As 2024 wound to close, major plastic resin producers were hit with two similar recycling-related class-action lawsuits – the latest in a growing trend of pursuing legal means of recouping costs for plastic pollution. | Zolnierek/Shutterstock
ExxonMobil on Monday filed a lawsuit against California Attorney General Rob Bonta, alleging that he and several environmental groups defamed the global oil and chemical company “for politics, publicity and private gain.”
The company is seeking monetary damages plus public recognition that chemical recycling “is recognized and permitted by law in multiple states, including Texas,” where ExxonMobil is headquartered. The suit was filed in federal court in the Eastern Texas district.
Bonta filed suit against ExxonMobil in September, seeking to “hold one of the largest petrochemical companies in the world accountable for misleading the public on plastic’s recyclability and polluting California’s environment and communities,” according to a press release at the time.
In the suit, ExxonMobil says, “Defendants are repeatedly and publicly attacking ExxonMobil with false accusations of being a ‘liar’ and declarations that advanced recycling is a ‘myth’ and a ‘sham.'”
A spokesperson from the California Department of Justice said via email, “This is another attempt from ExxonMobil to deflect attention from its own unlawful deception. The Attorney General is proud to advance his lawsuit against ExxonMobil and looks forward to vigorously litigating this case in court.
In an emailed statement, an ExxonMobil spokesperson said, “This campaign of lies designed to derail our advanced recycling business must stop. We refuse to let others attack our reputation and technology for their financial and political gain.”
Legal challenges to plastic recycling continue to build
As 2024 wound to close, ExxonMobil and other major plastic resin producers were hit with two similar recycling-related class-action lawsuits seeking to recoup costs for plastic pollution.
In the first, Ford County in Kansas is suing ExxonMobil, Chevron Phillips Chemical, Dupont, Celanese, Dow, Eastman Chemical, LyondellBasell Industries and the American Chemistry Council, alleging their decades of claims about plastics recyclability caused harm.
In the second suit, filed in federal court in western Missouri in mid-December, four residents of Missouri, Kansas, California and Florida are suing 11 entities including ExxonMobil, Chevron and the American Chemistry Council. The lawsuit seeks to remedy harm the plaintiffs say the companies caused through misleading recycling claims.
The suits were filed in federal courts in Kansas and Missouri by Sharp Law, based in greater Kansas City.
The Kansas suit defines the class to include all 105 counties in the state that have incurred or will incur cleanup costs for plastic waste starting January 1, 1989.
The companies named in both suits are mostly PE producers, although unlike many other legal actions, these lawsuits also name producers of chemical intermediates used to make polymers. For example, Celanese produces acetic acid, which is used to make PET.
The suits allege that, driven by profit, the named companies misrepresented the recyclability of plastics, and that as a result more plastics were produced and purchased than otherwise would have been, leading to higher pricing for plastics and “massive sanitation problems” for local jurisdictions.
Located about 150 miles west of Wichita, Ford County is in sparsely populated southwestern Kansas, with a population of about 34,000, according to the U.S. Census Bureau, and the beef processing industry is by far the biggest employer in the area, according to the Dodge City/Ford County Development Corporation.
Sharp Law, based in greater Kansas City, filed the Ford County suit Nov. 27, along with two other Kansas firms on behalf of Ford County. The firm also filed the Missouri suit Dec. 16, on behalf of the four named plaintiffs and on behalf of “all persons or entities in the United States and its territories who indirectly purchased plastics” starting January 1, 1990.
The suits add that “the plastics industry – which includes petrochemical companies, their trade associations, and the front groups that represent their interests – should be held accountable for their campaign of deception much like the producers of tobacco, opioids, and toxic chemicals that engaged in similar schemes.”
Sharp Law lists several successful multimillion-dollar class-action settlements on its website, and has experience in antitrust, consumer protection and oil and gas disputes. The settlements listed include judgments against ExxonMobil in 2012 and PVC producer Oxy USA in 2022 concerning royalties from crude oil and natural gas leases on land in Kansas.
Rex Sharp, co-counsel for the Ford County suit, did not respond to a request for comment by time of publication.
List of recycling lawsuits grows
In the past few years, governments and organizations have increasingly resorted to legal means to address plastic pollution, with some organizations offering guidance such as the “Making Plastic Polluters Pay” report from the Center for International Environmental Law or encouraging public-private partnerships.
Recent cases surrounding claims of plastic recyclability have included New York and Baltimore suing PepsiCo and other major packaging users; a suit against Danone; and one against Colgate-Palmolive.
In 2023, Reynolds Consumer Products agreed to change advertising language and pay up to $4 million to settle one of multiple lawsuits alleging its marketing of recycling collection bags was illegal. And in 2022, Keurig Dr Pepper settled a class-action suit for $10 million regarding coffee pod recyclability claims, and Canadian officials forced Keurig Canada to alter its recyclability claims and pay about $2.37 million in penalties.
Industry reaction
Both complaints are “littered with claims that are inaccurate, misleading and out of date,” said Ross Eisenberg, president of America’s Plastic Makers, in an emailed statement, adding that the filings use text directly from activist action plans and cite “extremist groups such as Greenpeace and Beyond Plastics as sources.”
America’s Plastic Makers comprises the plastics division of the American Chemistry Council and ACC member companies including ExxonMobil, LyondellBasell and Shell Chemical.
The suits say that “only a tiny fraction of plastics are ever recycled,” citing data from Greenpeace and activist group Beyond Plastics.
The 2024 “State of Recycling” report from The Recycling Partnership estimated that only 21% of household recyclables were recovered – including 55% of both PET bottles and aluminum cans, 43% of non-bottle PET, 59% of HDPE bottles and jars, 30% of PP, 20% of film and flexibles and 47% of steel cans. The TRP report added that recyclable material largely ends up in landfills due to lack of access to recycling services and a lack of education and communication.
And the National Association for PET Container Resources industry group recently reported that recycling for PET bottles in the U.S. in 2023 reached 33%, the highest rate since 1996.
In an emailed statement, an ExxonMobil spokesperson said such lawsuits “do nothing to advance solutions to plastic waste and pollution.” The spokesperson added that the company continues to invest in keeping plastics out of landfills.
Eisenberg echoed the sentiment: “It would be far more helpful to its citizens and the environment if Ford County invested more in its own recycling infrastructure instead of bringing a misguided lawsuit. ACC looks forward to refuting these meritless allegations and plans to vigorously oppose the claims.”