The report’s authors cite the need for further research to fully account for costs associated with plastic’s life cycle.
Plastic is everywhere in daily life in the United States, from synthetic fabrics to toys to disposable utensils, straws and bags. While plastic is cheap for the average consumer, its impacts cost Americans $436 billion to $1.1 trillion per year—and that’s likely an underestimate, according to a new report from Duke University scholars.
The report, written by experts at Duke University’s Environmental Law and Policy Clinic, Nicholas Institute for Energy, Environment & Sustainability and School of Medicine, provides the most comprehensive analysis to date of the social cost of plastic.
“The prices that consumers pay for plastic products don’t tell the whole story of their costs,” said lead author Nancy Lauer, staff scientist at the Duke Environmental Law and Policy Clinic. “Fossil fuel subsidies keep plastics relatively inexpensive in the United States. But as our report reveals, the true economic, environmental and health costs to society are far greater.”
The authors derived their estimate from 13 existing studies documenting plastic’s harms and costs across its life cycle—from fossil fuel extraction and production to use, disposal and mismanagement. In some cases, the authors supplemented costs pulled from the studies with new calculations. All costs were adjusted to 2025 dollars.
Human health impacts from plastic use represented the bulk of the costs in the analysis, accounting for an estimated $410 billion to $930 billion per year. Toxic chemicals found in plastics—such as phthalates, PFAS, BPA and flame retardants—have been connected to cancer, cardiovascular disease, reproductive disorders and neurological conditions. These and other health-related impacts are associated with healthcare expenses, lost worker productivity and premature death.
"A growing body of research indicates that our routine and unwanted plastic ingestion is causing harm to the health of Americans and exacting a substantial economic cost—and that’s for the effects that we know,” said co-author Jason Somarelli, assistant professor of medical oncology in the Duke Department of Medicine. “We are just beginning to understand the long-term health implications of constant plastic ingestion and the complex interactions between the thousands of chemicals found in plastics. As those are better understood, the cost estimates identified in our report are likely to rise, and investments in research and development are urgently needed to reduce or eliminate harmful plastic exposures and mitigate the negative health consequences of plastic."
Additional impacts include:
- Greenhouse gas emissions ($6.4 billion–$15.9 billion): Emissions—primarily generated through fossil fuel extraction and plastic production—contribute to climate-related harms, including extreme weather, rising healthcare costs and reduced agricultural productivity.
- Human health impacts from fossil fuel extraction ($2.9 billion–$31.9 billion): Fracking and other operations to extract oil and gas emit air pollutants linked to asthma, cancer and premature death.
- Landfilling ($2.9 billion): Most plastic waste in the United States—86% as of 2019—is disposed of in landfills, with the direct costs usually falling to local governments.
- Plastic litter cleanup ($9.8 billion–$13.3 billion): State and local governments, businesses, educational institutions and volunteer organizations remove plastic litter from roadsides, waterways and public spaces.
- Costs to marine industries ($3 billion): Plastic debris deters tourism ($2 billion) damages marine shipping ($909 million) and degrades fisheries and aquaculture ($88 million).
- Impacts on marine ecosystem services ($1.4 billion–$112 billion): Marine plastic pollution reduces fisheries’ productivity, diminishes biodiversity and limits recreational opportunities, among other losses in ecosystem services.
Policy Implications and Future Research
Some state and local governments in the United States have enacted policies to reduce plastic’s harms and associated costs, such as bans on plastic grocery bags or California’s mandated 25% reduction of single-use plastics. To fully address the problem, however, the authors cite the need for a response across all levels of government and the private sector.
The report recommends prioritizing policy interventions that reduce both the supply of new plastic and the demand for plastic products. Without action early in plastic’s life cycle, the authors write that efforts to reduce costs become a “zero-sum game” in which addressing one type of harm could, in turn, increase the cost of another.
The report also identifies the need to fill critical data gaps through additional research into costs associated with:
- Additional human health impacts from exposure to micro- and nanoplastics, pollution from waste management facilities and multiple chemicals found in plastics
- Impacts on terrestrial ecosystem services, such as harm to wildlife, reduced agricultural productivity and disruption of food webs
- Recycling to manage plastic waste and incineration to dispose of it
- Property values diminished by plastic waste, litter or proximity to industrial facilities
“With plastic production projected to increase in the coming decades, plastic’s negative impacts will grow, too,” said co-author Tibor Vegh, senior policy associate at the Nicholas Institute for Energy, Environment & Sustainability. “Decision-makers need a full picture of the costs to develop informed policies and interventions to curb its known—and yet-to-be-documented—harms.”
Support for the report was provided by the Natural Resources Defense Council and Beyond Petrochemicals.
Microplastics Are Everywhere
Duke researchers are studying the human health and ecological impacts of microplastics and developing sustainable and effective solutions to address them.
Plastic Research at Duke
The report is an example of the array of interdisciplinary research being conducted at Duke to address the plastic crisis. Comprised of more than 60 faculty, students, staff and postdocs from 12 Duke schools and departments, the university’s Plastic Pollution Working Group aims to better understand the issues around plastic pollution while working to develop solutions. Group members’ research covers a variety of themes, from environmental toxicology to marine conservation to public outreach and the arts.
###
CITATION: Lauer, N., T. Vegh, M. Nowlin, J. Virdin, and J. Somarelli. 2025. The Social Cost of Plastic to the United States. NI R 25-09. Durham, NC: Nicholas Institute for Energy, Environment & Sustainability, Duke University. https://nicholasinstitute.duke.edu/publications/social-cost-plastic-united-states
For media inquiries, contact the Nicholas Institute communications team at ni-comm@duke.edu.
