The Face Mask Paradox

Original article (in Vietnamese): https://vnexpress.net/nghich-ly-khau-trang-4761409.html

Whenever I return to Vietnam, I have a habit of walking in a large park in the center of Hanoi, and I frequently see many used medical masks discarded by the roadside or floating on the surface of the lake.

Source: Ma, J., Chen, F., Xu, H., Jiang, H., Liu, J., Li, P., Chen, C. C., & Pan, K. (2021). Face masks as a source of nanoplastics and microplastics in the environment: Quantification, characterization, and potential for bioaccumulation. Environmental Pollution, 288, 117748. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2021.117748

This image reminds me of a statement by Dr. Pham Ngoc Bao - Deputy Director of the Adaptation and Water research group at an exchange between the Institute for Global Environmental Strategies (Japan) and the International Institute for Sustainable Development (Canada), which I attended: "Microplastic pollution in Southeast Asian countries is reaching alarming levels. Only about 30% of microplastic waste is treated before being discharged into the environment. Particularly in the Philippines, when collecting and analyzing microplastic waste samples, scientists discovered that the largest source of microplastics was blue – originating from medical masks."

Earlier this year, for the first time in history, scientists discovered microplastics in human blood and placentas.

The face mask, with the purpose of protecting human health, has now become a major hazard to us in the long run. Inherently, the face mask is not the problem, but the way they are not recycled properly and cause long-term consequences is.

In Vietnam, the circular economy model is gradually being learned and applied, with the goal of using resources efficiently and economically, limiting waste, and recycling waste.

Major companies in the world today do not just aim for profit when investing. They also seek sustainable development solutions. "Green transition" is no longer just "cosmetic makeup," but has become one of the mandatory criteria for products when entering major markets.

The European Union has agreed that by the end of 2025, all member countries must integrate "Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR)" into their national environmental laws. EPR is an environmental policy that requires producers to be responsible for the entire life cycle of their products and services, rather than just until the distribution step to consumers. This means producers must have logistics and recycling plans for every product and service provided. EPR is evaluated as an effective tool to minimize the impact of waste, reduce environmental pollution, and create motivation for green transition - where economies commit to and comply with more sustainable standards.

Vietnam is one of the leading countries in Southeast Asia, as regulations and legislation related to EPR were first drafted in the Law on Environmental Protection 2020, and took effect on January 1, 2024, regarding recycling responsibilities for producers and importers of tires, batteries, accumulators, lubricants, and packaged products.

Implementing EPR is a big step forward in the economy's "Green Transition" strategy. However, with anything new, there are always difficulties and inadequacies.

To ensure extended responsibility, businesses can only choose one of two main ways: (1) self-recycling and (2) contributing financially to the Vietnam Environmental Protection Fund as a type of tax based on the volume and mandatory recycling rate of the product.

However, in a recent survey, businesses leaned towards the simpler option of paying into the fund.

This is quite understandable given that the reality of recycling in Vietnam is still limited. Choosing the self-recycling option, businesses must organize recycling themselves or authorize a third party. Not every business has the capacity and resources to organize post-distribution recycling, while authorizing a third party to recycle carries many risks, as recycling facilities in Vietnam are still spontaneous and rudimentary, with a severe lack of standard infrastructure.

Outdated recycling methods even risk causing more environmental pollution than the amount of pollution reduced from recycling activities. Choosing the self-recycling option also causes businesses to increase production costs, raising product prices and reducing competitiveness in the market.

I believe that to create opportunities and motivation for businesses to self-recycle, authorities should consider enacting a third option allowing businesses to participate simultaneously in both self-recycling and financial contribution based on their capacity.

This approach has many advantages in Vietnam. First, it allows businesses time to participate and adapt to new regulations, as well as empowering them to decide on a recycling rate suitable for their capacity, instead of placing a burden and forcing them to choose between recycling or paying, which causes a negative mentality.

Second, it encourages many producers and importers to participate in organizing self-recycling, indirectly creating motivation for specialized recycling businesses in Vietnam to raise standards, and attracting infrastructure investment capital from abroad, contributing to the "Green Transition" effort towards a circular economy.

Third, having more producers participate in organizing self-recycling also indirectly raises awareness about waste sorting at the source in households through campaigns and advertising programs.

In Osaka, where I live, waste recycling has been standardized down to each household. Regulations on waste sorting are applied flexibly based on the recycling conditions and infrastructure of each city. In large cities, waste can be classified into 7-8 different groups, while in some other cities far from the center, there are only two main groups: burnable waste and recyclable waste.

If you have ever been to Japan, you might be surprised to see very few public trash cans, yet the streets are very clean. The reason lies largely in the consciousness of the people, who always voluntarily take the waste generated during the day back home. Early education in schools plays a big role as Japanese students are always exposed to waste sorting and classroom cleaning activities frequently from a young age.

In Vietnam, waste sorting at the source, although considered a fundamental and inevitable solution, after a long time still stops at "pilot" projects.

I believe that people's awareness of waste sorting and recycling will gradually be improved when the financial contributions of EPR from producers to the environmental protection fund are turned into direct projects and actions at schools, where the majority of waste is recyclable such as books, school supplies...

Only when awareness of environmental protection is raised will paradoxes like the example of the medical mask no longer exist.