The Environmental Protection Administration (EPA) on Thursday announced a ban on food containers made from polylactide (PLA) at eight venues that is to come into effect on Aug. 1, the first step in banning the polymer, which is typically made from plant starch.
The ban covers cooked food served in single-use cups, bowls, plates and lunchboxes made of PLA in the eight venues: public agencies, public and private schools, department stores, shopping centers, hypermarkets, supermarkets, convenience stores, and fast food chains and restaurants.
Banning PLA might confuse the public, as it used to be promoted as a more “sustainable,” “green” and “better” choice for the environment compared with fossil-fuel plastics.
The marine plastic litter problem first came to public attention in the 1960s, and since then scientists have been studying plastic pollution’s environmental and health impacts globally, while searching for “greener” alternatives to conventional fossil-fuel plastics. Bioplastics were among the new materials developed during this search.
Bioplastics are either made of renewable biomass resources or are biodegradable and can break down into natural elements without leaving toxins, while they can also be both biomass-based and biodegradable. PLA, one of the three most common bioplastics, is typically made from the starch found in sugarcane, corn, sugar beet and cassava.
Although a certain amount of carbon dioxide is captured while growing PLA’s raw materials (plants) reducing their carbon footprint, the idea that it could be fully biodegraded or composted naturally might be misleading. Many bioplastics need industrial composting to biodegrade in a shorter period of time — such as PLA, which needs a temperature of about 58°C and high humidity to biodegrade in one to two months.
As the EPA said, Taiwan has no composting facility for recycling PLA. A bigger problem is that most people cannot distinguish between conventional plastics and bioplastics. PLA waste is often discarded in recycling bins along with plastics such as polyethylene terephthalate (PET) bottles, but even a small percentage of PLA mixed into the recycling stream can contaminate the recycled PET and make a whole batch unusable, causing it to end up in a landfill or be incinerated.
Considering all aspects of their life cycle — land use, genetic modification, pesticides, energy consumption, carbon and other greenhouse gas emissions, biodegradability and recyclability — it is still difficult to claim that PLA and other bioplastics are more eco-friendly than traditional plastics. Therefore, the EPA’s ban on PLA in certain venues can be seen as a step toward reaching its plastic reduction goal.
However, PLA food containers at the eight venues are estimated to account for less than 10 percent of all PLA products in Taiwan, so there is still a long way to go.
While scientists continue to develop greener alternatives or improve the production and recycling processes of plastics and bioplastics, the government, instead of banning PLA, should step up efforts to launch more “reduction” and “reuse” policies. The abuse of plastics and single-use items in exchange for convenience is the real problem here.
The NT$5 discount offered to people who bring their own cups to chain beverage shops, fast-food restaurants and convenience stores, and the store-provided rentable reusable cup services launched last year are two examples of creating incentives for consumers to reuse.
However, the government should also set obligatory reusable and refillable packaging goals for retailers, and regulate product labeling to better guide consumers on how to properly dispose of plastic or bioplastic packaging.
A gap appears to be emerging between Washington’s foreign policy elites and the broader American public on how the United States should respond to China’s rise. From my vantage working at a think tank in Washington, DC, and through regular travel around the United States, I increasingly experience two distinct discussions. This divergence — between America’s elite hawkishness and public caution — may become one of the least appreciated and most consequential external factors influencing Taiwan’s security environment in the years ahead. Within the American policy community, the dominant view of China has grown unmistakably tough. Many members of Congress, as
After declaring Iran’s military “gone,” US President Donald Trump appealed to the UK, France, Japan and South Korea — as well as China, Iran’s strategic partner — to send minesweepers and naval forces to reopen the Strait of Hormuz. When allies balked, the request turned into a warning: NATO would face “a very bad” future if it refused. The prevailing wisdom is that Trump faces a credibility problem: having spent years insulting allies, he finds they would not rally when he needs them. That is true, but superficial, as though a structural collapse could be caused by wounded feelings. Something
Former Taipei mayor and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) founding chairman Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) was sentenced to 17 years in prison on Thursday, making headlines across major media. However, another case linked to the TPP — the indictment of Chinese immigrant Xu Chunying (徐春鶯) for alleged violations of the Anti-Infiltration Act (反滲透法) on Tuesday — has also stirred up heated discussions. Born in Shanghai, Xu became a resident of Taiwan through marriage in 1993. Currently the director of the Taiwan New Immigrant Development Association, she was elected to serve as legislator-at-large for the TPP in 2023, but was later charged with involvement
Out of 64 participating universities in this year’s Stars Program — through which schools directly recommend their top students to universities for admission — only 19 filled their admissions quotas. There were 922 vacancies, down more than 200 from last year; top universities had 37 unfilled places, 40 fewer than last year. The original purpose of the Stars Program was to expand admissions to a wider range of students. However, certain departments at elite universities that failed to meet their admissions quotas are not improving. Vacancies at top universities are linked to students’ program preferences on their applications, but inappropriate admission