On February 16 this year, the National Development and Reform Commission issued Order No. 21 (hereinafter referred to as Order No. 21), announcing the "National Development and Reform Commission on Amending the Regulations on the Revision of ...

Mr. Chen, a wholesaler of hotel supplies in Baotou, Inner Mongolia, told China Economic Weekly (Weibo) that the wholesale price of polypropylene lunch boxes that can be put into microwave ovens is 30 to 40 cents per piece, which is three to four times that of foam lunch boxes. Small catering companies are naturally happy to buy the latter.

On March 28, the website of the Industry Coordination Department of the National Development and Reform Commission released an explanation of Order No. 21, which is summarized as follows:

First, it must comply with the relevant national standards for food packaging utensils. The test results of the Food Safety Institute of the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention show that disposable foam plastic tableware complies with the "Sanitary Standard for Polystyrene Resins for Food Packaging" (GB9692-1988) and the "Sanitary Standard for Polystyrene Molded Products for Food Packaging" (GB9689-1988);

Second, disposable foam plastic tableware can be recycled after use;

Third, many countries in the world, such as the United States, the European Union, and Japan, have been producing and using disposable foam plastic tableware;

Fourth, because disposable foam plastic tableware is light in weight and consumes less materials, it can save oil resources;

Fifth, the social environment has changed, and people's behavior of throwing away garbage has been greatly reduced.

But the public and many professionals are not convinced by these five reasons, because the reasons for banning foam lunch boxes were also convincing.

In January 1999, with the approval of the State Council, the former State Economic and Trade Commission promulgated and implemented the "Catalogue of Eliminating Outdated Production Capacity, Technology and Products" (the first batch) (referred to as Order No. 6, commonly known as the ban on white), requiring the elimination of disposable polystyrene foam tableware in China before the end of 2000.

In 2001, the former State Economic and Trade Commission once again emphasized in the "Emergency Notice on Immediately Stopping the Production of Disposable Foam Plastic Tableware": "Disposable foam plastic tableware has serious problems in production, use, and recycling: For example, the foaming agent used in the production process will destroy the atmospheric ozone layer; it is easy to produce a large amount of harmful substances under high temperature conditions; it is difficult to degrade when buried in the ground, which will cause pollution to the soil and groundwater, and it is very difficult to recycle and treat."

Comparing before and after, the second article of Order No. 21, which states that "it can be recycled and reused", has attracted more public attention: What is the value of recycling? How to reuse? Who will reuse? How to establish a recycling system?

Is the foam lunch box safe?

Yang Huidi: From a professional perspective, lunch boxes made of different materials have different properties. Transparent lunch boxes have a relatively high temperature resistance, can be put into the microwave, and the contents of the lunch box can be seen from the outside. The characteristics of foam lunch boxes are good rigidity, light weight, and can stack more than a dozen lunch boxes without collapsing. Although it is not degradable, it has better hygienic properties.

Dong Jinshi: I have four materials on hand, which I recently sent to the inspection agency for testing. There are food-grade resins, several scraps from the production of lunch boxes, and some purchased waste. From the test results of polystyrene resin, only food-grade resin materials meet the corresponding standards. However, from the test results of styrene monomer, all four are qualified.

This means that companies can take qualified raw materials for testing, but use unqualified raw materials in production without being discovered.

The most troublesome thing at present is that some companies use waste plastics or even imported foreign garbage to produce lunch boxes. The toxic lunch boxes produced are sold in China, while the lunch boxes produced with good raw materials are exclusively for export. This test result shows that the quality inspection department cannot completely determine whether these foam lunch boxes are safe.

So to ensure the safety of the lunch boxes, the purchasing records of the manufacturers should be checked. But many companies do not have records and invoices. Therefore, if many companies are producing in violation of regulations, it is difficult for our current regulatory power to find out one by one.

Zhang Di: In theory, I accept the five reasons given by the National Development and Reform Commission. But the information I know now is that China's production technology of disposable foam lunch boxes is 20 years behind that of Europe and the United States. Can it be used with confidence? Moreover, the Chinese are too "creative" and can use formaldehyde to soak sausages and mix melamine into milk powder. Maybe many things can be done in Europe and the United States, but I am afraid they will not work in China.

Can the decision-making be more transparent?

Yang Huidi: Many people say that the release of the ban is like a "bolt from the blue". This is actually the result of the lack of sufficient communication between the formulation of public policies and the public. But the National Development and Reform Commission is not starting to lift the ban on foam plastic lunch boxes now. In fact, the entire decision-making process was quite cautious. The relevant departments had done many toxicity tests before. Moreover, the foam lunch box has survived repeated bans for 14 years, which shows that it has vitality.

Li Bo: The process of lifting the ban on foam plastic tableware was a complete "surprise attack". The entire decision-making process did not involve the public, and there was very little public information. It is precisely because of this that it has attracted the attention of the public, the media and many government departments. The public is not only the creator of environmental problems, but also the victim of environmental problems. How can we participate in the environmental governance process? This requires the public to participate in the decision-making of environmental issues.

But now the public neither knows the process of relevant policy formulation nor has the opportunity to participate and express opinions. The policy of lifting the ban on foam plastic lunch boxes was formulated and issued.

Xia Jun: The legal term for this document, Order No. 21, is called administrative regulations, which is an administrative legislative act. In the past, projects related to foam plastic lunch boxes could not be approved, including the corresponding environmental impact assessment. The lifting of the ban means that these are now released and legalized. Therefore, this is a mandatory and effective regulation in China.

Is recycling technology feasible?

Li Bo: I once did an experiment. I piled up all the recyclable and non-recyclable garbage at home for three months, and then invited a garbage collector to come in, separate the garbage he wanted from the garbage he didn¡¯t want, and take it away without paying a penny. The condition was that he had to tell me why he wanted to collect these and not those. As a result, he refused to collect very light and thin plastics, including foam tableware.

His reason was that if he only collected these very light things, first, he would sell them for very little money, and second, there would be no space to store them. It can be seen that it is difficult to recycle all foam tableware by relying on the market alone.

Cao Yang: The garbage cans on the street are turned over and over by countless scavengers every day. Mineral water bottles or cans are picked up, but plastic bags, used toilet paper, etc., can also be recycled in theory. Why don¡¯t people pick them up? It¡¯s because the added value is low and they are not worth money.

Currently, the reuse rate of recycled garbage in China is only 40%. Developed countries such as Japan have a rate of more than 60% or 70%. Many cities in China are carrying out garbage sorting activities, but the implementation is not good. I hope that the lifting of the ban on foamed plastic lunch boxes can lead to the thorough use of garbage classification and full participation, which is the solution.

Dong Jinshi: Before the ban on the use of foamed lunch boxes, Beijing had tried systematic recycling. At that time, lunch boxes could be recycled as long as they paid money, but no matter where they were stored, they had a smell and attracted many flies and rats. The people were very dissatisfied and reported it to the municipal management department.

Yang Huidi: Everyone is worried that there are some toxic substances in the lunch boxes, etc. This is what unscrupulous merchants do, and it is actually two different things from the lifting of the ban on foamed lunch boxes. Don't confuse them. I think as long as the materials are qualified, they can be produced.

Recycling may be more difficult, but there are many ways. It is not necessarily that taking all of it back and reusing it is called recycling. For example, adding it to biological waste and making it into solid combustibles for incineration is also recycling, and it can even be put into iron smelting furnaces, steel smelting furnaces, and coking furnaces as fuel and carbon source.

In foreign countries, whoever pollutes is responsible, but it is wrong to think that recycling is the responsibility of the manufacturer. The recycling of waste plastic lunch boxes involves at least four aspects: raw material manufacturers, processing companies, merchants using them, and consumers are all responsible.

Plastic Industry Video