Plastic is everywhere — inside the human body, throughout the oceans and into the Arctic. A new study in The Lancet Planetary Health warns that, unless the world changes course, emissions from plastics across their entire life cycle could more than double plastic’s damage to human health by 2040.
The concern is not only plastic litter or microplastics in the environment, but the pollutants released from fossil fuel extraction, manufacturing, transport, recycling and disposal. About 99% of plastics are made from fossil fuels; the material is used in packaging, furniture, clothing, construction, medical devices and tires. Across its life cycle, plastic contributes greenhouse gases, fine particulate matter and toxic chemicals that harm health directly (for example by worsening respiratory and cardiovascular disease) and indirectly via climate change.
The study is the first to estimate healthy years of life lost attributable to plastics’ life cycle. Using the public-health metric disability-adjusted life years (DALYs), the authors combined modeled future plastic production under six scenarios with emissions and health-impact calculations. Their baseline year was 2016, when they estimate roughly 2.1 million healthy life years were lost globally due to plastics’ life-cycle emissions.
Looking ahead, the researchers estimate that emissions from plastics could slash about 83 million healthy life years between 2016 and 2040. Under a “business as usual” scenario — where production, recycling rates and waste leakage remain largely unchanged — annual health losses would exceed 4.5 million DALYs in 2040, more than double the 2016 figure. Even in the most optimistic scenario, with reduced use, higher recycling and better waste management, about 2.6 million healthy life years would still be lost in 2040, roughly half a million more than in 2016.
That scale of harm is striking: one researcher not involved in the study noted that the more than 4 million lost healthy life years projected for 2040 would amount to roughly five hours of lost full health for every person on Earth. Plastics also account for around 4.5% of global human-caused greenhouse gas emissions, a share smaller than energy or agriculture but large and growing as plastic production expands.
The study highlights concentrated local harms as well. In Louisiana, for example, a corridor of more than 200 petrochemical plants tied to plastic production — called “Cancer Alley” by residents — has been linked to elevated cancer risk. Globally, the OECD projects plastic consumption could nearly triple by 2060; as production rises, so do emissions and the associated health burden.
Importantly, the researchers point out that their estimates are conservative. They did not include potential health effects from micro- and nanoplastics or from toxic chemicals that can leach from plastic products during everyday use, because reliable global data are lacking. Those omissions mean the real health costs of plastics are almost certainly higher — the authors call their results “the tip of the iceberg.”
To reduce plastic-related health damage, the study’s authors and other experts say the most effective measure is producing less new plastic. That would involve reducing consumption, eliminating unnecessary products, switching to reuse systems and using plastics only where no viable alternatives exist. They also recommend banning hazardous chemicals in plastic production and harmonizing measures internationally under a strong, legally binding global plastics treaty that covers the full life cycle and associated chemicals.
Efforts toward such a treaty have faced political barriers: UN talks on a global plastics agreement stalled last year after disagreements, including resistance from major oil-producing states to limits on new production. Still, the researchers emphasize that action can and should be taken at individual, organizational, local and national levels to curb plastics pollution and its growing health toll.
This article was adapted from a report originally published in German and translated into English.