Plastic in the rubbish dumps on the outskirts of Beijing China has banned foreign rubbish from entering the country since January 2018.
China has already challenged the recent announcement that it will no longer accept foreign rubbish for recycling.
What to do if you want to digest more domestic waste yourself? Should you bury or burn garbage that can not be recycled and reused?
We are here to try to answer the second question. Obviously there are differences of opinion on this issue.
So, what do we know about plastic trash?
According to the British trade information website of the Royal Revenue and Customs Administration (HMRC), Britain exported a total of 800,000 tons of plastic waste to other countries in 2014 for recycling in those countries, including China.
Some media reports revealed that a large part of these exported rubbish was polluted by other rubbish and must be incinerated.
In the United Kingdom, plastic packaging wastes in the country face a total of almost 1,245,000 tons shipped to landfills and incineration plants in 2016.
The National Packaging Waste Database estimates that there were more than 1.02 million tons of plastic packaging scrap used for recycling in 2016.
Remind, these are just plastic packaging waste, not all plastic garbage.
So, for those difficult to recycling plastic garbage, we burn it, or buried?
Burning
'Burning faction' to say: plastic is extracted from the oil and gas production, incineration will produce a lot of heat.
At first glance, it seems reasonable to put plastic garbage in an incinerator and then use it to generate electricity.
If the incinerator can collect the heat remaining in the process and use it for office and home heating, the utilization efficiency will be even higher.
In this way, plastic wastes are being burned, substituting polluting fuels, such as coal or petroleum, in some places.
Rugby Constituency Conservative MP Mark Pawsey, chairman of the bipartisan panel of the PACKAGING packaging industry, said in the lower house that 'waste is used to generate heat and make the cement in my constituency Factory to produce cement.
'My feeling is that this utilization of the thermal value of the packaging material goes far beyond sending it to the landfill.'
His point of view is supported by operators of such incinerators, whose organization is called the Environmental Services Association (ESA).
Jacob Hayler, president of the association, told us: 'It's better to recycle non-renewable waste by burning it to the landfill.'
He cited government documents, according to the UK's Digest of Energy Statistics (DUKES), which said that 2016 waste from EfW was equivalent to replacing 2.5 million tonnes of virgin fossil fuels.
In general, the amount of greenhouse gas emissions from incineration is lower than landfills, according to Black.
That said, burning plastic makes sense, but things are not that simple.
Because these data come from unclassified waste incineration, rather than burn plastic.
Domestic rubbish from ordinary households does generate greenhouse gases at the landfill, causing the planet to heat up unless the landfill gas is collected.
But this does not apply to plastics because plastics are a particularly stable material and do not decompose underground in the landfill, so they do not generate greenhouse gas emissions.
In fact, the "Burial School" is also full of excitement.
Image copyright PA Volunteers Pick up plastic bottles and count points on the Thames in London.
Image caption Volunteers pick up plastic bottles at London's Thames, and the UK Department of Environment said they must stop exporting plastic trash.
Buried school
Incineration of plastics creates toxic and harmful gases that enter the environment if the incinerators are ineffective, and modern incinerators are believed to largely solve the problem.
However, climate change is also a problem that needs to be considered.
Eunomia, a consulting firm, calculates that burning plastic in an incinerator for power generation produces 25% of the heat, compared to 55% for a new gas-fired power plant.
Dominic Hogg of the company told the BBC: "After burning out coal-fired power generation, burning unclassified garbage will become the most carbon-intensive power generation system.
'If the government wants to reduce carbon emissions, that would not make sense unless the government took radical steps to reduce the amount of plastic in uncategorized trash.'
Plastic where to go? Chinese-style recycling
'Waste siege'? Hong Kong seeking change to ban the mainland litter
Environmental groups are also concerned that if plastic wastes increase because China rejects foreign plastic waste while Britain has to build more incinerators to deal with them, new demand will be created: plastic waste, which should have been recycled, is also used to feed Incinerator.
The British government seems to be persuaded by this group that Therese Coffey, the head of the Department of the Environment, declared in the lower house of parliament: 'From an environmental point of view, burying plastic is generally better than burning plastic.'
Stop carbon emissions
Indeed, we can go one step further to argue that it is a cheap way of capturing and storing plastic waste in landfills.
For decades, the government has been pledging to develop power plants that can collect carbon emissions from thermal power plants and inject them into underground rock formations.
Buried plastic can also achieve the same effect, the unwanted carbon lock, but the cost is only a fraction.
Elena Polisano of Greenpeace UK reluctantly agreed.
She told the BBC: 'What we should do is, in this order, reduce, reuse, recycle.
'To the stage where we need to decide if the garbage should be burned or buried, we should have failed many times.
But it is still safer to control than letting these failures spread to the atmosphere in the form of toxic gas. '
The issue looks academic, but it is practical for the British government, especially since the Minister of Environment is preparing a new waste disposal program and claims that Britain must "stop the offshore disposal of rubbish."