The COVID-19 pandemic and single-use plastic waste in households: A preliminary study

Filho, Walter Leal; Salvia, Amanda Lange; Minhas, Aprajita; Paço, Arminda do; Dias-Ferreira, Célia

doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.148571

Cited by 62 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the shorter term, focusing on improvement of the waste collection and management can help; however, in the longer term, a more sustainable solution will be moving toward a circular economy to remove waste and single-use plastic out of the production cycle and focus on building the producer's responsibility models with new product design that would enable reuse, recycling, and minimizing plastic packages. It was estimated that about 50% of plastic is produced for single-use, and the majority of them are being used for food packaging [2][3][4]. Stefanini et al [256] reported that glass packaging, which is eco-friendly and easier to recycle, is a potential alternative for reducing marine litter; however, the use of glass is not increasing due to high energy demand.…”

Section: Sdg 12 (Ensure Sustainable Consumption and Production Patterns)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Impacts of Plastic Pollution on Ecosystem Services, Sustainable Development Goals, and Need to Focus on Circular Economy and Policy Interventions

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Plastic pollution is ubiquitous in terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems. Plastic waste exposed to the environment creates problems and is of significant concern for all life forms. Plastic production and accumulation in the natural environment are occurring at an unprecedented rate due to indiscriminate use, inadequate recycling, and deposits in landfills. In 2019, the global production of plastic was at 370 million tons, with only 9% of it being recycled, 12% being incinerated, and the remaining left in the environment or landfills. The leakage of plastic wastes into terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems is occurring at an unprecedented rate. The management of plastic waste is a challenging problem for researchers, policymakers, citizens, and other stakeholders. Therefore, here, we summarize the current understanding and concerns of plastics pollution (microplastics or nanoplastics) on natural ecosystems. The overall goal of this review is to provide background assessment on the adverse effects of plastic pollution on natural ecosystems; interlink the management of plastic pollution with sustainable development goals; address the policy initiatives under transdisciplinary approaches through life cycle assessment, circular economy, and sustainability; identify the knowledge gaps; and provide current policy recommendations. Plastic waste management through community involvement and socio-economic inputs in different countries are presented and discussed. Plastic ban policies and public awareness are likely the major mitigation interventions. The need for life cycle assessment and circularity to assess the potential environmental impacts and resources used throughout a plastic product’s life span is emphasized. Innovations are needed to reduce, reuse, recycle, and recover plastics and find eco-friendly replacements for plastics. Empowering and educating communities and citizens to act collectively to minimize plastic pollution and use alternative options for plastics must be promoted and enforced. Plastic pollution is a global concern that must be addressed collectively with the utmost priority.

show abstract

Section: Sdg 12 (Ensure Sustainable Consumption and Production Patterns)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Impacts of Plastic Pollution on Ecosystem Services, Sustainable Development Goals, and Need to Focus on Circular Economy and Policy Interventions

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The World Health Organization (WHO) estimated that in 2020 the global production of masks and gloves was 129 and 69 billion per month, respectively [ 8 ]. Although the use of fabric masks has been allowed under certain circumstances [ 9 ], most face masks are produced from plastic polymers such as polypropylene (PP), polyethylene (PE) and polyurethane (PU), therefore relying on fossil sources for production. The proper disposal of face masks is extremely important as such a huge amount of disposable products may have severe consequences on the environment and human health [ 10 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Environmental Impact of Surgical Masks Consumption in Italy Due to COVID-19 Pandemic

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The COVID-19 pandemic suddenly changed the lifestyle of billions of people. Face masks became indispensable to protect from the contagion providing a significant environmental impact. The aim of this work is to propose possible solutions to decrease masks’ impact on the environment. For this reason, different masks (surgical and fabric) were considered, and the CO2 emissions associated with the mask materials production were calculated. Carbon Footprint (CF) for each material composing the masks was evaluated through the database Ces Selector 2019. The software Qgis (version 2.18.20) allows us to elaborate the CO2 emissions maps for each Italian region. Finally, for surgical masks, which are often imported from abroad, the CF related to transport was considered. It results that fabric masks are a sustainable solution to prevent contagion. The total CO2 emission associated with the use of fabric masks from the beginning of the pandemic (March 2020) to December 2021 resulted in about 7 kton compared to 350 kton for surgical masks.

show abstract

“…One study reported that, there was a 66% increased in the consumption of single-use facemasks due to the mandatory use for health protection compared to pre-COVID era. 11 Additional expenses for the preventive measure resulted in significant financial implications to people, especially those from the low-socioeconomic background, a high number of family members and those with comorbidity conditions mainly because of the volume of the preventive measures that required for all household members with limited income to buy them. 12,13 To date, many studies described the burden experienced by the patients and healthcare system and very scarce discussed the financial burden incurred by the general population.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…12 The strict lockdown implemented by the government, many households were found to stock up essential items like food, common medicines such as paracetamol, flu medicine, cough syrups and others including traditional and complementary medicine as well as nutraceutical/supplements. 10,11 The panic buying resulted in an immediate increase in spending on household consumers. Nevertheless, the magnitude of the spending and its impact on household income was unknown.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing the Impact of Out-of-Pocket Expenditures for Prevention of COVID-19 Infection on Households: Evidence From Malaysia

Jaafar

Laziz

Ithnin

et al. 2021

INQUIRY

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

COVID-19 infection resulted in significant economic implications to patients as well as a considerable financial burden to the general population for preventive measures. A descriptive study was conducted among staff at one of the public universities in Malaysia to estimate the monthly out-of-pocket expenditures for preventive measures used for COVID-19 infection. The study tool includes questions on household out-of-pocket expenditure and the measurements of the impact of the expenditure on household income. It was found that the average cumulative monthly expenditures related to the preventive measures were US$ 45.90 (Ringgit Malaysia 187.77), which was 4.3% of the household income. The highest expenditures were for traditional and complementary medicine followed by nutraceutical/supplements and disposable facemask. 8% of the households in this study incurred more than ten per cents of their monthly household income for expenditures related to COVID-19 preventive measures. Several households are experiencing substantial financial implications for preventive measures related to COVID-19 infection. This study highlights the out-of-pocket expenditures incurred for preventive measures were substantial for certain households. Effective initiatives from the government on providing subsidized protective personal equipment and a cost-sharing approach could help to alleviate the household financial burden.

show abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic and single-use plastic waste in households: A preliminary study

Cited by 62 publications

References 5 publications

Impacts of Plastic Pollution on Ecosystem Services, Sustainable Development Goals, and Need to Focus on Circular Economy and Policy Interventions

Impacts of Plastic Pollution on Ecosystem Services, Sustainable Development Goals, and Need to Focus on Circular Economy and Policy Interventions

Environmental Impact of Surgical Masks Consumption in Italy Due to COVID-19 Pandemic

Assessing the Impact of Out-of-Pocket Expenditures for Prevention of COVID-19 Infection on Households: Evidence From Malaysia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About