If UNC tackled single-use plastics with the same intensity we bring to beating Duke, we might not win a national championship, but we’d certainly lead the nation in sustainability. While clubs like the Carolina Green Team and the Student Environmental Action Coalition have raised awareness, UNC still falls short on implementing policies that target single-use plastics. Awareness campaigns and student-led initiatives are important, but without strong policy, these efforts remain symbolic rather than transformative.
First, it’s crucial to understand the scale of the issue. As of January 2024, the Ocean Conservancy reports microplastics were found in 90 percent of proteins sampled, meaning Americans may consume up to 3.8 million microplastics a year just from protein. These particles, far beyond the "save the turtles" narrative, pose real risks to human health, containing endocrine disruptors linked to reproductive issues, developmental problems and higher cancer risks. Universities, with their dense populations, worsen this issue by offering single-use plastics in dining halls, student stores and at sporting events.
While UNC provides recycling and composting bins, these are only band-aid solutions. Real change lies in prevention — stopping plastic waste before it starts. This is where a sustainable procurement policy comes in. Procurement teams decide what products appear in dining halls, dorms and campus services. Through sustainable procurement, they can mandate alternatives like biodegradable, recyclable or compostable materials — think bamboo or paper utensils and packaging. This policy would require suppliers to meet strict green criteria, making eco-friendly products the default choice for students. By embedding sustainability into purchasing decisions, UNC could dramatically reduce its reliance on single-use plastics.
Better yet, UNC already has a foundation: the Environmentally Preferable Purchasing program, which encourages eco-friendly purchases. However, EPP focuses largely on favoring green products, while sustainable procurement goes further, enforcing comprehensive guidelines across environmental, social and economic responsibilities. Blending these approaches offers a powerful solution — EPP nudges suppliers toward greener products, while sustainable procurement policy enforces these standards through binding criteria.
Skeptics argue that sustainable procurement is too costly, but that assumption overlooks broader trends. Schools like Clemson, Stanford, Coastal Carolina and Michigan have already adopted these policies, proving they’re both feasible and effective. As more institutions follow, economies of scale will lower the cost of sustainable alternatives, making green products more affordable over time. With a $4.2 billion budget, UNC is more than capable of investing in long-term solutions. The real cost lies in inaction: pollution, environmental degradation and other serious public health risks.
UNC must shift its focus from managing plastic waste to preventing it entirely. Embracing sustainable procurement is not just a responsibility — it’s an investment in the University’s future and our planet. By blending existing initiatives with stronger procurement policies, UNC can lead by example, setting a precedent for campuses nationwide. The question isn’t whether we can afford to make this change, but whether we can afford not to.
— Kate Nunnally, UNC Public Policy ‘28
