Recent Analysis Shows Folly of Anti-Plastic Policies

Every day, hundreds of millions of Americans rely on plastics to stay healthy, get around, keep their homes in working order, and make errands easier. Unfortunately, policymakers at both the federal and state level are determined to make plastic products more costly and difficult to access, even though plastic pollution from America is close to zero. As the American Consumer Institute (ACI) points out in a recently released analysis, shifting away from plastic would be “inherently inflationary and inefficient” and impose “a permanent, recurring burden on the consumer’s grocery budget.” Policymakers should reject these misguided proposals and allow continued consumer access to affordable packaging.

In its report, ACI examines what a mandated transition away from plastic packaging to more expensive alternatives would entail across a representative 49-item “Master Basket” of consumer goods. The results aren’t encouraging for advocates of onerous anti-plastic mandates. ACI notes, “Across the 49-item Master Basket, the mandated transition away from plastic results in a 21.6 percent cumulative price increase ($60.75). This raises the total cost of the representative grocery basket from a baseline of $281.29 to $342.04.” 

Some of the hardest-hit items are critical staples: “Whole Milk (1 gal) is projected to increase by 38.3 percent ($1.53 per unit),” while anti-plastic mandates applied to “proteins and frozen staples result[] in per-unit increases ranging from 15 percent to 28 percent ($0.74 to $1.10). These spikes are primarily driven by the loss of hermetic seals and moisture-lock barriers, necessitating higher retail margins to offset spoilage.” These increases would exacerbate inflation—which stubbornly remains above 3 percent—and would make it even more difficult for families to afford basic food items. 

Instead of trying to relieve these cost pressures, the government has predictably made the problem worse. As the Taxpayers Protection Alliance has pointed out in previous blog posts and op-eds, allegedly “wasteful” and “dirty” industries such as plastics manufacturing were frequent targets of the Biden administration. Through measures such as “national strategies” (read: bans) and “risk mitigation plans,” the former President emphasized needless administrative procedures (often of dubious constitutionality). All this came at the cost of regulatory flexibility as well as job and wage growth.

These costly plans failed to take into account increasingly-popular technologies such as pyrolysis. This is a process by which plastics are heated in a controlled environment and turned into new products such as fuels. According to a 2025 analysis published in Energy Conversion and Management, “Pyrolysis can convert 60–80 percent of plastic waste into liquid fuels, with yields of up to 85 percent in fast pyrolysis processes conducted at temperatures between 450 °C and 600 °C. The process also reduces greenhouse gas emissions by 40 percent, mitigating 3.5 tons of CO₂-equivalent per ton of plastic waste processed. Economically, pyrolysis oil can be sold for $600–$900 per ton, while syngas, with a market value of $200–$300 per ton, can generate up to 800 kWh of electricity per ton of waste.”

Given these significant benefits, recycling advocates have pushed for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to regulate certain pyrolysis processes as manufacturing instead of incineration or waste management. These latter categories trigger not only stringent federal regulations, but also onerous state laws.

Under the leadership of President Trump, the EPA is finally reversing course. The agency is currently moving to clarify that certain pyrolysis technologies employed for chemical recycling purposes “are not forms of incineration” under the Clean Air Act. This proposed change would also remove pyrolysis/combustion units from the EPA’s definition of a municipal waste combustion unit under its Other Solid Waste Incinerators category, ensuring a light-touch regulatory approach.

This is an important step in the right direction. However, policymakers must also remain on guard against misguided proposals at all levels of government to overregulate and phase out plastics. Plastics can power the future and make Americans safer, wealthier, and healthier, but only with the right set of policies.