On July 1, 2025, it will become a landmark node in the environmental protection process in the United States. On this day, the multi state "plastic ban" officially came into effect, marking the start of a comprehensive transformation from the end of consumption to the social structure. The paid paper bags in front of the supermarket checkout counter are the most intuitive epitome of this paradigm shift - the low-cost era of "plastic convenience" has come to an end. The chain reaction quickly spread to all corners: the catering industry said goodbye to polystyrene foam lunch boxes, and the hotel industry abandoned small plastic cleaning bottles. In Delaware, the coercive power of regulations is reshaping the business ecosystem, with restaurant owners not only having to replace containers, but also retraining their employees on how to deal with new regulations that require customers to proactively request straws. This is a huge impact on operational inertia, "said a restaurant manager, whose words condensed the pains and choices faced by countless enterprises in this wave of green transformation.
A few things you need to know about the latest "plastic ban" in the United States:
Q: Will the United States ban plastic on July 1, 2025?
Answer: No. This is a common misconception. In fact, multiple states began implementing their own newly passed regulations around this day. This is a "multi state linkage" rather than a "national unification" action, so the regulations vary from state to state.
Q: What specific impacts will my daily life be affected by?
Answer: It depends on your state. For example:
In Delaware, you won't be able to get a styrofoam lunch box or plastic mixing stick.
In Virginia, large chain restaurants will also ban foam lunch boxes.
In Illinois (effective from 2026), large hotels will no longer provide disposable shampoo bottles.
Q: Are these bans just prohibiting the use of certain things? Is there any deeper content?
Answer: Yes, this is the core of this change. In addition to directly banning certain products, states like Oregon and Minnesota are implementing a program called Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR). Simply put, it means' whoever produces is responsible '. In the future, companies that manufacture packaging and tableware must invest in managing the waste generated after the use of these products.
Q: Why is there such a system as EPR?
Answer: The purpose is to solve the problem from the source. In the past, the cost of garbage disposal was borne by the government and taxpayers. The EPR system forces manufacturers to consider recycling and environmental issues when designing products, as this directly affects their costs. This is a crucial step in driving the entire industry towards a more sustainable direction.
More disruptive than consumer bans is the mandatory implementation of Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) in this legislative wave. This marks a profound economic model shift: the management cost of plastic waste is forcibly transferred back from public finances (i.e. taxpayers) and consumers to its producers.
The Oregon bill is a model that concretizes responsibility into two core obligations: joining producer responsibility organizations (PROs) and providing funding for the final disposal of products. This is equivalent to pre calculating the "afterlife" cost of the product into its total lifecycle cost.
Minnesota and Colorado have provided key supporting measures at the implementation level: the former has set a registration deadline and completed the confirmation of responsible parties; The latter provides a basis for subsequent regulation and cost accounting through a data reporting mechanism.
Behind this series of combination punches is a clear economic signal: the full lifecycle management from cradle to grave will no longer be an environmental slogan, but a legal standard that enterprises must comply with and a business cost that must be accounted for. The business model of 'end of responsibility' that used to push products to the market is being replaced by a new economic model that internalizes environmental costs.
At least 12 states, including California, New York, and New Jersey, have legislated to prohibit the use of disposable plastic bags in the retail industry. This series of legislative actions is not accidental, but based on the following severe data:
人均消耗量： 美国人均年使用约300个塑料袋，总计达1000亿个，构成巨大的消费惯性。
全球视角： 全球年消耗量高达5万亿个，表明这是一个全球性的环境挑战。
生态后果：
海洋污染： 塑料袋在美国海岸线垃圾总量中占比约10%，是海洋“塑料漩涡”的主要构成物。
陆地压力： 塑料制品占据了垃圾填埋场19%的体积，成为土地资源的长期负担。
系统性失灵： 全球塑料制品的回收率仅为9%。这一数据揭示了一个核心问题：依赖末端回收的治理模式已宣告失败，绝大多数塑料制品在一次性使用后便成为永久性污染物。
随着禁令范围扩大，可降解材料、可重复使用包装的研发和生产成为热点。生物降解塑料的市场需求被进一步推动，创造塑料循环利用、废弃物管理等产业的机遇。现有替代产品尚处于商业化初期阶段，生产未成规模，成本普遍较高，性能也难以匹敌。2017年，可降解生物塑料全球产能仅为200万吨/年，不足全球塑料年需求的1%，价格比普通塑料高出两到三倍。
