Article image

The Planetary Triptych of Crisis

Wednesday, 12 November 2025 04:30

Summary

The global effort to manage the planet’s ecological crisis is being defined by three distinct, yet interconnected, scientific and political failures: the unchecked proliferation of plastics, the unsustainable boundaries of the global food system, and the significant implementation gap in the hydrogen economy. Conventional plastics’ life-cycle greenhouse gas emissions are projected to nearly quadruple by 2050, from 1.7 GtCO2e in 2015 to 6.5 GtCO2e, a trajectory that international treaty negotiations have so far failed to curb due to a fundamental disagreement over capping production. Simultaneously, the global food system, which drives the transgression of five planetary boundaries and contributes over 30% of anthropogenic emissions, lacks integrated national policies that simultaneously address climate, biodiversity, and nutrition. Finally, the much-touted green hydrogen revolution faces a massive implementation gap, with only 7% of announced projects finishing on schedule in 2023, and its overall mitigation potential is limited to a modest 0.5–3% of global annual CO2 emissions, underscoring the need for a strategic focus on hard-to-abate sectors rather than a broad energy transition.

The Unchecked Trajectory of Plastic Emissions

The disposal of plastics has emerged as a critical, yet often overlooked, climate decision, with its life-cycle emissions placing a substantial and growing burden on global decarbonisation efforts7. In 2015, the global life-cycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions attributed to conventional plastics stood at 1.7 Gt of CO2-equivalent (CO2e)7. Under the current production and waste management trajectory, this figure is projected to soar to 6.5 GtCO2e by 2050, representing a nearly fourfold increase7. This dramatic rise is a direct consequence of the linear economic model that treats plastic as a disposable commodity7.

As of 2015, approximately 6,300 million tonnes (Mt) of plastic waste had been generated globally7. Of this colossal amount, a mere 9% had been recycled, 12% was incinerated, and a staggering 79% had accumulated in landfills or the natural environment7. If current trends persist, the total amount of plastic waste in landfills or the environment is expected to reach 12,000 Mt by 20507. The scientific consensus is clear: only the aggressive, concerted application of renewable energy, recycling, and demand-management strategies has the potential to keep 2050 emissions comparable to the 2015 level7.

However, the political will to implement such aggressive measures has been severely tested in international forums1,4,5. Negotiations for a legally binding global plastics treaty, which began in 2022, have been fraught with disagreement3,4. The second part of the fifth session of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC-5.2), held in August 2025, adjourned without reaching a consensus on a final text4,5. The central point of contention remains whether the treaty should impose mandatory caps on new plastic production or instead focus on downstream measures such as waste management, improved design, and recycling1,5. Major oil-and-gas-producing nations, including the United States, Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait, have consistently opposed provisions that would cut plastic production or ban chemical additives5. This gridlock, which has seen talks collapse without a clear path forward, leaves the world without a collective, legally binding mechanism to address the root cause of the pollution crisis: the fossil fuel-driven expansion of plastic manufacturing1,3,5. The failure to agree on upstream measures, such as production reduction, makes it challenging to include key extraction or production reduction measures in the final draft, thereby compromising the treaty’s ability to comprehensively address the full life cycle of plastics3.

The Unbounded Crisis of Global Food Systems

The global food system, encompassing everything from production and processing to distribution and consumption, is a primary driver of planetary destabilisation, yet its boundaries remain conceptually and politically elusive4,6,8. The system is responsible for approximately 30% of global anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions4,15. This estimate includes emissions from crop and livestock activities, land-use change, and the energy-intensive processes of food processing, packaging, transportation, and retail4. Furthermore, the food system accounts for almost one-third of the global burden of disease, highlighting a profound failure to deliver both environmental and human health outcomes15.

Scientific analysis indicates that the current food system is a major contributor to the transgression of five of the nine established planetary boundaries: climate change, biosphere integrity, land use, freshwater use, and nitrogen and phosphorus flows4. The environmental effects of the global food system are projected to increase by between 50% and 90% by 2050, a consequence of projected increases in human population, changes in diets, and rising income levels4. This trajectory will push the system further beyond the Earth’s safe operating space4.

The challenge for policymakers lies in the inherent complexity of defining the system’s boundaries6,8. The interconnectedness of physical, social, economic, political, and ecological systems at all scales means that comprehensive thinking on social and ecological issues “can find no natural boundaries”6. This lack of clear demarcation complicates the development of effective interventions, often leading to partial analyses and solutions that risk ‘burden shifting’8. Burden shifting occurs when an intervention creates the appearance of progress in one area while failing to address the root causes of degradation or simply displacing the problem to another part of the system or the world14. For instance, corporate ‘greenwashing’ through carbon offsets and technological fixes in developing countries can create the illusion of climate action in the Global North, while failing to address the systemic issues of overconsumption and extractivist supply chains14.

Addressing this systemic failure requires a holistic transformation, yet national policy integration remains weak4,12. Less than 12% of national policies worldwide explicitly consider climate, biodiversity, and nutrition together12. The necessary transformation involves a shift towards healthier, diversified, and more plant-based diets, alongside spatially redistributed cropland, improved water-nutrient management, and significant food waste reduction4,15. The current policy landscape, however, is not yet equipped to mandate the hard societal changes in values and consumption patterns required to operate within planetary limits12.

The Implementation Gap in the Hydrogen Economy

Hydrogen is widely promoted as a critical component for decarbonising hard-to-electrify sectors, yet the reality of its deployment is constrained by a significant ‘implementation gap’ and a modest overall climate mitigation potential1,6,9. A comprehensive analysis of approximately 2,000 low-carbon hydrogen projects, encompassing operational and planned initiatives until 2043, reveals a stark disparity between ambition and reality1. The net life cycle greenhouse gas emission reduction potential of these existing and planned projects is quantified to be between 0.2 and 1.1 GtCO2e per year by 20431. This range represents a relatively small contribution, accounting for only 0.5% to 3% of global annual CO2 emissions1.

The primary challenge is the chasm between announced capacity and actual delivery6,7. Tracking 190 projects over three years showed that only 7% of global capacity announcements were completed on schedule in 20236. While the ‘ambition gap’ towards 1.5 °C scenarios has been closing, with the announced project pipeline nearly tripling to 422 GW within three years, the ‘implementation gap’ remains wide6. This failure to translate announcements into operational capacity is driven by high upfront costs, significant investment risks, and a lack of robust infrastructure6,8,9.

Green hydrogen production, which uses electrolysis powered by renewable energy, is currently two to three times more expensive than its fossil fuel-based counterpart, ‘grey’ hydrogen9. Realising all announced projects without a global carbon pricing mechanism would necessitate an estimated US$1.3 trillion in global subsidies, a figure that far exceeds current announced public support6,7. Furthermore, the physical infrastructure for hydrogen presents major hurdles8,10. Hydrogen’s low volumetric energy density requires high-pressure storage and specialised transportation facilities, and the current infrastructure is not ready to support a widespread transition8,10.

Crucially, the climate-effectiveness of hydrogen is highly dependent on its application1. The most climate-effective uses are in sectors where alternatives are scarce, such as steel-making, the production of biofuels, and ammonia for fertilisers1,9. Conversely, the use of hydrogen for road transport, power generation, and domestic heating is discouraged, as more favourable and efficient alternatives, such as direct electrification, already exist1. Policy support is therefore urged to secure investments but must be strategically focused on applications where hydrogen is truly indispensable to avoid misallocating scarce resources and capital6.

Conclusion

The three distinct environmental challenges of plastics, food systems, and hydrogen deployment collectively illustrate a global sustainability effort hampered by political inertia, systemic complexity, and a failure to align ambition with implementation. The projected surge in plastic-related emissions to 6.5 GtCO2e by 2050 is a direct consequence of a political deadlock that prioritises production over planetary limits, leaving the world without a binding mechanism to enforce upstream reductions1,5,7. Similarly, the global food system’s transgression of multiple planetary boundaries is perpetuated by a policy failure to integrate climate, biodiversity, and nutrition, leading to partial solutions and the risk of burden shifting4,12,14. Finally, the green hydrogen economy, while critical for hard-to-abate industries, is struggling with a vast implementation gap and a need for over a trillion dollars in subsidies, confirming that its role is strategic and limited, not a panacea for the entire energy transition1,6,7. Overcoming these crises requires a fundamental shift from symptomatic fixes to systemic, integrated policy interventions that address the root causes of overconsumption and resource extraction, rather than merely managing the resulting waste and emissions14.

References

  1. Global greenhouse gas emissions mitigation potential of existing and planned hydrogen projects

    Used to cite the specific findings on the GHG mitigation potential of hydrogen projects (0.2–1.1 GtCO2e yr−1), the analysis of 2,000 projects, and the identification of climate-effective applications (steel, ammonia) versus discouraged ones (road transport, heating).

  2. UN Plastics Treaty - Global Plastic Laws

    Used to provide the timeline of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC) sessions (INC-1, INC-2, INC-3, INC-5) and the core disagreement over including measures to reduce plastic production (upstream measures).

  3. Talks on global plastic pollution treaty adjourn without consensus - UNEP

    Used to confirm the adjournment of INC-5.2 in August 2025 without consensus, the number of participants, and the core issues of disagreement (production caps, finance, compliance).

  4. Transforming food systems to return to Earth's limits - Knowledge for policy

    Used to detail the five planetary boundaries transgressed by the food system, the 30% contribution to GHG emissions, and the projected 50–90% increase in environmental effects by 2050.

  5. No end in sight to plastic pollution crisis as treaty negotiations in Geneva fail - AP News

    Used to detail the specific opposition to production cuts by nations like the US, Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait, and the central conflict over production caps versus waste management.

  6. The green hydrogen ambition and implementation gap - IDEAS/RePEc

    Used to quantify the 'implementation gap' (only 7% of capacity announcements finished on schedule in 2023), the tripling of the project pipeline, the estimated subsidy requirement (US$1.3 trillion), and the need to focus policy on indispensable applications.

  7. Exploring Boundaries in Food Systems Research

    Used to support the point that comprehensive thinking on social and ecological issues 'can find no natural boundaries,' complicating interventions.

  8. Plastics disposal as a climate decision | Request PDF - ResearchGate

    Used to provide the core scientific data on plastics: 2015 GHG emissions (1.7 GtCO2e), projected 2050 emissions (6.5 GtCO2e), the 6,300 Mt of waste generated by 2015, and the need for aggressive strategies (renewable energy, recycling, demand management).

  9. Food system boundaries: how they are defined and what that implies for research outcomes and policy recommendations - WUR eDepot

    Used to discuss the conceptual difficulty of defining food system boundaries, the risk of partial analyses, and the consequences of demarcation choices for policy advice.

  10. Opportunities and Barriers to the Implementation of Green Hydrogen | Globalfields

    Used to detail the high cost of green hydrogen (2-3 times more expensive than grey), the importance of its use in hard-to-abate industries (iron, steel, ammonia), and the need for policy support to derisk projects.

  11. Hydrogen Infrastructure: Development and Challenges - Energy Tracker Asia

    Used to describe the infrastructure challenges, including the need for specialised facilities for high-pressure storage and transportation due to hydrogen's low volumetric energy density.

  12. How do we ensure good nutritional governance within planetary boundaries? - YouTube

    Used to cite the statistic that less than 12% of national policies explicitly consider climate, biodiversity, and nutrition together, and the need for hard societal change.

  13. Systems Thinking for Degrowth: Archetypes, Equity, and Strategic Pathways for Global Sustainability - MDPI

    Used to define and provide context for 'burden shifting' in the context of corporate 'greenwashing,' carbon offsets, and the failure to address root causes like overconsumption and extractivist supply chains.

  14. Our food systems are harming the health of people and planet - YouTube

    Used to cite the statistic that food systems contribute over 30% of GHG emissions and account for almost one-third of the global burden of disease, and the need for a shift towards healthier, plant-based diets.