Who gains from saving nature
Ledger 1 : 33 — For each dollar financing nature-based solutions in 2023, about $33 financed activities harmful to nature. (UNEP)
Cases / Plastic waste and recycling claims · United States · 2017–2020

Hefty EnergyBag plastic marketed as recycling was burned in cement kilns

Short record: the main facts, with sources. A full case file has not been prepared.

Nature's voice · report
No measurement of the harm done to me here is on record.
Did nature suffer? Not measured.
Not on record
  • The record does not name which of my species, waters, soils or forests were harmed.
What the record lacks: 1 none on record · 1 not measured See the gaps

Dow and Keep America Beautiful marketed the Hefty EnergyBag programme as recycling, Plastics Today reported. Plastic collected in Omaha was burned in a cement kiln, which puts in question whether collected plastic was recycled.

What?
Dow and Keep America Beautiful marketed the Hefty EnergyBag programme as recycling; collected plastic was burned in cement kilns. Plastics Today
Where?
Omaha and Boise, United States Plastics Today
When?
2017-2020 Plastics Today
Who?
Gained
None on record
Lost
None on record
Harmed
None on record
Why?
Not stated in the sources reviewed.
How?
Collected plastic was sent to cement kilns and burned Plastics Today
5 of 6 questions answered from the record · open: who

What happened

The record, in order.

Plastics Today reported that Dow and Keep America Beautiful marketed the Hefty EnergyBag programme as recycling.

Plastic collected in Omaha was burned in a cement kiln, and plastic from Boise was also sent to a cement kiln, according to Plastics Today.

    In court and with insurers

    Every proceeding and every insurer decision on record.

    Lawsuits and rulings

    No court case on record. No court has ruled on this case.

    Insurers

    No insurer decision on record.

    What we don't know

    Undisclosed, unproven, untried: recorded as data.

    Nature

    • Not measured Harm to nature: The record holds no measurement of harm to nature.

    Record

    • None on record The sources reviewed do not give the programme's volumes, any other participating communities, or emissions from the kilns.

    Did the harm stop?

    Not stated in the sources reviewed.

    Who paid?

    Not stated in the sources reviewed.

    Sources

    Voices on record: — Company or project— Government and regulators— Courts✓ Press and investigations— Communities and civil society— Researchers

    Press and investigations

    Connected cases

    Related matters, and cases linked to this one through the same organisations, with the role each played in both.
    Similar cases
    Plastic waste and recycling claims · Chemical pollution · Global · 2018–2026
    Coca-Cola World Without Waste targets reset
    Same type: Plastic waste and recycling claimsSame countryHarm to nature not measured
    Plastic waste and recycling claims · United States · 2024
    New York v PepsiCo and LA County v PepsiCo/Coca-Cola
    Same type: Plastic waste and recycling claimsSame countryHarm to nature not measured
    Plastic waste and recycling claims · Chemical pollution · Water use · United States · 2021–2026
    California v. ExxonMobil: plastics recycling claims and the Baytown plant
    Same type: Plastic waste and recycling claimsSame countryHarm to nature not measured
    Plastic waste and recycling claims · International · 2015–2024
    Adidas x Parley ocean plastic shoes
    Same type: Plastic waste and recycling claimsHarm to nature not measured
    Plastic waste and recycling claims · Water use · International waters · 2013–2025
    Great Pacific Garbage Patch and The Ocean Cleanup
    Same type: Plastic waste and recycling claimsHarm to nature not measured