In 2022, California passed some of the most sweeping plastics restrictions in the nation, setting ambitious targets for reducing use. At the time, the law was heralded by environmentalists and even had buy-in from some industry groups.<\/p>\n
But now, with the law having gone into effect last month, significant opposition has emerged from other states, a business group and some environmentalists.<\/p>\n
California\u2019s new law sets deadlines for manufacturers to make products such as shampoo bottles and food wrappers with less plastic. It also creates requirements that plastic products be recycled at higher rates.<\/p>\n
This week, a group of 17 states sued California, calling the law an overreach that will affect the cost of goods in their states. Earlier this month, environmental groups also sued California, saying the law is being put into effect with loopholes that make it less effective.<\/p>\n
Central to both lawsuits is the idea that California policy often sets a standard for the rest of the nation, both because other Democratic states often follow suit and because the state\u2019s market share is so large. For example, the state\u2019s stringent vehicle emissions standards<\/a> have for decades effectively set the bar for carmakers nationwide.<\/p>\n The states challenging the law, which include Texas, Florida and Georgia, say in their complaint<\/a> that the law\u2019s \u201cunprecedented requirements reflect California\u2019s bespoke environmental preferences \u2014 preferences irreconcilably at odds with those of many other states.\u201d<\/p>\n Their complaint, filed Monday in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California, argues that the law will require \u201crevolutionary changes\u201d that will saddle producers with extra costs that will ultimately be passed on to consumers purchasing basic necessities.<\/p>\n \u201cOnce again, California is trying to enact a policy that negatively impacts the rest of the country,\u201d Attorney General Mike Hilgers of Nebraska, who is leading the lawsuit, said in a statement.<\/p>\n The plaintiffs, which include the National Association of Wholesaler-Distributors, are asking a judge to immediately block enforcement of the law.<\/p>\n \u201cCalifornia is not entitled to pronounce nationwide policies,\u201d Eric Hoplin, chief executive of the wholesalers\u2019 group, said in a statement.<\/p>\n Environmental groups are unhappy for a different reason: They say California officials have weakened the new law.<\/p>\n The law sets benchmarks for reducing the amount of plastic created and increasing recycling rates in California.<\/p>\n By January 2027, producers must reduce the amount of plastic in packaging by 25 percent. The reduction can be achieved by reducing package sizes, switching to a different material or making the products reusable. By 2030, the recycling rate for single-use plastics must be 40 percent. By 2032, all packaging must be either recyclable or compostable.<\/p>\n Environmental advocates say that any reduction in plastics creation will reduce greenhouse gas emissions as well as the amount of waste ending up in landfills. But the specific regulations written to carry out the law undermine its scope, according to the environmental groups suing the state.<\/p>\n For example, the regulations consider pyrolysis \u2014 a form of breaking down plastic at high temperatures \u2014 to be a form of recycling, even though only a tiny fraction of the plastic that\u2019s incinerated ends up as new plastic, according to the complaint filed by the groups.<\/a><\/p>\n Pyrolysis also creates a significant amount of hazardous waste, said Tara Brock, legal campaign director with Oceana, a nonprofit ocean conservation organization that joined the Natural Resources Defense Council and the Californians Against Waste Foundation to sue the state.<\/p>\n