trends

EPA estimates nationwide emissions of ambient air pollutants and the pollutants they are formed from (their precursors). These estimates are based on actual monitored readings or engineering calculations of the amounts and types of pollutants emitted by vehicles, factories, and other sources. Emission estimates are based on many factors, including levels of industrial activity, technological developments, fuel consumption, vehicle miles traveled, and other activities that cause air pollution.

Emissions information is developed with input from state and local air agencies, tribes, and industry. EPA tracks a range of emissions data, including how much of each pollutant is emitted from various pollution sources. To view national, state, and local emissions summary data, see EPA's Air Emissions Sources site. The table below shows that emissions of the common air pollutants and their precursors have been reduced substantially since 1980.
*As a result of the permanent phase-out of leaded gasoline, controls on emissions of lead compounds through EPA's air toxics program, and other national and state regulations, airborne lead concentrations in the U.S. decreased 98 percent between 1980 and 2005. After 2005, the EPA methodology for lead changed and is not comparable to the 2005 and earlier numbers. Since 2008, emissions have continued to decrease by 30 percent from 2008 to 2017. In the 2017 NEI, the highest amounts of Pb emissions are from Piston Engine Aircrafts, and Ferrous and Non-ferrous Metals industrial sources. The 2008 and 2017 estimates were used to approximate the 2010 to 2023 percent change.
Emissions of air pollutants continue to play an important role in a number of air quality issues. In 2023, about 66 million tons of pollution were emitted into the atmosphere in the United States. These emissions mostly contribute to the formation of ozone and particles, the deposition of acids, and visibility impairment. To get detailed information about emissions estimates displayed below, please visit EPA's Air Pollutant Emissions Trends Data.

Annual emissions estimates are used as one indicator of the effectiveness of our programs. The graph below shows that between 1970 and 2023, gross domestic product increased 321 percent, vehicle miles traveled increased 194 percent, energy consumption increased 42 percent, and U.S. population grew by 63 percent. During the same time period, total emissions of the six principal air pollutants dropped by 78 percent. The graph also shows that CO ₂ emissions, after having risen gradually for decades, have shown an overall decrease since 2007, and in 2022 were 17 percent higher than 1970 levels.
Note: CO2 emissions estimate through 2022 (Source: US Greenhouse Gas Inventory Report)
Gross Domestic Product:Bureau of Economic Analysis
Vehicle Miles Traveled:Federal Highway Administration
Population:Census Bureau
Energy Consumption:Dept. of Energy, Energy Information Administration
Aggregate Emissions:EPA's Air Pollutant Emissions Trends Data
Despite great progress in air quality improvement, approximately 140 million people nationwide lived in counties with pollution levels above the primary NAAQS in 2023.

In addition, from 1990 to 2017 emissions of air toxics declined by 74 percent, largely driven by federal and state implementation of stationary and mobile source regulations, and technological advancements from American innovators.

In recent years, EPA has acted to dramatically improve America's air quality by designing and developing national programs that, when fully implemented, will achieve significant reductions in air emissions. The associated air quality benefits will lead to improved health, longevity, and quality of life for all Americans.

Weather Influence

Weather conditions influence emissions and air quality. EPA has developed statistical approaches to account for weather's influence on ozone and fine particles. While these approaches do not change the quality of air we breathe, they do help us understand how well emission reduction programs are working. More information is available for trends in ozone adjusted for weather conditions.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
National summary of air quality trends and status

# data[].attributes.body
WHO data show that almost all of the global population (99%) breathe air that exceeds WHO guideline limits and contains high levels of pollutants, with low- and middle-income countries suffering from the highest exposures.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
From smog hanging over cities to smoke inside the home, air pollution poses a major threat to health and climate.

Ambient (outdoor) air pollution in both cities and rural areas is causing fine particulate matter which result in strokes, heart diseases, lung cancer, acute and chronic respiratory diseases.

Additionally, around 2.4 billion people are exposed to dangerous levels of household air pollution, while using polluting open fires or simple stoves for cooking fuelled by kerosene, biomass (wood, animal dung and crop waste) and coal.

The combined effects of ambient air pollution and household air pollution is associated with 7 million premature deaths annually.

Sources of air pollution are multiple and context specific. The major outdoor pollution sources include residential energy for cooking and heating, vehicles, power generation, agriculture/waste incineration, and industry. Policies and investments that support sustainable land use, cleaner household energy and transport, energy-efficient housing, power generation, industry, and better municipal waste management can effectively reduce key sources of ambient air pollution.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Air pollution kills an estimated seven million people worldwide every year. WHO data shows that 9 out of 10 people breathe air containing high levels of pollutants. WHO is working with countries to monitor air pollution and improve air quality.

# data[].attributes.body
Africa is home to five of the ten most polluted countries worldwide regarding outdoor fine particulate matter (PM2.5). Among these countries, Niger, Nigeria, Egypt, Mauritania, and Cameroon experience exposure to fine particulate matter (PM2.5) as high as 65-80 micrograms (μg/m3) per cubic meter (HEI & IHME, 2022).. Outdoor PM2.5 is the most consistent predictor of deaths from cardiovascular, respiratory, and other diseases in long-term exposure to air pollution studies.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.provider_name
Airqoon - Cost effective and easy to use air monitoring at scale

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Global Inequality: Air Pollution in Africa - Airqoon - Cost effective and easy to use air monitoring at scale

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Global Inequality: Air Pollution in Africa - Resources - Airqoon - Cost effective and easy to use air monitoring at scale

# data[].attributes.body
The gains in productivity have taken a cost on groundwater. Up to 90% of the country's groundwater is contaminated by toxic human and industrial waste dumping, along with agricultural fertilizers, rendering approximately 70% of rivers and lakes unsafe for human use.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Clean water tech is key to addressing Asia’s pollution

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The UpLink Aquapreneur challenge is sourcing high-potential solutions to prevent global water pollution and reduce its environmental impacts.

# data[].attributes.body
Across the EU, it is common to have air pollution levels that are higher than the latest WHO recommendations. Still, there are signs of improvement. More than 83% of urban citizens are exposed above safe levels for all pollutants, except SO₂, according to 2021 World Health Organization air quality guideline values

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Most European city dwellers are exposed to unsafe levels of air pollution. Improving air quality to match World Health Organization (WHO)-recommended levels could prevent more than half of premature deaths caused by exposure to fine particulate matter.

Air pollution emissions have declined in the last two decades, resulting in better air quality. Between 2005 and 2022, the number of deaths in the EU attributable to PM 2.5 fell by 45%, moving the EU closer to achieving the 55% reduction target outlined in the zero pollution action plan for 2030. Despite this improvement, air pollution remains the largest environmental health risk in Europe. Exposure to fine particulate matter, ozone and nitrogen dioxide levels above the World Health Organization recommendations cause an estimated 239,000, 70,000 and 48,000 premature deaths, respectively, in 2022. These pollutants are linked to asthma, heart disease and stroke.

Air pollution also causes morbidity. People l ive with diseases related to exposure to air pollution; this is a burden in terms of personal suffering as well as significant costs to the healthcare sector.

Society's most vulnerable are more susceptible to air pollution impacts. Lower socio-economic groups tend to be exposed to higher levels of air pollution, while older people, children and those with pre-existing health conditions are more susceptible. Over 1,200 deaths in people under 18 years of age are estimated to be caused by air pollution every year in EEA member and collaborating countries.

Besides health issues, air pollution can considerably impact Europe's economy due to increased healthcare costs, reduced life expectancy, and lost working days across sectors. It also damages vegetation and ecosystems, water and soil quality, and local ecosystems.

Across the EU, it is common to have air pollution levels that are higher than the latest WHO recommendations. Still, there are signs of improvement.

More than 83% of urban citizens are exposed above safe levels for all pollutants, except SO₂, according to 2021 World Health Organization air quality guideline values..

Over 1,200 deaths in people under 18 years of age are estimated to be caused by air pollution every year in EEA member and collaborating countries[1] .

Data from 2021 show that Central-eastern Europe and Italy reported the highest concentrations of particulate matter, primarily due to the burning of solid fuels for domestic heating and their use in industry.

All EU countries reported levels of ozone and nitrogen dioxide above the health-based guideline levels set by the World Health Organization.

In 2022, 16 Member States met their respective 2020-2029 national emission reduction commitments under the EU's National Emission reduction Commitments Directive (NECD) for each of the five main pollutants (nitrogen oxides, non-methane volatile organic compounds, ammonia, sulphur dioxide and fine particulate matter), according to the latest EEA assessment. Eleven Member States failed to do so for at least one of five main air pollutants.

Reducing ammonia emissions remains the biggest challenge: they have decreased only slightly in many Member States since 2005 and in some cases have increased.The agriculture sector is the principal source, responsible for 93% of total ammonia emissions

Since the 1980s, the EU has adopted strict policies on air quality. The EU's Ambient Air Quality Directives set air quality standards for 12 air pollutants. These directives also define common methods to monitor, assess and inform the public on ambient air quality in the EU. The European Commission has proposed an updated Directive on ambient air quality and cleaner air for Europe, with a key goal being to bring EU standards closer to recommendations from the WHO.

To see where we are in relation to these goals, a network of more than 4,000 air quality monitoring stations creates reliable, objective, comparable information on air quality. When levels are above the limit or target values, Member States are expected to prepare an air quality plan or programme that addresses responsible sources and ensures compliance.

The Zero Pollution Action Plan also sets the 2030 target of improving air quality, with a focus on PM 2.5, in order to reduce the number of premature deaths caused by air pollution in the EU by a minimum of 55%, relative to those in 2005.

The National Emission reduction Commitments Directive sets national emission reduction commitments for Member States and the EU for five important air pollutants: nitrogen oxides (NO x), non-methane volatile organic compounds (NMVOCs), sulphur dioxide (SO ₂), ammonia (NH ₃) and fine particulate matter (PM 2.5). These pollutants contribute to poor air quality, leading to significant negative impacts on human health and the environment.

The EEA supports these policies through data, indicators and assessments, including the annual air quality report and the zero pollution monitoring assessment.

Press releases and articles

Frequently asked questions

Premature deaths in the EU in 2022

from chronic exposure to fine particulate matter

from chronic nitrogen dioxide exposure

from acute ozone exposure

Reducing emissions of air pollutants in Europe

Europe has put in place legislation to reduce emissions from harmful air pollutants. The National Emission reduction Commitments Directive (NECD) sets national emission reduction commitments for Member States and the EU for five important air pollutants: nitrogen oxides (NOx), non-methane volatile organic compounds (NMVOCs), sulphur dioxide (SO₂), ammonia (NH₃) and fine particulate matter (PM2.5). These pollutants contribute to poor air quality, leading to significant negative impacts on human health and the environment.

Every year, the EEA publishes the most recent reported data and a briefing on the EU Member States' progress in meeting their emission reduction commitments.

In 2022, 16 Member States met their respective 2020-2029 national emission reduction commitments under the EU's National Emission reduction Commitments Directive (NECD) for each of the five main pollutants (nitrogen oxides, non-methane volatile organic compounds, ammonia, sulphur dioxide and fine particulate matter), according to the EEA assessment. Eleven Member States failed to do so for at least one of five main air pollutants.

Reducing ammonia emissions remains the biggest challenge: nine Member States need to cut their 2022 emission levels to fulfil their 2020-2029 reduction commitments. The agriculture sector is the principal source, responsible for 93% of total ammonia emissions according to the EEA assessment. Ammonia emissions have decreased only slightly in many Member States since 2005 and in some cases have increased.

Check air quality at any time: European Air Quality Index & App

How clean is the air you're breathing right now?

The European Air Quality Index provides information on the current air quality situation based on measurements from more than 2000 air quality monitoring stations across Europe.

The Index allows citizens to use an interactive map to check the air quality at station level, based on five key pollutants that harm people's health and the environment: namely particulate matter (both PM 2.5 and PM ₁₀), ground-level ozone, nitrogen dioxide and sulphur dioxide.

The index is also available as an app for mobile phones in all EU languages.

Air quality in your city: how clean is it compared to other European cities?

The costs to health and the environment from industrial air pollution

Air pollution from large European industry continues to cause significant damage to the environment, climate and people's health.

The analysis shows that just a small fraction of the most polluting facilities - many of them coal power plants - causes half of the total damage.

However, the EEA analysis also shows that environmental and health costs of European industry have decreased by a third (-33%) from 2012 to 2021. The EU energy sector has accounted for the vast majority - about 80% - of the total decrease.

Notes: Exposure above EU standards: the EU urban population is exposed to PM2.5 annual concentrations above 25µg/m3; PM10 daily concentrations above 50µg/m3 for more than 35 days per year; O3 maximum daily 8-hour mean concentrations above 120µg/m3 for more than 25 days per year; NO2 annual concentrations above 40µg/m3; Benzo[a]pyrene (BaP) annual concentrations above 1ng/m3; and sulphur dioxide (SO2) daily concentrations above 125µg/m3 for more than three days per year.

Exposure above WHO guidelines: the EU urban population is exposed to PM2.5 annual concentrations above 5µg/m3; PM10 annual concentrations above 15µg/m3; O3 maximum daily 8-hour mean concentrations exceeding 100µg/m3 for more than 3-4 days per year; NO2 annual concentrations above 10µg/m3; BaP annual concentrations above 0.12ng/m3; and SO2 daily concentrations above 40µg/m3 for more than three or four days per year.

Source: EEA, 2024.
More information

Other topics you might be interested in:

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Most European city dwellers are exposed to unsafe levels of air pollution. Improving air quality to match World Health Organization (WHO)-recommended levels could prevent more than half of premature deaths caused by exposure to fine particulate matter.

# data[].attributes.body
Over 150 million people in this region live in urban areas that do not comply with air quality standards, including PM₁₀ levels (UNEP and CCAC 2018), with approximately 45 000 premature deaths annually in the subregion of South America as a result of air pollution (UNEP 2017).

# data[].attributes.headline
What are the top 3 countries responsible for climate change?

# data[].attributes.subject
What are the top 3 countries responsible for climate change?

# data[].attributes.body
Most of the world's greenhouse gas emissions come from a relatively small number of countries. China, the United States, and the nations that make up the European Union are the three largest emitters on an absolute basis.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Our mission is to secure a safe and stable climate by accelerating the global transition to net-zero greenhouse gas emissions and a thriving, just, and resilient economy.

# data[].attributes.body
Coastal communities are flooding more frequently. As warmer temperatures cause sea level to rise, areas along U.S. coasts are flooding more often. In recent years, coastal communities have experienced more days of “nuisance” flooding at high tide, even on sunny days with no storm surge.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Climate Change Indicators in the United States | US EPA

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Presents information, charts and graphs showing measured climate changes across 57 indicators related to greenhouse gases, weather and climate, oceans, snow and ice, heath and society, and ecosystems.

# data[].attributes.headline
United States Progress Toward Climate Goals

# data[].attributes.subject
United States Progress Toward Climate Goals

# data[].attributes.body
With seven years to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions by 50-52% below 2005 levels by 2030, the U.S. government is engaged in multiple sectors, including electricity, transportation, buildings, industry, and agriculture, forestry and land use to meet this ambitious target.

# data[].attributes.headline
What country is doing the most to combat climate change?

# data[].attributes.subject
What country is doing the most to combat climate change?

# data[].attributes.body
No. 1: Denmark. Denmark tops the Climate Change Performance Index for the third year in a row in 2024. The Nordic nation scores “high” in the greenhouse gas emissions and renewable energy categories, but falls short of the “very high” rating needed to enter the top three of the overall rankings.

We can also see in this article, that America is not in the top 10 countries leading the way on climate change.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
These Are the 10 Countries Leading the Way on Climate Change

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Some countries are ahead of others when it comes to addressing climate change.

# data[].attributes.body
In 2023, the wave of historic climate laws California passed last year officially come into effect. Last fall, in a legislative frenzy, California passed some of the nation’s most aggressive climate measures in history. While most other governments pat themselves on the back for aspiring to reach net-zero by 2050, California has committed to reaching this goal by 2045.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
These four states are winning on climate. And they’re not all the ones you’d expect

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Here are four states to watch in 2023 who could take the lead in climate action.

# data[].attributes.headline
What the U.S has done about climate change

# data[].attributes.subject
What the U.S has done about climate change

# data[].attributes.body
The Biden-Harris Administration has taken hundreds of executive actions to reduce climate pollution across every sector of the economy, including on clean electricity, transportation, buildings, and industry, support for climate-smart agriculture and forestry, and targeted actions on super pollutants like methane and hydrofluorocarbons – all while advancing environmental justice and building climate-resilient communities.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
National Climate Task Force | The White House

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
President Biden’s Actions to Tackle the Climate Crisis President Biden campaigned on a bold vision of tackling the climate crisis with the urgency that science demands while building a clean energy economy that benefits all Americans—lowering costs for families, creating good-paying jobs for workers, and ensuring healthier air and cleaner water for communities. As part…

# data[].attributes.body
What is the rate of changing water pollution in Chad

# data[].attributes.body
How is the atmosphere affected by todays pollution

# data[].attributes.body
What is the leading factor in climate change

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
By logging in to use this resource, you agree to abide by the contracts and license agreements between Houston Community College and the vendor providing this resource. You are expected to make good faith efforts to comply with these Terms of Use (click to read in a new window).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
By logging in to use this resource, you agree to abide by the contracts and license agreements between Houston Community College and the vendor providing this resource. You are expected to make good faith efforts to comply with these Terms of Use (click to read in a new window).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
By logging in to use this resource, you agree to abide by the contracts and license agreements between Houston Community College and the vendor providing this resource. You are expected to make good faith efforts to comply with these Terms of Use (click to read in a new window).