What do you mean by “faught for this”? UNESDA paid for a contract study against tethered caps so it is clearly not impartial on this, nor is the study.

The report does not specify what this amount of extra plastic is supposed to be. A yearly rate? In any case, just taking randomly the larger number because the transition was 9 months ago is kindergarten math.

The UNESDA isn’t writing such an ad, it was buying that ad already over 6 years ago, in order to lobby against the law for tethered caps.