The U.S. is shifting its position in the plastics treaty talks and now wants the agreement to include global targets limiting virgin plastics production.
The shift, which was first reported Aug. 14 by Reuters, was confirmed by a White House official.
The official declined further comment and gave no details on how the U.S. would back reducing production. The Reuters story said Washington favors global targets, rather than letting countries set individual goals.
The major position change comes three months before the fifth and final planned round of talks in Busan, South Korea, in November.
The shift in the U.S. position was praised by environmental groups who said it would help any final deal have "teeth," but was slammed by the plastics industry.
Chris Jahn, the president and CEO of the American Chemistry Council, said in an Aug. 14 statement that the new U.S. stance risks outsourcing manufacturing jobs and would make it harder to get the 67 votes needed in the Senate to adopt the treaty.
"With today's shift in position to support plastic production caps and regulate chemicals via the U.N. Plastics Agreement, the White House has signaled it is willing to betray U.S. manufacturing and the hundreds of thousands of jobs it supports," Jahn said.
"The cost of goods is likely to rise globally, impacting those least able to afford it," he said. "And the U.S. negotiators' influence at the next round of negotiations will be significantly diminished since other countries know such drastic positions are unlikely to secure the 67 votes needed in the Senate to join the agreement."
The shift in the U.S. negotiating position could be seen as echoing comments in a White House report on plastics policy, released July 19.
In that 83-page report, two top environmental aides to President Joe Biden, including the head of the Council on Environmental Quality, wrote that the administration had a goal to "reduce the global production and consumption of virgin plastics" as part of its agenda.
The report was the most extensive plastics policy statement by the Biden administration.
At the last round of treaty talks, held in Canada in April, a top U.S. diplomat suggested the U.S. wanted to push for an agreement that could win broad support globally.
In an Aug. 14 statement, Greenpeace welcomed the U.S. shift and said Washington should join the Bridge to Busan, a group of 34 countries and the European Union pushing for limits on plastics production in the treaty.
"The United States' decision to back a global reduction in plastic production is a watershed moment in the fight against plastic pollution," said John Hocevar, Greenpeace USA's oceans campaign director.
"This move puts the US on the right side of history, standing with countries that recognize that we cannot recycle our way out of this crisis," Hocevar said.
Reuters also reported that the U.S. supports including a global list of chemicals on which to develop obligations in the treaty, as well as having global criteria to identify "avoidable plastic products."
Previously, the U.S. has said it wanted to stake out a middle ground in the talks and avoid "factions," as the talks have at times deeply split between countries seeking limits on resin production and those that are major producers of oil and petrochemicals, who instead prefer downstream measures like recycling and waste management.
ACC's Jahn said the Biden administration was caving to environmental groups and said economies will need more plastic, not less, to meet climate and sustainable development goals.
"As the White House caves to the wishes of extreme NGO groups, it does a disservice towards our mutual ambition for a cleaner, lower carbon future where used plastic doesn't become pollution in the first place," Jahn said.
"ACC still believes in the need for a strong global agreement to address plastic pollution," he said. "We can create a future where we retain the massive societal benefits plastics provide while also preventing used plastics from becoming pollution. Unfortunately, this change in position by the White House will hinder both objectives."
The Plastics Industry Association said the new U.S. position would hurt U.S. manufacturers.
“The White House’s misguided reversal in support of plastic production caps is not only impractical but directly harmful to all U.S. manufacturers and will get us no closer to reaching our shared environmental goals,” said President and CEO Matt Seaholm.
He said the Biden administration has “turned its back” on the country’s seventh-largest manufacturing industry and its 1 million employees.
But environmental groups said the public wants stronger action around plastic pollution.
Ocean Conservancy pointed to polling that said 78 percent of Americans consider plastic ocean pollution a pressing problem.
"We are deeply excited that the U.S. is shifting its position to support a reduction in plastics production in the treaty," said Anja Brandon, associate director of U.S. plastics policy for Ocean Conservancy. "The science is clear: to truly tackle plastic pollution, we need to start upstream by making less plastic in the first place."
Brandon called on the U.S. to support "an ambitious, time-bound reduction target" at the next round of talks in Busan.
Greenpeace said reports from Eunomia and Pacific Environment demonstrate that a 75 percent reduction in plastic production is needed as part of the effort to limit global warming to 1.5° C.