by John Lovett, Special to the Advocate, Arkansas Advocate
April 28, 2025

FAYETTEVILLE, Ark. — While biodegradable plastics currently account for a half percent of the hundreds of millions of tons of plastic produced annually, a growing demand for the alternative reflects consumer awareness and corporate response.

Researchers from Brazil, Germany and the United States document a multi-faceted global snapshot of the environmental aspects and trends surrounding single-use plastics in a review article titled “Rethinking single-use plastics: Innovations, policies, consumer awareness and market shaping biodegradable plastics in the packaging industry.” The piece was recently published in Trends in Food Science & Technology.

The researchers state that the largest area of application for biodegradable plastic materials is the packaging segment, which accounts for about half of single-use plastic production. The biodegradable packaging market was estimated to reach about $105 billion in 2024 with an expected annual growth rate of about 6 percent between 2024 and 2029, and 44 percent of patents filed worldwide for biodegradable polymers relate to packaging, the study noted.

About 474 million tons of plastics are produced globally each year, and about a third of it is used for packaging, including single-use plastic products for food and beverage containers. Of this, only about 25 percent gets recycled. Plastic production, the article adds, is expected to triple by 2060 following a trend of transitioning from durable plastics to single-use plastics.

Global plastic production increased from 369 million tons in 2016 to 404.5 million tons in 2020, partly due to materials used in the COVID-19 pandemic.

Citing a 2021 study from the same research group in Brazil, the review article noted the pandemic “exacerbated the use of single-use plastic and increased the demand for personal protective equipment and packaging, leading to remarkable growth in the plastics industry and generating more than 8 million tons of waste, mainly affecting Asia, Europe and America.” The same study mentions that the pandemic expanded food packaging due to a shift in eating habits and an increase in online purchases.

Despite the transition to single-use plastics, an increasing number of patents and successful research and development of biodegradable plastic materials has sparked the interest of industries to invest in large-scale production technologies for renewable monomers and polymers, the researchers added.

Looking to corn

Barone is supervised by Ana Elizabeth Cavalcante Fai, corresponding author for the review article, a food engineer and associate professor in food science at Rio de Janeiro State University, where she coordinates the Laboratory of Multidisciplinary Practices for Sustainability at the Institute of Nutrition.

“Food packaging plays a vital role in ensuring food safety and quality,” Fai said. “However, it is increasingly unjustifiable to produce short-life cycle packaging using synthetic plastics that persist in the environment for up to 400 years. Even more concerning is the growing awareness that plastics don’t degrade completely — they fragment into micro- and nanoplastics, which are now recognized as widespread environmental pollutants and an emerging public health concern.”

Ferreira said that while biodegradable plastics are a promising long-term alternative solution, it is not where he expects to see the biggest short-term impact on the reduction of overall plastic use.

Fai and Barone said that plastic has undeniably transformed modern life since its mass production began in the 1950s. However, despite its versatility and usefulness, “plastic has often been misused and is frequently applied to single-use items which are discarded with little regard for environmental consequences.”

“Most of the plastic ever made still exists in some form today,” Fai said. “When people say, ‘just throw it away,’ we must remember — there is no ‘away.’ Everything remains within the boundaries of our shared environment. The planet simply cannot absorb this volume of waste indefinitely. If current trends continue, some projections estimate that by 2050, there could be more plastic than fish in our oceans. This is not just alarming — it’s a call to urgent action.”

A “circular economy,” Ferreira said, could have a larger long-term impact on single-use plastic reduction. A circular economy broadens the familiar slogan of “reduce, reuse, recycle” to “rethink, refuse, reduce, reuse, repair and recycle,” in that order.

Brazil has an extraordinary biodiversity, Fai said, and a significant agro-industrial biomass base, rich in polysaccharides such as starch, pectin, lignin, and others. These valuable raw materials can be transformed into bio-based and biodegradable packaging for the food industry, she added.

“Through international partnerships, where each research group contributes its unique expertise, we can join efforts to develop sustainable and innovative packaging solutions,” Fai said. “This collaborative approach is key to building a more sustainable future for food systems worldwide,” said Fai and Barone.

“We are part of the problem as consumers, but at the end of the day, as consumers we can be part of the solution,” Ferreira said.

Co-authors of the review article on single-use plastics include Carollyne Maragoni-Santos of Federal University of the State of Rio de Janeiro; Patricia Marques de Farias of the Sustainable Packaging Institute in Germany; Camila Marcolongo Gomes Cortat of the Laboratory of Multidisciplinary Practices of Sustainability, Institute of Nutrition at the State University of Rio de Janeiro; Bianca Chieregato Maniglia of the University of São Paulo; and Ricardo Schmitz Ongaratto in the chemistry school at Federal University of Rio de Janeiro.

Plastics on the farm

“In our transplant production, rather than using the single-use plastics that you see in a store when you get plants, we use extra sturdy plastic transplant trays,” Friedrich said. “We know farmers who have used these for 20-plus years and are still strong.”

Friedrich said the CAFF farm also uses a paper pot system adapted from Japan that uses a chain of paper strips to form cells in which they grow the transplants. The training farm also uses a landscape fabric instead of plastic mulch for weed control, which can be reused over many years.

However, use of single-use plastic is unavoidable at times. For its “tractor-scale” production, CAFF uses the black plastic seen on strawberry beds at u-pick operations.

“Plants respond well to plasticulture because it warms the soil early, creates a weed free zone and delivers water directly to the plant roots,” Friedrich said. “The current biodegradable options for this function can’t hold up over the long, hot season.”

A thick, clear plastic is used to cover high tunnels at the farm, but that material has a longer lifespan of four to six years. High tunnels differ from greenhouses by generally having less climate control but still allow protection of plants from the elements and extend the growing season from early spring to late fall.

Irrigation drip tape — a flat tubing that provides water directly to plant roots — can also be a source of plastic on the farm, Friedrich said, and they try to use theirs for multiple years to minimize landfill deposits.

“In other areas of the state, there are recycling options that farmers can off-load their irrigation plastic,” Friedrich said.

Polypipe is commonly used for irrigation in row crop operations. When the season has ended, farmers roll up the pipe and drop it off for recycling.

The Center for Arkansas Farms and Food was developed to strengthen and expand our food and farming system by providing new opportunities to shape our current and future farmers, food entrepreneurs and food system leaders. CAFF is a program of the Arkansas Agricultural Experiment Station through the University of Arkansas System Division of Agriculture.

Through experiential learning, the center’s programs train farmers and food entrepreneurs with the production and business skills and resources necessary to develop resilient businesses that sustain our ecosystem, our land and our communities.

Arkansas Advocate is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Arkansas Advocate maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Sonny Albarado for questions: info@arkansasadvocate.com.

The post Research into biodegradable plastics involves Arkansas scientist appeared first on arkansasadvocate.com

Note: The following A.I. based commentary is not part of the original article, reproduced above, but is offered in the hopes that it will promote greater media literacy and critical thinking, by making any potential bias more visible to the reader –Staff Editor.

Political Bias Rating: Center-Left

This content leans center-left as it emphasizes environmental concerns related to plastics, the importance of sustainable innovations like biodegradable plastics, and the promotion of a circular economy. The narrative highlights scientific research, environmental responsibility, and the need for systemic changes, which align with progressive and environmentally conscious viewpoints. However, it maintains a balanced tone without overtly ideological language or partisan framing, making it more moderate than far-left activism. The article encourages practical solutions and consumer awareness, typical of center-left environmental discourse.

by Tess Vrbin, Arkansas Advocate
April 25, 2025

The Arkansas Abortion Support Network plans to show people on Saturday what seeking an abortion was like before the state’s ban took effect nearly three years ago, the group announced in a press release.

The “immersive” event will take place at a former Little Rock abortion clinic that now houses the Your Options Understood (YOU) Center, which AASN launched in the fall of 2022. The center provides resources about abortion, parenting or adoption. 

Little Rock Family Planning Services was the only abortion provider in Arkansas before the state enacted one of the nation’s most restrictive abortion bans, with a narrow exception to save the life of a pregnant person in an emergency.

AASN has helped fund out-of-state abortion services since Arkansas’ 2019 “trigger” abortion ban took effect upon the U.S. Supreme Court’s reversal of Roe v. Wade in June 2022.

Arkansas lawmakers have since proposed restricting abortion further or clarifying the terms of the existing ban. Some of those proposals became law after the 2025 legislative session, which ended last week, and the 2023 session, which saw a wider range of maternal and reproductive health legislation.

Brittaney Stockton, AASN’s policy and growth strategist, said she and other activists take issue with legislation that further governs abortion resources when the procedure is already banned. An unsuccessful bill this year would have required health care facilities to be licensed as ambulatory surgery centers in order to perform abortions if the procedure becomes legal again.

“We do not have access to abortion, but [lawmakers] are still doing everything they can to chip away and make it harder,” Stockton said.

Arkansas Legislature saw wide range of maternal and reproductive health legislation in 2023

Even while Roe v. Wade was still in place, state law required Arkansans seeking abortions to jump through “additional hoops,” which will be included in Saturday’s reenactment, Stockton said. Such “hoops” included a pregnant patient’s written consent for an abortion, a 72-hour waiting period between a doctor’s consultation and the procedure, and the requirement for doctors to show ultrasound images to pregnant patients seeking abortions.

Participants in Saturday’s event will learn why patients of the former clinic sought abortions. No personal information will be shared, Stockton said.

A key aspect of the event will be the portrayal of anti-abortion protesters outside the clinic, which can be “traumatic” for abortion seekers, Stockton said.

“We really want folks to understand what it was like to come into a clinic,” she said. “Whether you were there for a fetal anomaly or because you experienced sexual assault, or whatever … you still had to go through protesters telling you that you were evil, and making a terrible decision, and ‘Why can’t you just think about the baby?’”

The reenactment should last between 10 and 15 minutes, but wait times at abortion clinics used to last hours, Stockton said.

Afterward, attendees will have the opportunity to watch the film Preconceived, a documentary “contrasting the abortion experience with the misleading tactics of crisis pregnancy centers,” according to AASN’s news release. The event is scheduled from 11 a.m. to 1 p.m.

The YOU Center is next to Arkansas Pregnancy Resource Center’s Little Rock location. APRC is one of several anti-abortion centers state lawmakers have supported with taxpayer funds since the abortion ban took effect. Thirty-five organizations applied for shares of the $2 million set aside last year; pro-choice advocates have said these centers mislead pregnant people about their options.

Stockton participated in last year’s attempt to put a proposed limited right to abortion on the November ballot. Many Arkansans were unaware of the near-total abortion ban, she said, and some of her fellow canvassers were not aware of the former abortion clinic in Little Rock.

Saturday’s event is an effort to close gaps in public knowledge about abortion in Arkansas, Stockton said.

“There’s hope in knowing what happened in the past so you can understand and do better moving forward,” she said.

The Arkansas Abortion Amendment did not make it to the ballot after the Secretary of State disqualified more than 14,000 signatures on a technicality.

Other Arkansas laws ban abortions at 12, 18 and 20 weeks’ gestation. A Democrat-sponsored bill to repeal these bans and restore abortion access in Arkansas was not considered by the Republican-led Legislature this year.

Legislative background

AASN’s services at the YOU Center include free emergency contraceptives, condoms and pregnancy tests. The organization distributed more than 13,000 doses of emergency contraception in 2024, Stockton said.

She also said Arkansans should not take the availability of contraceptives for granted because in her 15 years as a pro-choice advocate, she has watched lawmakers place more and more restrictions on abortion before and after Roe v. Wade’s reversal.

Earlier this month, a House committee rejected a bill from Rep. Robin Lundstrum, R-Elm Springs, that would have required minors to obtain written parental consent in order to receive long-acting reversible contraception, such as an intrauterine device (IUD). The Arkansas chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics opposed the bill.

Lundstrum said Thursday she has not decided if she will reintroduce the bill in a future legislative session. She said she wanted the bill to “open this conversation” that IUDs can have side effects and do not prevent sexually transmitted diseases even though they prevent pregnancy.

“These kids are thinking it’s a get-out-of-jail-free card,” Lundstrum said. “The parents and the doctor and the kids need to have a conversation that this is not a be-all end-all.”

Arkansas’ teenage pregnancy rate is more than twice the national average, with the majority of those pregnancies unplanned, according to data from Arkansas Advocates for Children and Families. The organization said last year that greater access to contraception and a more robust sex education landscape would reduce the rates of teen pregnancy and birth.

In February, a Senate committee rejected a proposal to require public school students, starting in fifth grade, be shown a fetal development video created by an anti-abortion organization. Stockton spoke against the bill and advocated for more comprehensive sex education in public schools; state law requires abstinence-based sex education, if it is taught at all.

A separate bill that became law this month will require “human fetal growth and development education” and the viewing of an ultrasound video at grade levels to be determined by the Arkansas Department of Health.

Lundstrum said she’s not aware of any upcoming proposals to further change Arkansas’ abortion laws.

She said she was asked to sponsor Act 387 of 2025, which clarifies that doctors can perform abortions to save a pregnant Arkansan’s life within “reasonable medical judgment.” The law will “let doctors in emergency situations be doctors,” Lundstrum said. It passed the Legislature with bipartisan support.

Another new Arkansas reproductive health law — Act 859, the Reproductive Empowerment and Support Through Optimal Restoration (RESTORE) Act — requires all entities that receive federal family planning service grant funds to provide services that help women track and manage their fertility.

“The RESTORE Act is groundbreaking legislation that champions reproductive healthcare for women in Arkansas by prioritizing restorative reproductive medicine,” conservative group Heritage Action for America stated in a news release Wednesday.

The law also prohibits state-funded entities from penalizing a medical professional who declines to participate in fertility treatments due to “sincerely held religious beliefs or moral convictions.” Another new law allows medical providers to opt out of providing abortions for religious reasons.

Arkansas Advocate is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Arkansas Advocate maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Sonny Albarado for questions: info@arkansasadvocate.com.

The post Arkansas abortion ban gets tweaked; pro-choice advocates plan “immersive” event appeared first on arkansasadvocate.com

Note: The following A.I. based commentary is not part of the original article, reproduced above, but is offered in the hopes that it will promote greater media literacy and critical thinking, by making any potential bias more visible to the reader –Staff Editor.

Political Bias Rating: Left-Leaning

This content presents a strong pro-choice perspective, advocating for increased access to abortion services in Arkansas and opposing restrictive abortion legislation. It discusses efforts by the Arkansas Abortion Support Network (AASN) to raise awareness about the challenges of seeking an abortion in the state after the ban took effect, highlighting emotional and logistical barriers faced by abortion seekers. The language used also criticizes lawmakers who attempt to “chip away” at abortion rights and points to legislative actions that further restrict access.

The article clearly reflects an advocacy for reproductive rights, particularly in opposition to anti-abortion policies and practices. This aligns with a left-leaning stance on abortion and reproductive health, as the content emphasizes the need for more access and criticizes conservative legislation.

by Ainsley Platt, Arkansas Advocate
April 24, 2025

Two coal-fired power plants in Arkansas are exempt from revised air pollution rules under a Trump administration rollback of environmental standards adopted last year, leaving some former EPA officials and environment groups concerned about prolonged exposure to unhealthy emissions.

The exemptions will last for two years, long enough to keep one plant already slated for closure from having to install equipment required by the new rules.

As part of its deregulation efforts, the Trump administration put out a call earlier this year for companies to request exemptions to several environmental rules finalized in Biden’s last year in office. The Clean Air Act allows the president to exempt pollution sources from compliance with any part of section 112 of the CAA if “the technology to implement the standard is not available and it is in the national security interests of the United States to do so.” 

Entergy Arkansas’ White Bluff 1 power station near Redfield and the Plum Point Energy Station near Osceola, which is owned by a consortium of utility companies, applied for the exemption.

Had President Donald Trump not directed the Environmental Protection Agency to provide the exemptions, the plants would have been required to install continuous emissions monitoring systems (CEMS) to measure the amounts of particulates released into the air. The plants also would have been subject to stricter regulations for how much particulate matter they could release through their stacks.

Instead, the plants will only be subject to the version of the rule prior to the 2024 revisions. The plants now have until 2029 to comply with the requirements finalized last year — that is, if they remain in effect.

The Mercury and Air Toxics (MATS) rule is one of more than two dozen environmental and pollution regulations being targeted for rollbacks by EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin. In a statement announcing the deregulation targets in March, Zeldin said the move was a push back against “destruction and destitution” caused by EPA rules enacted in the previous administration.

The White Bluff plant is scheduled to be shut down in 2028, an Entergy Arkansas spokesperson said.

“White Bluff 1 is the only affected unit in Arkansas that may require the installation of additional equipment to meet new MATS requirements coming into effect in 2027, and that same unit is also subject to a requirement to cease burning coal at the end of 2028 under a consent decree,” Matt Ramsey said in an emailed statement. “This exemption will avoid the need to make additional MATS-related investments that increase costs to our customers so close to the cessation of coal date.

“White Bluff 1 will continue to operate under the current MATS standards, which the EPA has determined to be protective of public health with an adequate margin of safety,” Ramsey added. 

MATS matters

The MATS rule was first issued in 2012 to reduce the amount of mercury and other toxics being emitted by coal power plants. Those rules were revised in 2024, during the final months of the Biden administration, requiring all facilities subject to the rule to install CEMS monitoring while tightening the amount of “filterable particulate matter” that a coal power plant could emit.

The revised requirements slashed the amount of particulate matter a coal plant could emit by two-thirds. A fact sheet issued by the EPA last year said that 93% of existing coal plants that were not already set to close already met the revised particulate matter standard.

Particulate matter is used as a surrogate for emissions of mercury, a heavy metal, and other pollutants designated as air toxics under the federal Clean Air Act. Heavy metals can be toxic to humans, and inhaling them can lead to respiratory issues such as asthma.

“Fine particulate matter in the rule and in the science is a proxy for these heavy metals,” explained Sierra Club attorney Tony Mendoza. “So if you’re limiting fine particulate matter to a certain level, EPA found you’re reducing your emissions of mercury and arsenic and nickel.”

Mendoza said he had been surprised that the Plum Point and White Bluff facilities had requested exemptions, saying that documentation put forth by the EPA during the rulemaking process led them to believe it would not be difficult for either plant to comply with the revised rule.

“It seems that they should have been able to comply and there is some non-public reason why they’re seeking that exemption,” Mendoza said. “We were frankly a little surprised to see them on that list.”

Frustration and concern

The chair of the Sierra Club’s Arkansas chapter expressed frustration and concern over the Trump administration’s move. The Sierra Club was one of the plaintiffs in a lawsuit that resulted in the consent decree that requires Entergy to shut down White Bluff and its Independence coal plant within the next ten years.

“Environmental issues tend to work kind of like co-morbidities, where air quality issues on their own might not be causing huge issues for the average Arkansan,” Erica Kriner said, “but then you add poor drinking water from hog farms disposing waste into the Buffalo River; then you add an uptick of diseases that threaten agriculture; and suddenly all of these issues start to snowball with each other.”

Kriner said it was important that Arkansas communities understand the “larger context” of what these actions can mean. She compared the attempts to roll back regulations to a car in need of repair — perhaps it could continue to run at first, but it would eventually stop working.

“Chipping away at our clean air protections may not feel like it will lead to dire consequences, but the Trump administration, the [Sarah] Huckabee Sanders administration, they rely on people not understanding the long-term consequences of dismantling these regulations,” Kriner said.

The exemption from complying with the revised rule was particularly concerning for Joe Goffman, who oversaw the 2024 revisions as the head of the Environmental Protection Agency’s air office during the Biden administration and helped author the section of the Clean Air Act that gave the EPA the authority to regulate so-called “air toxics,” such as mercury, in 1990.

Goffman said the MATS rule exemptions for coal-powered plants would allow these facilities to continue using less frequent testing to demonstrate compliance with the pre-2024 version of the standards, which they are still subject to, if they had not already begun using CEMS.

Goffman said this leaves room for inaccuracies and potentially even manipulation.

“I can say from my many decades of experience in this area — if there was one pollutant” that Congress decided to regulate, “the pollutant to target is PM [particulate matter], because that’s the most dangerous pollutant that makes people sick,” Goffman said. 

That’s because harmful substances – like mercury – “ride” on fine particles.

“A lot of these substances are carried by fine particles,” Goffman said. “In other words, you don’t have these free floating nickel molecules or other heavy metal molecules. They ride on fine particles. That’s what makes them particularly lethal.”

Without a CEMS monitoring mandate for all coal plants, Goffman said, there could be “a lot” of particulate matter that is being emitted that isn’t necessarily reflected in reporting.

Arkansas Advocate is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Arkansas Advocate maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Sonny Albarado for questions: info@arkansasadvocate.com.

The post Two Arkansas coal-fired plants win exemptions for monitoring toxic air particles appeared first on arkansasadvocate.com

Note: The following A.I. based commentary is not part of the original article, reproduced above, but is offered in the hopes that it will promote greater media literacy and critical thinking, by making any potential bias more visible to the reader –Staff Editor.

Political Bias Assessment: Center-Right

The article primarily discusses the Trump administration’s rollback of environmental regulations, particularly with regard to air pollution standards for coal-fired power plants in Arkansas. It presents the viewpoint of the administration’s policy as one focused on deregulation and reducing what is described as “burdensome” restrictions. This reflects a right-leaning stance, as the policy approach aligns with the traditional conservative emphasis on reducing government intervention in business and regulatory practices.

While the article includes criticism from environmental groups and former EPA officials, which represents a left-leaning perspective, the focus on the actions taken under Trump’s deregulation efforts and the framing of those actions as part of a broader conservative agenda signals a Center-Right bias in the overall tone and context. The criticisms of the exemptions are presented as concerns about the long-term impact, but the narrative is largely driven by the deregulation viewpoint associated with the Trump administration.