Many plastics labeled 'biodegradable' don't break down as expected

Published in Phys.org March 18, 2015 by the American Chemical Society

 

Recycling plastic works; additives to biodegrade plastic do not.

A new study from Michigan State University shows that several additives that claim to break down polyethylene (i.e., plastic bags) and polyethylene terephthalate (i.e., soda bottles) simply don't work in common disposal situations such as landfills or composting.

"Making improper or unsubstantiated claims can produce consumer backlash, fill the environment with unwanted polymer debris and expose companies to legal penalties," said Susan Selke, co-author of the study and MSU packaging professor.

The results, featured in the current issue of Environmental Science and Technology, are a culmination of a three-year study that focused on five additives and three categories of biodegradation, which cover the majority of methods available on the market today.

The team studied biodegradation with oxygen, such as in composting; biodegradation without oxygen, such as in an anaerobic digester or a landfill; and simply burying plastics.

"There was no difference between the plastics mixed with the additives we tested and the ones without," said Rafael Auras, co-author and MSU packaging professor. "The claim is that, with the additives, the plastics will break down to a level in which microorganisms can use the decomposed material as food. That simply did not happen."

William Rathje, the late Arizona paleontologist and founder of the Tucson Garbage Project, revealed that even after years underground, chicken bones still had meat on them, grass was still green and that even carrots still maintained their orange color.

Since organic materials take so long to decompose, it's not surprising then that plastics, even with the aid of additives, would take decades or longer to break down, if at all. So, if the additives don't work, what's the solution?

"The solution is to not make claims that are untrue," Selke said. "The proper management of waste plastics is the proper management of waste plastics."

And for now, that means not using any of the disposal methods or additives included in the study as feasible options, Selke said.

It's a growing trend that many U.S. cities and countries have banned or have adopted legislation taxing the retail use of plastic bags, one of the largest sources of polyethylene waste. Plastic manufacturers are also seeking solutions to this problem, Selke said.

"Package-user companies funded this study because they wanted to know if the additives that are being marketed to them work," she said. "They wanted scientific proof to evaluate the products and disposal approaches that are available to them to break down plastic."

Explore further: Gut bacteria from a worm can degrade plastic

 

More information: Evaluation of Biodegradation-Promoting Additives for Plastics, Environ. Sci. Technol., 2015, 49 (6), pp 3769–3777. DOI: 10.1021/es504258u
 
Abstract
Biodegradation-promoting additives for polymers are increasingly being used around the world with the claim that they effectively render commercial polymers biodegradable. However, there is a lot of uncertainty about their effectiveness in degrading polymers in different environments. In this study, we evaluated the effect of biodegradation-promoting additives on the biodegradation of polyethylene (PE) and polyethylene terephthalate (PET). Biodegradation was evaluated in compost, anaerobic digestion, and soil burial environments. None of the five different additives tested significantly increased biodegradation in any of these environments. Thus, no evidence was found that these additives promote and/or enhance biodegradation of PE or PET polymers. So, anaerobic and aerobic biodegradation are not recommended as feasible disposal routes for nonbiodegradable plastics containing any of the five tested biodegradation-promoting additives.

Journal reference: Environmental Science & Technology
Provided by American Chemical Society

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2015-03-plastics-biodegradable-dont.html#jCp

Sounding a Royal Alarm for the Ocean

Published in the Huffington Post on March 25, 2015 by Andreas Merkl

Last Wednesday, His Royal Highness The Prince of Wales, speaking in Washington, DC, to an audience of 100 governmental, corporate and nonprofit leaders, sounded the alarm about the ever-increasing quantities of plastic waste entering the ocean. He cited a recent study in the journal Science which stated that, without intervention, between five to 12 million metric tonnes of plastics will continue to enter the ocean every year. Think of that number like this: The global tuna catch is 4.5 million metric tons per year. We are taking out tuna and replacing it with plastic.

The Prince, an impassioned environmentalist, called for governments, corporations and non-governmental organizations to work together to reduce the flow of plastics into the sea. As the head of an organization committed to doing just what the Prince described, I was heartened by his words and deeply appreciate the urgency and global reach of his message.

Plastic is found in practically every species of fish examined and causes the deaths of countless seabirds and marine animals..

But the situation is also solvable if we take Prince Charles' mandate to heart. We are already seeing the kind of collaboration and action that he describes through our Trash Free Seas Alliance®, a forum Ocean Conservancy leads where industry, scientists and nonprofits join forces for solutions. The Alliance is working with producers of plastics and consumer goods that are stepping up to share responsibility -- and take action -- for this global crisis.

We know from the research cited in Science that as much as 83 percent of this waste comes from 20 countries -- the majority of them developing nations where implementation of more effective waste management could produce a significant decrease in the amount of plastic entering the ocean. And the flood of plastics is not "just" an ocean issue; it has major implications on public health, job creation, tourism and developing economies and markets.

While there are a number of responses that can work over the long term, the Alliance is committed to developing a collective industry response to "turbocharge" the increase of collection and treatment in the short term, especially for the five countries cited as contributing as much as half of the plastic waste.

Through a collaborative effort of corporations working with governments and agencies within these nations, lives and economies can be made better, and plastic waste entering the ocean can be drastically reduced. This type of approach is supported by the Global Ocean Commission, a group of world leaders working with industry, scientists, conservation groups and others, to identify solutions to some of the most pressing issues facing our ocean.

Scientists tell us that "global peak waste" will not come before the year 2100. That makes it even more urgent to develop the right tools and the winning solutions to "get this right" for the ocean, for its inhabitants and for people the world over.

For 30 years, through our International Coastal Cleanup, we have focused on trash removal from beaches and waterways around the globe. During that time, 11 million volunteers in over 150 countries have removed more than 190 million pounds of debris. Now we at Ocean Conservancy have expanded our focus and redoubled our efforts. With our partners in the Trash Free Seas Alliance®, we are committed to preventing plastic from getting into the ocean in the first place.

4 States Working to Ban Microbeads

Published in EcoWatch.com on March 30, 2015 by Staley Prom, Surfrider Foundation

There are currently numerous state bills introduced around the country focused on curbing marine plastic pollution. One notably popular subject this session is that of microbeads, which are teeny tiny bits of plastic put in consumer products such as toothpastes and facial scrubs, which (likely unbeknownst to consumers!) wash down the drain, are frequently not captured by wastewater treatment facilities (because they’re too small, do not biodegrade, and float), simply pass through wastewater treatment facilities, and eventually enter our waterways and pollute our oceans. These microplastics are found in all ocean gyres, bays, gulfs and seas around the world.

Microplastics are found in all ocean gyres, bays, gulfs and seas around the world. Photo credit: Surfrider Foundation

This is problematic for a multitude of reasons. First, plastic does not biodegrade into elements or compounds commonly found in nature like other organic materials, but instead, photodegrades into smaller pieces of plastic causing pollution that is virtually impossible to remediate. Second, microplastic debris absorbs toxic, environmentally persistent chemicals such as DDT, PCBs, PAHs, and flame retardants found in our waterways. In 2011, the National Oceanic Atmospheric Association found that plastic debris accumulates pollutants such as PCBs up to 100,000 to 1,000,000 times the levels found in seawater.

Thus, aside from the negative effects of plastic consumption by marine life such as intestinal clogging and starvation, fish can become contaminated by the plastic’s absorbed toxins, which bioaccumulate up the food chain.  These toxins pose dangerous threats to humans and wildlife who consume them. Microplastics? Megaproblem.

Currently, there are at least 15 microbead bills pending at various stages across the country. Below is a sampling of some of these bills. While, as explained below, Surfrider Foundation has concerns associated with some of the bills, Surfrider is hopeful that states will carefully draft bills that will address the very serious threats that microplastic pollution poses to our coastal resources and water quality.

Connecticut
Connecticut currently has four microbeads bills in the works: House Bill (H.B.) 6081, H.B. 5206,H.B. 5403, and H.B. 5727. On March 10, 2015, Surfrider Foundation submitted testimony to the Joint Committee on the Environment supporting the bills, with amendments. Surfrider’s concerns with the bills primarily focus on any exceptions or exemptions for “over the counter” drugs or “biodegradable” particles. First, there must not be any exemptions for over the counter products, as this creates a huge industry loophole, rendering any microbeads ban futile, since the number of over the counter drugs is incredibly broad, and contains numerous types of products such as fluoride and whitening toothpastes, acne scrubs, moisturizing cleansers, and wrinkle creams, which are the exact kinds of products which typically utilize microbeads. Secondly, any exemptions for biodegradable particles are concerning, because “biodegradable” can be a misleading term. Any microbead legislation should only include a biodegradable exception if the term is carefully defined in a way to ensure that only products which are truly able to break down into natural elements in the marine environment or in wastewater treatment are considered biodegradable.

Hawaii
Recently, on March 18, Surfrider Foundation submitted testimony in strong support of Hawaii’s microbead bill, H.B. 621, with amendments, to the Energy and Environment Committee, and Commerce and Consumer Protection Committee. The bill gradually (i.e. between December 31, 2017 and December 31, 2019) phases in the prohibition on the manufacture and sale of personal care products that contain “synthetic plastic microbeads.” “Synthetic plastic microbead” means any intentionally added non-biodegradable solid plastic particle measuring less than five millimeters in size and used to exfoliate or cleanse in a rinse-off product. Violations are punishable by civil penalties up to $1,000 for a first violation, and up to $2,500 for subsequent violations.
As noted above, this microbead definition, which excludes “non-biodegradable” particles is potentially problematic. Thus, the Surfrider Foundation proposed in its testimony that the legislators must either remove the vague, misleading term “non-biodegradable” in the definition of “synthetic plastic microbead” and replace it with “non-compostable,” or define “biodegradable” as “capable of decomposing back into natural elements.”

Oregon
Similarly, in Oregon, H.B. 3478 was first read March 2, 2015, and was referred to the Energy and Environment Committee March 9, 2015. The bill phases in the prohibition on the manufacture and sale of personal care products and over the counter drugs that contain synthetic plastic microbeads. Currently, the definition of “synthetic plastic microbead” means “a solid plastic particle that a manufacturer intentionally incorporates into a personal care product and that: (A) Measures less than five millimeters in diameter; (B) Is not biodegradable; (C) The manufacturer intends as a method for exfoliating skin or otherwise cleaning the human body; and (D) The manufacturer intends for the consumer to rinse off from the body after use.  Thus, the definition excludes particles which are “biodegradable.” As noted above, this is potentially vague and problematic, and any microbead legislation should ensure that the ban applies to all microplastic particles, and that only products which are truly able to break down into natural elements are excepted. The Surfrider Foundation, on behalf of the Oregon Surfrider Foundation Chapter Network, and the individual Oregon chapters have expressed these concerns in personal letters to their state legislators, and Surfrider Foundation staff will be participating in a work group on this bill in the future.

Washington
Meanwhile, Washington’s microbead bill, Senate Bill (S.B.) 5609 passed the Senate unanimously on March 11, 2015. In the House, the bill had its first reading and was referred to the House Committee on the Environment on March 13. The Committee recently held a public hearing on the bill on March 23, 2015.

Unfortunately, S.B. 5609 passed the Senate with a potential “biodegradable” loophole, similar to Hawaii and Oregon’s microbeads bills. The definition of the banned “synthetic plastic microbead” excludes biodegradable particles (i.e., synthetic plastic microbead means “an intentionally added nonbiodegradable solid plastic particle measuring less than five millimeters in size and used to exfoliate or cleanse in a rinse-off product”), which, again, could be problematic without further clarifying what is biodegradable and what is nonbiodegradable.

The Surfrider Foundation will continue to monitor these, and other proposed microbeads bills, and bring awareness to these issues such that legislators will be encouraged to craft effective bills that serve their intended purposes.  Go here for more information on the dangers of marine plastic pollution, and on Surfrider Foundation’s Rise Above Plastics campaign.

Visit 5 Gyres I Want Plastic Off My Face information page to learn how you can get involved.

Bayfield resident sharing documentary on Atlantic Ocean expedition

Published Friday, March 27, 2015 by Dave Flaherty, Goderich Signal-Star
 

Bayfield resident Jennifer Pate took part in an expedition across the Atlantic Ocean to study the effect of plastics and toxins on oceans and marine life late last year. 

Her documentary “eXXpedition – Jen Pate: Making the Unseen Seen” will be shown at Bayfield Town Hall on Thurs., Apr. 2 at 7:30 p.m. (Contributed photo)

Sailing across the Atlantic Ocean is something the majority of people will never experience.

Bayfield resident Jennifer Pate can stake claim to that experience and wants to share it with others.
This upcoming Thursday, Blue Community Bayfield will present “eXXpedition- Jen Pate: Making the Unseen Seen” at Bayfield Town Hall at 7:30 p.m.

The film documents an expedition of 14 women, including Pate, who sailed across the Atlantic Ocean to study the impact of plastics and toxins on oceans and marine life.

Pate has been participating in world expeditions for about five years now.

“After my first, I set up my own film company when I was still living in England,” Pate said.
As her films focus on environmental issues and social responsibility, Pate said her interest was peaked immediately when she heard about this particular expedition.

She was chosen out of a field of 300 applicants.

It was an all-female team, which Pate admitted caused some uncertainty for her at first.
“It was a first of kind for me, all of my other expeditions have been a mix of men and women. Before we left, a lot of us were wondering if it would get catty, you know, the typical stereotypes of a bunch of woman being together,” she said. “But I found it was the exact opposite – it was the most calm expedition I’ve been involved with.”

Beyond the experience of traveling across the Atlantic itself, Pate said she left the expedition with 13 new friends.

“We all said we can’t get rid of each other – when you go through an experience like that you’ve got friends for life,” she said. “We all came out like family and made a connection we will have for the rest of our lives.”

Although she has a mind for environmental issues, this was the first time Pate had become directly interested in the oceanic effect of plastics and toxins.

“The adventure was what drew me in, but the more and more I’ve read the more I have come to be so involved with this issue.”

The negative effect of smaller pieces of plastic such as beer and pop can rings and shopping bags has been known for a considerable amount of time, but Pate said they were looking at micro plastics, which never really break down, just disintegrate into smaller pieces and “become sponges for toxics”.

Sea creatures eventually ingest these pieces of plastic and the toxins along with them.

The expedition left from Lanzarote in the Canary Islands on Nov. 16, 2014 and arrived at Martinique in the Caribbean islands on Dec. 5.

“It 100% exceeded my expectations,” Pate said. “It was an incredible trip.”

The team traveled on a 72-foot vessel with a varying amount of sailing experience amongst the crew members.

“Half our team was brand new and even the ones who were experienced hadn’t necessarily sailed an ocean before.”

Pate had many more responsibilities than just holding a camera.

Each crew member took their turns handling cooking, cleaning and navigation duties.
The documentary premiered on March 7 in London, England, hosted by the Royal Geographical Society.

Pate said about 200 people attended, including 13 of the 14 crew members of the expedition.
The event at Bayfield Town Hall is sponsored by the Bayfield Photography Club and admission is by donation.

The documentary is available for streaming at www.vimeo/ondemand/exxpedition

Proceeds from film streams will go towards to creating an education package, which will be facilitated by British company Digital Explorers.

For more information on the film, visit www.exxpedition.com.

Pate said she hoping to organize a similar expedition for the Great Lakes in the near future.

Plastic waste responsible for nearly 92% life-threatening cases in marine life

Published in Customs Today Report February 21, 2015

 

MEXICO: According to a new study thousands of individual animals from hundreds of marine species including every kind of sea turtle and around half of marine mammals have encountered plastic, glass, and other garbage in the ocean.

Often the encounters are fatal. In some cases they may be helping push some beleaguered species towards extinction in the wild.

Those are some of the findings in the most comprehensive look at the effects of debris on marine wildlife since 1997. Co-authors Sarah Gall and Richard Thompson, marine biologists at Plymouth University in the United Kingdom, looked in 340 different publications for reports about animal encounters with marine trash.

They found that 693 species of marine animals had some sort of interaction with human-made debris, with 17 percent of them listed with some degree of vulnerability to extinction on the International Union for Conservation of Nature red list.

Sometimes these encounters involved glass, metal, or paper. But plastic surged past those materials as a hazard to ocean wildlife, turning up in almost 92 percent of animal-meets-marine debris reports, according to the study published in the journal Marine Pollution Bulletin.

All together there were 44,006 incidents of individual animals, across 395 species, that had eaten plastic bits or been tangled in plastic rope or netting.

Around 80 percent of the time, these encounters injured or killed the animal.

There were reports of 138 hawksbill turtles, 73 Kemp’s Ridley turtles, and 62 leatherback sea turtles tangled in plastic. All three are listed as critically endangered—one step below extinct in the wild—on the IUCN red list.

Marine mammals as a group proved especially vulnerable to marine plastic debris, with 30,896 of the reports involving these animals tangled in ropes or netting. They included 215 Hawaiian monk seals, a critically endangered species, and 38 endangered northern right whales, as well as 3,835 northern fur seals and 3,587 California sea lions.

Among seabirds, Gall and Thompson found 174 records of individual birds from over 150 species being tangled in or eating plastic. They included 3,444 northern fulmars 1,674 Atlantic puffins, 971 Laysan albatross, and 895 greater shearwaters.

Your Face Scrub Could Be Starving Coral Reefs

Scientists find corals are eating as much plastic as food, and this can kill them.

(Photo: Mark Conlin/Getty Images)

Published in Take Part.com February 27, 2015 By Taylor Hill

The ocean’s corals have a lot to deal with these days.

Ever-increasing greenhouse gas emissions are warming ocean temperatures, bleaching and sometimes killing coral reefs that shelter fish that end up on your dinner plate. The seas are absorbing carbon dioxide from the burning of fossil fuels, which is acidifying the oceans and retarding the growth of coral.

Now Australian researchers have found that the 8 million tons of plastic we dump into the ocean each year are being eaten by corals, which gums up their digestive tracks and can lead to starvation.

Photos ‘a’ and ‘b’ show microplastics in the mouths of coral
polyps. Photo ‘c’ shows plastic fragments found in the
water near reef sites. (Photos: N.M. Hall)

By nature, corals are not picky eaters, said study coauthor Mia Hoogenboom of ARC Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies at James Cook University, and the 5 trillion pieces of plastic floating in the water today look just as enticing to the organisms as their favorite meal, zooplankton.

Researchers took corals from the Great Barrier Reef and put them in water littered with microplastics—five-millimeter bits or smaller that make up most of the ocean’s total plastic pollution. They found that the coral polyps ate almost as much plastic as the marine plankton they were supposed to be eating, and the tiny plastic pieces ended up lodged deep in their gut cavity tissue.

Coral gets energy in part from photosynthesis, but the symbiotic creature needs that gut tissue to digest food. If it’s jammed up with plastics, it could slowly starve to death. Scientists studied the water around the Great Barrier Reef and found bits of plastic there too—just in smaller numbers.

“If microplastic pollution increases on the Great Barrier Reef, corals could be negatively affected as their tiny stomach cavities become full of indigestible plastic,” Hoogenboom said.
Coral is just the latest organism found to be dealing with plastic pollution.

Hundreds of marine species are trying to cope with increasing encounters with plastics they come across in the sea. In a recent study, researchers found that plastics were the culprits in 92 percent of marine animals’ reported encounters with debris. Those encounters usually involved animals either eating plastic bits or getting tangled in plastic rope or netting and resulted in injury or death about 80 percent of the time.

Still, the effects of microplastics have been understudied, and there is a need “for further investigation of whether and how microplastic contamination influences the physiology, growth, and survival of marine organisms,” the authors wrote.

 

Related Stories on TakePart

'Nature Is Speaking': 'Coral Reef

This Hawaiian Island Is So Polluted With Plastic That It Might Become a Superfund Site

Ocean Plastic Pollution’s Shocking Death Toll on Endangered Animals

Ban Microbeads in California

Take Action to Tip The Scales Let's Ban Microbeads in California!

The 5 Gyres Institute has come a long way since we began sailing the high seas on a mission to document the emerging global plastic crisis.  In the last 5 years, we have sailed over 50,000 miles, collected more than four hundred ocean surface samples, published several peer reviewed scientific papers documenting our findings, and helped launch a national movement to ban microbeads from personal care products like facial scrubs and toothpaste.  Your support right now will help 5 Gyres tip the scales in favor of the planet and win the battle to Ban Microbeads in California. A win against microbeads in California will help pave the way toward legislative wins across the country.   The movement has caught fire. In the last few months, 18 states across the country - from Hawaii to Maine - have introduced legislation to ban microbeads. Were building upon the tremendous efforts of our partners at The Plastic Soup Foundation, who first galvanized European audiences to take this issue on. Just last week, a federal bill was introduced in congress. But major players in the cosmetics industry are spending big bucks to introduce language that allows bioplastics to replace current plastic beads. Without adequate testing and oversight, 5 Gyres and our coalition partners are wary of bioplastics - unless they are proven beyond any shadow of doubt to break down into before they reach the ocean.    With research emerging daily highlighting the devastating effects of plastic on marine life - from starving coral reefs to poisoning fish that humans consume - it's clear that we need to act now to stop plastic pollution at the source, before it ever has a chance to reach the oceans. That's why in California we have teamed up with Assembly Member Richard Bloom (D - Santa Monica) and a coalition of leading environmental groups to introduce the most comprehensive ban in the country. Over the next several months, 5 Gyres will be working to educate lawmakers and citizens about the dangers of microplastic pollution, build grassroots support in key districts, and pass responsible policies with one objective: to keep plastic off of our faces and out of our oceans. We have a momentous battle ahead - and the stakes could not be higher. What happens in 2015 in legislatures across the country will determine the fate of billions of microbeads and accordingly, our oceans. Join us in our last stand to ban the bead and protect the oceans that we cherish, and the marine life that calls them home. Support our work to protect the oceans from microplastic pollution by making a contribution today.

Sincerely, The 5 Gyres Team