4.6 million tonnes of carbon dioxide is generated from burning plastic waste



CAMPAIGN FOR ZERO WASTE - Supermarkets and oil companies have a lot to answer for. Politicians must explain why they let the retailers and fossil fuel industry get away with a practice they know to be harmful to marine life. Companies are largely driven by money and greed, their shareholders often kept in the dark. All the while millions of seabirds are dying, polar bears are playing with plastic and even shellfish have become inedible in some locations. This is morally unsound!



The very existence of supermarkets encourages producers to seek ways of presenting their goods to compete for trade and vie for cost savings, to get their customers. But it must be said that plastic is useful for wrapping produce to keep it fresh, and the lure into unsustainable practices is understandable. But that was before we realised that we are poisoning the marine environment, and the fish that feed a substantial proportion of people around the world, upsetting the Blue Economy, where in the face of population growth and desertification, the sea is a valuable resource.


We therefore propose:





ARTICLE 2 (draft)


1. A requirement to replace plastic liquid containers with environmentally friendly glass, metal and/or waxed paper cartons. In other words retracing our footsteps, to the days before single use plastic. (Some development of waxed cartons to replace the larger milk containers might be necessary, but is achievable.)


2. That where Section 1., is not practically achievable, that genuinely domestically biodegradable and compostable plastic might be substituted.


3. That where the requirement of Sections 1., and 2., are not achievable for practical purposes, that a recycling regime is introduced with bottle banks, especially for PET and polythene drinks containers using polyethylene closures. To include a deposit return scheme, where scanned items generate automatic points for customers.


4. That in default of the above Sections, that offenders should be liable to pay into the plastic trading scheme as per Article 7, at the then current rate of exchange per tonne of plastic used in said packaging. The aim being to fund the conservation efforts of those making the effort to help prevent plastic reaching the oceans.


5. That manufacturer's who replace products presently packaged in plastic containers, with glass, metal. paper or other more sustainable and recyclable packaging materials will benefit from a PBI (Plastic Baseline Index) credit at the current standard rate.




1. Supermarket packaging transformation (back) to paper predominantly
2. Glass bottles, metal cans, waxed cartons over plastic, unless genuinely biodegradable 
3. Monitoring rivers and strict enforcement against micro-fiber spillages from treatment plants
4. Trackers for fishing nets and strict enforcement for dumping, unless accidents reported
5. Recycling of plastic to 90% with controlled incineration of 5% non-reusable elements, banks
6. Filtration on domestic machines to remove microfibres from clothing
7. Introduction of a plastic credit (incentives) trading scheme to drive the clean up





It is hope that market trends will obviate the need to introduce environmental legislation to the same end. The sad reality being that shopping trends indicate otherwise.




Once again, producers not voluntarily changing to protect the oceans will be identified and targeted, not making us many friends in the corporate world, but gelling with conservationists and ordinary people who care about the environment. Corporations need not see us as the enemy, where we are here to help and show examples of adaptation that works.


We hope by this means, that where politicians have many conflicts of interest, blinding them and making them deaf, as to the voices of the many, that such show not tell, will begin to affect producers as much as buyers. You will appreciate that at the moment there is very little choice for shoppers, where mainstream manufacturers are not giving them the choice.




    Narendra Modi for 1st plastic free prime minister of India Could Angela Merkel be the first plastic free Chancellor of Germany ?


    Could Xi Jinping be the first plastic free President of China ?    Bojo, Boris Johnson, hanging in there by the skin of his teeth





We need tougher MARPOL legislation and enforcement, to prevent plastic from rivers flowing into the sea. We implore you to write to your MP, Senator, Prime Minister, President, Queen or King, to ask them to agree to introduce laws and rules that make it illegal in their countries to allow river waste (including microplastics) into territorial waters - and from there into international waters. A law like this is sure to trigger the introduction of monitoring, barriers and cleaning operations with equitable rewards for any organization providing such services. So far your leaders have demonstrated that they don't give a jot, and will not tackle the monopoly enjoyed by their political backers.





Manufacturers should look to replace single use plastic in packaging wherever practical. Supermarkets should look for alternative packaging if it would not detract from the quality of produce or make them uncompetitive. They might support a plastic-oil circular economy with recycling depositories at their stores. 







INDIFFERENCE - Tangled in a societal maze and cemented by big business oligarchs, what chance does an oyster or muscle stand, let alone a turtle, where they cannot speak, write, or vote.


You can speak for them by not purchasing goods in packaged in plastic, unless it is responsibly recycled, and by fitting a filter to your domestic machines, where they empty to a sewage treatment system.






Governments simply don't care enough at the moment to revise their policies, because it's cheaper to take a dump in the ocean and heaven forbid, spend money on filtration for the sake of biodiversity. Politicians are reeling from climate change, they know that nobody can see them dumping waste in the oceans, and it underpins their frail economies to continue to do so - for the sake of getting re-elected. It's all about power, not lives. They will continue to slaughter defenseless animals, so long as the electorate continue to do nothing. Doing nothing is the same as agreeing with the slaughter. That is why we had World War Two, the moral world finally had to act to stop Nazi Germany invading and taking over the less able in Europe, leading to concentration camps, to eliminate political opponents and genocide on an industrial scale.


That will only change with a food crises and poisoned fish being declared carcinogenically inedible by the World Health Organization. I.e. with cancer victims falling like Covid-19 victims, taking up hospital beds. And even then that will only be because of the rising Healthcare bills. Governments actually seem to like it when elderly vulnerable patients bite the dust early. It's like ethnic cleansing, but legal. Or is it. is it legal to engineer a situation where people die earlier?





HARBOURS - The ocean washes up a small percentage of plastic flotsam to remind us of our sins. All the beach and marina cleaning is unable to keep up with the dumping in our rivers, which ends up swirling about the seven seas.







PLASTIC SNACKS - Below the waves and out of sight, marine life is eating plastic like there is no tomorrow, and there may well be, if nothing is done about it. Nets are trapping and suffocating wildlife and beaches are strewn with fishing discards and plastic flotsam. Big business is responsible, but not so much as the politicians who allowed this situation to develop.






This website is provided on a free basis as a public information service. copyright Cleaner Oceans Foundation Ltd (COFL) (Company No: 4674774) 2021. Solar Studios, BN271RF, United Kingdom. COFL is a company without share capital whose founding objects are charitable, being not-for-profit.